Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum
Forum Ringside => Guitars, Amps and Effects => Topic started by: MDV on May 11, 2011, 11:31:47 PM
-
In case you didnt already know
I for one 'meh' in its general direction
Unless the inevitable deluge of clips show otherwise, of course.
But BK seems to be the only forum without a 10 page thread on it :lol:
What do the venerable BK denizens think of this new glorified VST dongle development in amp modelling technology?
-
When i hear clips this may change
But until then ill say it will still sound like a modeller and is definitely NOT worth the money they charge for it as you could get better tones from a real amp cheaper!
-
i'm waiting for the Egnater E2 before I splash more on rack gear, couldn't give a monkeys about this ;)
-
Well gosh, a new buzzy-sounding £3000 distortion pedal covered in flashy lights.
Amps aren't games consoles. Nothing sounds as good as a genuine valve amp. And it never will.
Digital stuff sounds just good enough to make you want to take it home from the shop. Then you wake up and hey, it's boxing day and you're bored of your christmas presents already.
[Standard enquiry about crunch overdrive sounds goes here]
-
What do the venerable BK denizens think of this new glorified VST dongle development in amp modelling technology?
As soon as I first saw the original this is what I was thinking, but it is a pretty powerful machine and does it's job well. A 1U or 2U short rack chassis with a dual-core and 4 gigs of memory and an EMU 1212m card(or something like that) would get you there with more flexibility in your effects choices, more processing power, on-the-fly recording and LOADS cheaper, even with a footswitch. Add a small flip-out monitor like you see sometimes in network racks and you're good to go. A dedicated guitar-puter that can also display boobies. If only I had more money to work with right now. It's been in my thoughts though. If you had a studio computer with Mac OS and you hackintoshed your guitar-puter, you could also sync them up and your studio computer could use the racked one's resources and CPU to give extra aid in recording and processing.
-
What do the venerable BK denizens think of this new glorified VST dongle development in amp modelling technology?
As soon as I first saw the original this is what I was thinking, but it is a pretty powerful machine and does it's job well. A 1U or 2U short rack chassis with a dual-core and 4 gigs of memory and an EMU 1212m card(or something like that) would get you there with more flexibility in your effects choices, more processing power, on-the-fly recording and LOADS cheaper, even with a footswitch. Add a small flip-out monitor like you see sometimes in network racks and you're good to go. A dedicated guitar-puter that can also display boobies. If only I had more money to work with right now. It's been in my thoughts though. If you had a studio computer with Mac OS and you hackintoshed your guitar-puter, you could also sync them up and your studio computer could use the racked one's resources and CPU to give extra aid in recording and processing.
But the PC would never give you 0.8ms In-To-Out latency, more like 10 times that. AND it's Bill Gates. J get eye cancer when I see Windows.
-
I couldn't give a flying $%&# about modelling gear :lol:
Valves for the win :D
-
I don't think I buy the argument that a digital solution can never sound as good as valves: if you throw enough CPU horse-power at something you can simulate pretty much anything. That said, I don't think we're even close to that point yet with amp modelling. I'll certainly give any clips a listen but I'm not expecting it to do what a valve amp does.
-
Yes you can simulate pretty much anything.
BUT a simulation is never 100% exact to what is being simulated
-
What do the venerable BK denizens think of this new glorified VST dongle development in amp modelling technology?
As soon as I first saw the original this is what I was thinking, but it is a pretty powerful machine and does it's job well. A 1U or 2U short rack chassis with a dual-core and 4 gigs of memory and an EMU 1212m card(or something like that) would get you there with more flexibility in your effects choices, more processing power, on-the-fly recording and LOADS cheaper, even with a footswitch. Add a small flip-out monitor like you see sometimes in network racks and you're good to go. A dedicated guitar-puter that can also display boobies. If only I had more money to work with right now. It's been in my thoughts though. If you had a studio computer with Mac OS and you hackintoshed your guitar-puter, you could also sync them up and your studio computer could use the racked one's resources and CPU to give extra aid in recording and processing.
But the PC would never give you 0.8ms In-To-Out latency, more like 10 times that. AND it's Bill Gates. J get eye cancer when I see Windows.
Is that what happened to Jobs then?
I find my home-built PC is far, far more stable than any of the 3 macs I have to use at work (2 8 core 16GB mac pros and a macbook pro), and it's also faster, despite costing between about 1/2 to 1/4 of the price of any one of the macs I use... And, as much as it's fun to despise Bill Gates (and it really, really is...), the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation is an excellent funder of science both in the US and here in the UK, so I've mellowed slightly towards the guy in recent years.
Add to that those godawful smug apple adverts (oh god they're almost as bad as traffic wardens, mashed potato, the c***ing beatw@ts and telecasters...), and I'm afraid Apple have actually pushed me towards Microsoft.
Don't get me wrong though, the laptop looks pretty :)
Roo
-
I have found that stability and speed can vary a lot between varying macs of the same spec.
i presume its to do with the hardwares bios etc.
i do also prefer a pc though as you can build something that outspecs a mac by miles for about £300-400 and then just install mac on it anyway and it runs faster than it does on the apple hardware.
-
I think the point is you can get instant mix ready sounds in a studio or have a light portable and very controllable live rig through the house PA. For consistent and controllable results this kind of thing is very valuable to some folks. Just think if you were recording a piece for a commercial or conference or music for TV and you needed one quick quitar line. You are working on your own, do you:-
A. Drag out the 50W Marshall, 4x12, SM57 and Neumann and spend 2 hours getting a good sound or
B. Plug into the Axe FX, play the line, sit it in the mix in 10 mins and move on....
These things are very valuable to studios and in a mix almost nobody could tell the difference. Time is money so for instant and predictable results I can certainly see why people buy these things.
Okay, I'm putting my guitarists hat back on now:-
Valves all the way!!!!!!
That lazy studio git better mic my MJW up becuase I'm not playing through no rack computer :D
-
A. Drag out the 50W Marshall, 4x12, SM57 and Neumann and spend 2 hours getting a good sound or
it takes 2 hours getting a good sound? i can generally do it within minutes now that i've got used to the process of micing
-
... a pretty powerful machine ... dual-core and 4 gigs of memory and an EMU 1212m card ... processing power, on-the-fly recording ... small flip-out monitor ... dedicated guitar-puter ... Mac OS .. hackintoshed your guitar-puter ... sync them up and your studio computer could use the racked one's resources and CPU to give extra aid in blah blah blah blah blah.
Yes, you could do all that. Or you could buy a valve amp.
-
I just realised, I've never played through a valve amp and thought hmmm, I wish this sounded more like a digital modelling amp.
-
An Axe-FX kicked your puppy did it, Frank? :lol:
-
What do the venerable BK denizens think of this new glorified VST dongle development in amp modelling technology?
As soon as I first saw the original this is what I was thinking, but it is a pretty powerful machine and does it's job well. A 1U or 2U short rack chassis with a dual-core and 4 gigs of memory and an EMU 1212m card(or something like that) would get you there with more flexibility in your effects choices, more processing power, on-the-fly recording and LOADS cheaper, even with a footswitch. Add a small flip-out monitor like you see sometimes in network racks and you're good to go. A dedicated guitar-puter that can also display boobies. If only I had more money to work with right now. It's been in my thoughts though. If you had a studio computer with Mac OS and you hackintoshed your guitar-puter, you could also sync them up and your studio computer could use the racked one's resources and CPU to give extra aid in recording and processing.
Or mic an amp.
-
What do the venerable BK denizens think of this new glorified VST dongle development in amp modelling technology?
As soon as I first saw the original this is what I was thinking, but it is a pretty powerful machine and does it's job well. A 1U or 2U short rack chassis with a dual-core and 4 gigs of memory and an EMU 1212m card(or something like that) would get you there with more flexibility in your effects choices, more processing power, on-the-fly recording and LOADS cheaper, even with a footswitch. Add a small flip-out monitor like you see sometimes in network racks and you're good to go. A dedicated guitar-puter that can also display boobies. If only I had more money to work with right now. It's been in my thoughts though. If you had a studio computer with Mac OS and you hackintoshed your guitar-puter, you could also sync them up and your studio computer could use the racked one's resources and CPU to give extra aid in recording and processing.
Or mic an amp.
:lol: As a multi effects unit.
edit: Just read Hunter's post. I've not had any issue testing out the theory with my 3 Ghz dual-core with 4 gigs of memory and an Emu 1212m. It's a really good card and I just keep snapping them up when I see one used for $50 or so. Have one in my main, the HTPC, my GFs PC and two more in a box. Unless I tried to run a real CPU hog like Altiverb, there's no latency with a PCI card. Any of the main studio effects you would actually like to use in a live setting worked wonderfully. I used the Left in/out for into amp and the Right in/out for the loop. I set them up as 4 monos, instead of stereo pairs.
-
Sadly, this is how modern guitar gear is developed and sold. The manufacturer invents a "problem" that supposedly exists in current technology, then invents a ridiculously expensive "solution" to the non-existent problem. Then he covers it in flashy lights. Then people on guitar forums get excited about the flashy lights and don't bother listening to how bad these digital boat anchors actually sound.
See also: Gibson guitars with USB sockets.
-
What do the venerable BK denizens think of this new glorified VST dongle development in amp modelling technology?
As soon as I first saw the original this is what I was thinking, but it is a pretty powerful machine and does it's job well. A 1U or 2U short rack chassis with a dual-core and 4 gigs of memory and an EMU 1212m card(or something like that) would get you there with more flexibility in your effects choices, more processing power, on-the-fly recording and LOADS cheaper, even with a footswitch. Add a small flip-out monitor like you see sometimes in network racks and you're good to go. A dedicated guitar-puter that can also display boobies. If only I had more money to work with right now. It's been in my thoughts though. If you had a studio computer with Mac OS and you hackintoshed your guitar-puter, you could also sync them up and your studio computer could use the racked one's resources and CPU to give extra aid in recording and processing.
Or mic an amp.
:lol: As a multi effects unit.
You never mentioned anything about it being for effect!
Mic an amp with a multi FX unit in the loop :P (Or some stomp boxes)
I will give the axe that though: while the modelling has left me cold consistently, the effects seem very high quality. If you compare to something like eventide rack units, then youre talking arguably similar quality and similar variety of effects, plus some amp models. From that perspective it makes sense, if you need that many effects.
-
What do the venerable BK denizens think of this new glorified VST dongle development in amp modelling technology?
As soon as I first saw the original this is what I was thinking, but it is a pretty powerful machine and does it's job well. A 1U or 2U short rack chassis with a dual-core and 4 gigs of memory and an EMU 1212m card(or something like that) would get you there with more flexibility in your effects choices, more processing power, on-the-fly recording and LOADS cheaper, even with a footswitch. Add a small flip-out monitor like you see sometimes in network racks and you're good to go. A dedicated guitar-puter that can also display boobies. If only I had more money to work with right now. It's been in my thoughts though. If you had a studio computer with Mac OS and you hackintoshed your guitar-puter, you could also sync them up and your studio computer could use the racked one's resources and CPU to give extra aid in recording and processing.
Or mic an amp.
:lol: As a multi effects unit.
You never mentioned anything about it being for effect!
Mic an amp with a multi FX unit in the loop :P (Or some stomp boxes)
I will give the axe that though: while the modelling has left me cold consistently, the effects seem very high quality. If you compare to something like eventide rack units, then youre talking arguably similar quality and similar variety of effects, plus some amp models. From that perspective it makes sense, if you need that many effects.
Lol, sorry for that lack of clarity. I haven't had much sleep lately. I do agree a handful of mics are a better solution to getting the sound into whatever it is you are recording with. I guess the point I wanted to make was the part with the boobies.
-
Lol, sorry for that lack of clarity. I haven't had much sleep lately. I do agree a handful of mics are a better solution to getting the sound into whatever it is you are recording with. I guess the point I wanted to make was the part with the boobies.
er, what?
-
Lol, sorry for that lack of clarity. I haven't had much sleep lately. I do agree a handful of mics are a better solution to getting the sound into whatever it is you are recording with. I guess the point I wanted to make was the part with the boobies.
er, what?
You no like boobies?
-
i always felt digital modeling was a good solution for low volume loud-like tone. but for loud tone, nothing beats the physics of the valves driving the power transformer and the speaker.
-
I believe there was plans for an FX only version, not sure what's going on with that.
The marketing does make it sounds rather nice but I'll wait for unbiased opinions, still want one.
-
Lol, sorry for that lack of clarity. I haven't had much sleep lately. I do agree a handful of mics are a better solution to getting the sound into whatever it is you are recording with. I guess the point I wanted to make was the part with the boobies.
er, what?
You no like boobies?
I think everyone likes boobies. It's pretty much universal.
-
i always felt digital modeling was a good solution for low volume loud-like tone. but for loud tone, nothing beats the physics of the valves driving the power transformer and the speaker.
It has 2 strengths IMO:
Easier to get a usable sound quickly, and indeed at any volume, so you can record late at night or whatever. Good for scratch tracks. Debatable for proper ones.
Consistency. Few amps and no mic placements have a 'save as' function! Good luck getting a sound back, exactly the same, a month after its been stripped down.
I quite like that though. It changes your workflow; you have to be prepared, whoevers playing be on the ball and get the performances down, and whatever sound you end up with will always be unique to the project (for better or worse). With recall of patches you can tinker with something for months, or years, and theres never a "RIGHT! this is IT, tracking time, this is the sound, lets go" moment or period, where the songs are DONE, and its time to get a project finished. I like that bit. Its part of the experience. Maybe I'm just odd though.
Of course reamping serves a similar purpose, insofar as you dont have to commit to one sound, you can always change it as long as you have the DIs, but whatever sound you get is still never going to be exactly replicable in later reamps if you change your mind.
-
On the point of storing and reproducing a sound for a recording - just get a programmable tube preamp. Problem solved.
-
On the point of storing and reproducing a sound for a recording - just get a programmable tube preamp. Problem solved.
You cant get programable mic placements. Thats the hardest part.
Edit - by hardest I mean hardest to reproduce.
I would never abandon mic choice and placement as a part of dialing in a serious gutiar sound, however.
-
I still want to know why he said boobies.
-
It was one of his benefits of the lavish and unneeded PC rig.
-
For effects i would rather get a rocktron replifex or intellifex.
But maybe that's because i'm a cheapskate somewhat
-
It was one of his benefits of the lavish and unneeded PC rig.
Hrmm. I must have come to the wrong conclusion on what an AxeFx really was. Does anyone know why they decided to dump the software version they were planning on releasing for PC/Mac and just stick with the proprietary hardware?
-
Cos you cant crack a 2U rackmount computer running your VSTs and put it in a torrent.
-
I'll take this in plugin, please: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywDUAw7ck8g
-
I like modelers for what they are. They do make life easy for folk and the vast majority for people who will listen to your music or watch you live will never, ever be able to hear the difference.
But by goodness I wouldn't pay Axe-FX money for one.
-
I'll take this in plugin, please: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywDUAw7ck8g
That is actually very impressive.
Only as good as what you feed it with though. For me it would be an amp that just contains....my amps. I supopse there are another half a dozen (max) owned by mates that would be of interest I could borrow. It would certainly give me less compunction about selling them. The key thing is that after cature you can manipulate the sound; there are some ways it will be fixed, I'g guessing (mic type and location, speaker, cab, room) and some ways it will be variable, the most valuable of which is gain (you can EQ itb all day long; not quite the same, but close enough, but youre stuck with whatever level of gain/distortion you started with).
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1QBwUerxeM
I'm liking this more and more.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1QBwUerxeM
I'm liking this more and more.
Those videos sure look impressive. I am an analog fan (my first effect was a Digitech Rp255 which was ok to start, but now...wow that´s mostly cr@p), but I´d like to try that out! But the price would stop me anyways^^
-
Hehe. I knew you would, MDV. Sounds killer, right? The thing is, you probably won't need your mates amps at all, but it would be nice to profile their amp and then say, "See ya. Gonna go play your amp now except I have extra doodles to twiddle and more sounds than you. Gonna go profile a Dumble in two days. Neener neener." I'm sure there will be a little community set up for swapping of the "profiles" just like how in the high-gain vid he was using the Mesa file sent over e-mail. So you could get profiles from a 5150 of every year of production since the start and see if the myths are true or not.
The price was said, in one of the vids, to be around $1600. Not sure if that's retail or street, either way it's less expensive than AxeFx by a whole lot. I wish it didn't look like a damned Star Trek control board though. Much, much later in the year(when current troubles are behind me), I will bite and order one for testing, if it doesn't look like another "almost" product by then.
YouTube clips = the Satan of audio. So we'll see.
-
Yeah the community would probably be very interesting. The accuracy of the reproduction, bearing in mind its youtube, was very impressive indeed. I didnt get any hint of 'this has been digitalised' off the profile sound. Very impressive.
Gotta bear in mind though when, say, I trade my VHT pitbull CL red channel for your VH4 channel 3, for argument sake, youre not really; youre trading my VHT pitbull CL, ubercab, V30 and MD421, where I chose to put it, in the room I profiled the amp in, for your VH4, Mesa oversized, V30 and SM57, inc location of mic, location of cab in room, the room itself, the mic pre, the cables and all the rest. I then cant mic that with my AT4050 a little off axis just off the edge of the cone on the jensen in my orange 2x12, or whatever. its clearly not actually owning the amps, it has limitations. Quite significant limitations.
But
If I can have a star trek looking box that has a *representation* of 50 high class amps in them, with a decent signal chain, not where they've been captured with a PC mic by a moron in an untreated room, and if they sound as close as they did in that vid, as realistic, and I can change the gain, sag, pre level, EQ, whatever, etc etc, add various stomps to them....thats $%&#ing awesome quite frankly. Its not owning the amps and being able to interchange parts of the chain in the way I know and love, but I'd pay £1000 for the versatility of it, and accuracy of capture, quite cheerfully. If, thats IF the capture is actually as accurate as it seems to be in the vids.
-
In the mean time, btw, the closest youre going to get in plug form is voxengo curve EQ. If you dont know it already, go do a little digging about its capture ability ;)
-
Oh, I have it. Lol. I do like Voxengo products a bunch. The Lampthruster is nice and their tape distortion sounds really good on a kick drum when used sparingly. Oh, sir. You remind me of the days when I afforded that cr@p. Since we're here, have you tried Brainworx products? The ShredSpread is phenomenal for the type of stuff we do and the BX Digital is also mainstay for me, on every damn mix. I wish I could get the new ones, but right now.... no. I think new PC guts and anti-viral software are gonna be on that list first anyways. I've just lost every damn thing I've done recently for the free boobies. Again. Installing all the plugins I've acquired is a two night job. Gotta give up teh pronz.
Also, I don't see why you HAVE to use a mic to do this. In keeping with my views on impulses, I'd rather take the speaker right out of the chain with these high-gain heads. The difference in power amps isn't nearly as great as the difference in preamp topology and I think it would be better to "profile" from the preamp out and use a head and cab that's around as a slave. If it's possible to do it that way, you're back in control of mic placement and can use whatever power tubes/speakers you damn well please. There's a lot that can happen between the pre and power amp and I'd hate to miss that section. On the other hand, that part where he changed the god damned pick attack level? $%&# the effects loop.
-
Voxengo kick arse. A lot of their stuff is downright $%&#ing weird, and kind of overpowered, but if you understand the tools and use them carefully, they can be awesome. I'll check out brainworx, thanks.
You could, in priciple, I guess, do it with a load-having power amp out DI, I suppose. It depends how the profiler hooks up to the system. If its off a line out from an interface then I suppose its possible.
I disagree entirely, massively and vehemently that taking the speaker out is the right thing to do for metal. Its a complicating factor, and a potential weak point, but the dynamic response of the speaker and the freedom in micing it/them are massive, vital parts of good metal sounds. Good any sounds. Impulses are a pale shadow; linear convolution doesnt capture dynamic response, and it doesnt capture how a speaker or the system in general respond to mutiple frequency inputs. The result is flatter and overly 'clean'. One of the things that struck me about the profiling process there was the steadily increasing pulse as well as the pink (sounded like) noise; that would be, I guess, to replicate the dynamic response of the system to broad spectrum and accurately reproduce its distortion characteristics. Normal convolution, and impulses, dont do that.
-
shite. It's a mess in this head of mine. "Clarity, dude. Make your point more understandable."
Meant out of the chain of "profiling" and not the eventual chain into the PC/whatever. I suppose the rest of my post would make a BIT more sense now. :lol: I think micing up classic combo amps is the thing to do as that's a distinct part of the amp itself and that would be it for me on that particular method. I was pondering the whole Weber or whatever brand attenuator devices or cabs(Randall) that can take from the power amp, but then there's another bit of circuitry that seems far from discrete between the amp and the Kemper. The attenuators I've tried, I didn't like. I've never tried one with a line out, but I'm thinking there is going to be an untrue nature to what comes out. I think the preamp out, if possible, would make it so someone with close to no mind for this stuff can provide me a file that is usable and I'm still up and running the way I always have, nitpicking over mic choice/placement, cab direction relative to the room, etc. I don't like being stuck with preset choices and the effort it would take for me to actually get an amp situated in a room for a setting that will work in a song I haven't even started on yet would make me go insane. Even if it does have emulated mic placement, it's just that. I'd like to have the benefits of different flavors without screwing with the original formula too much. Pancakes with blueberries, awesome. Pancakes made from organic brown rice flour, blueberries and that dried ice cream with the astronaut on it that they sell at museums, no thanks.
-
I see what you mean. It echoes another of my major complaints with impulses: 3 positions? $%&# off. Mic placement is an art in and of itself, and though the boundaries are finite, the variability is infinite. 5mm and 15 degrees away from your current, poor sounding placement could well be a kickarse placement. I can get an OK placement in 5 minutes, but I can also quite cheerfully spend hours refining a mic placement. Moreso when there two or more involved (phase, bitches! It can make or break you; kills noobs on contact; invaluable tool if you know what youre doing).
It all hinges on the ways it can recieve and relay a signal. If it can take a line in and send a line out (and why the $%&# wouldnt it? If it doesnt, thats a serious oversight) then you should be able to profile any pre, and then run it into any power amp, cab, speaker, mic etc etc etc. Power amp is another matter, since no matter how you capture the power amp (if its got a line in that it can profile from then you should be able to) youre still going to have to run it into another power amp after that: there are many obvious issues with this.
The other obvious thing to do is profile an amp through multiple cabs/speakers/mics/rooms if possible, etc etc. That is a potentially infinite job, even for one amp, so you'd have to pick some favourites.
Its pretty clear that theres a lot of possible homogeneity similar to the modeller+impulse homogeneity that we currently hear possible with this, but the usergroups would likely see to it that there are dozens of profiles, hundreds even, for dozens of amps. Its a far more flexible system than model+impulse.
It also pretty much cures the non-reproducability of an amped sound that I was on about before. You can capture the amp, settings, mic and location and use it again at another time. A 'save as' button for mic placements! That alone is very valuable (to me at least).
I need to find out more about it (like if it can profile a pre alone) but if the price isnt too extortionate, I may well buy one. It looks very promising indeed.
-
You cant get programable mic placements. Thats the hardest part.
Can ;)
Rammstein guitar bloke made a mic placement robot arm thing so he could save positions as presets, it's on youtube somewhere
-
You know those Germans. They make good stuff.
(http://6.media.collegehumor.cvcdn.com/4/0/collegehumor.2f1cc78466abb2a4d39a7a207eb34d73.jpg)
-
You know those Germans. They make good stuff.
(http://6.media.collegehumor.cvcdn.com/4/0/collegehumor.2f1cc78466abb2a4d39a7a207eb34d73.jpg)
Thanks man, we don´t get many compliments since the 1930s^^
I need to build me one of those robot things too...where´s the nearest university?
-
I'm a big fan of German products. Native instruments Komplete 6 is out of this world used with Kore2 and Terratec's Axon midi guitar controller. You forget to eat it's that good.
This profile amp is a great idea and those vids were very convincing. Like Mark says done in the right environment it should slay an Axe FX and they're still bloody good.
I could make profiles of my Koch and flog them on he internet. Oh dear..... No seriously that thing is a dream machine.
See how digital is catching up. I still love tubes amps, we all do but this is closing the gap. That's got to be good for us, right?
I remember in the mid 90s when I was trying to make a living as a photographer. Digital SLR bodies were 10 grand and 1 mega pixel. Everyone scoffed as the quality was shitee. Now look at them. It nearly put Kodak out of business. So the amp sim products will get better and cheaper. Watch out Marshall don't get left behind like the British Motorcycle industry by your own complacency. Let's hope Dolph still has customers in the future too, for more huge Koch products.
-
Some interesting discussion of the kemper here:
http://forum.fractalaudio.com/lounge/31504-kemper-profiling-amplifier-next-axe-fx-style-modeler.html
Along with a healthy dose of butthurt, lots of fanboyism and suspicion. Cliff of FA interjects with some interesting comments here and there; while hes a bit of a belligerant tosser, he does clearly know his stuff (I 'meh' at the axe because its redundant and uninteresting to me, and it still has 'modeller' sound; that said, it is quite clearly the best modeller out there, with which good sounds are possible) and his comments are worth reading (like his guess, based on how he surmises the kemper works, that the demos will be of a fender and recto type amp (albiet after said demos are already out there; he seems to be a git, but not dishonest; he probably didnt know they were on the net already) because using those would hide limitations of its profiling ability.
I'm, still interested in this, but I'm gonna wait till theres much more material from it out there, especially with a wide variety of amps. I want to hear comparisons between the kemper after increases in gain, volume (sag/whatever) and EQ changes Vs the amp after similar changes have been made, especially.
Yeah, johnny; the day that a modeller does what the real thing does, just as well, I'll buy it without any compunction. Why wouldnt you? I'm not $%&#ing married to valves or anything; they just satisfy me the most at the moment :D But that day is not today. Modelling is getting better, but its still a blow up doll.
Well, it used to be a blow up doll. Now its more like a cloned body that died, was reanimated and is controlled by $%&#ing software written by a pornstar. Progress! But not the real thing.
-
Well, it used to be a blow up doll. Now its more like a cloned body that died, was reanimated and is controlled by $%&#ing software written by a pornstar. Progress! But not the real thing.
You are a strange, strange man....
The way I see it valve amps v. modellers will come down to a similar situation like we have with wristw@tches now. There is room for both digital displays and the old fashioned analog arm. You know what I mean, right?
-
Not really. When modellers are indistiguishable from valve amps in sound and feel, valves amps will be genuinely obsolete. They'll be collectors items at most.
These are just the facts.
A lot of people are getting to prefer modelled sounds already, as it happens. I've had people ask me for tones that are obviously pod/podfarm/axe created, and they prefer them to real amp sounds.
Edit: they didnt get it though. They ended up being happy with the proper amp tones.
-
Well, it used to be a blow up doll. Now its more like a cloned body that died, was reanimated and is controlled by $%&#ing software written by a pornstar. Progress! But not the real thing.
Woww....
Well, if I could buy that I would quit playing the f**king guitar and devote all my spare time to something I'd really enjoy....
-
Jesus Christ, MDV. That was too long to read through. 17 pages in, the conversation boiled down to: someone calling Cliff out for his "predictions" of the demos that have been out for months, everyone saying they have no idea what it's really doing and dog farts. I made the choice to stop at the whole page about farts. :roll: Still keeping an eye on the Kemper, especially since a rack unit will be made and hopefully cheaper and better looking.
-
You probably got the jist of it from that. The main and most valid point in there is that its a 'snapshot' of the amps behaviour on given settings; it does model how changes would alter the behaviour. I believe kemper said as much in the namm vid too (eq changes wont be the same as in the amp, specifically).
I went through it right to the lock :lol: it devolved into an argument about assessment of the accuracy of models between one of the members and a mod.
-
Nice analogy Mark! :lol: I think I'd still play the guitar Dave, just at the same time as getting.....enough already. :lol:
So this Kemper amp. Did he put some kind of signal though the amp which made that weird sound and that was enough for this thing to clone the entire Fender amp?
-
Anyone getting Kemper GAS?
-
So this Kemper amp. Did he put some kind of signal though the amp which made that weird sound and that was enough for this thing to clone the entire Fender amp?
Basically. It sends a known set of frequencies at known volumes through the amplifier, analyzes the difference in EQ, volume dynamics(how much compression is applied) and harmonic structure for those frequencies at those volumes, and applies that to it's parameters and then allows you to make some remarkable changes. That's how it seems, anyways.
-
So this Kemper amp. Did he put some kind of signal though the amp which made that weird sound and that was enough for this thing to clone the entire Fender amp?
Basically. It sends a known set of frequencies at known volumes through the amplifier, analyzes the difference in EQ, volume dynamics(how much compression is applied) and harmonic structure for those frequencies at those volumes, and applies that to it's parameters and then allows you to make some remarkable changes. That's how it seems, anyways.
It's a very clever idea. I hope its as good as these you tube vids.
-
So this Kemper amp. Did he put some kind of signal though the amp which made that weird sound and that was enough for this thing to clone the entire Fender amp?
Basically. It sends a known set of frequencies at known volumes through the amplifier, analyzes the difference in EQ, volume dynamics(how much compression is applied) and harmonic structure for those frequencies at those volumes, and applies that to it's parameters and then allows you to make some remarkable changes. That's how it seems, anyways.
Does it do that through the range of all the amp's own eq controls? Or do you just get it mimicking a static eq position on whatever amp?
If it does that, and accurately, then it sounds rather amazing. Oh, that said, as MDV mentions above, if it's copying the cab and microphone as well that seems a bit rubbish. But presumably it could take it's return signal from a speaker out using a dummy load or something so you only get the response of the amp? Otherwise you're not ever going to be able to use it live other than straight into a PA.
-
So this Kemper amp. Did he put some kind of signal though the amp which made that weird sound and that was enough for this thing to clone the entire Fender amp?
Basically. It sends a known set of frequencies at known volumes through the amplifier, analyzes the difference in EQ, volume dynamics(how much compression is applied) and harmonic structure for those frequencies at those volumes, and applies that to it's parameters and then allows you to make some remarkable changes. That's how it seems, anyways.
Does it do that through the range of all the amp's own eq controls? Or do you just get it mimicking a static eq position on whatever amp?
If it does that, and accurately, then it sounds rather amazing. Oh, that said, as MDV mentions above, if it's copying the cab and microphone as well that seems a bit rubbish. But presumably it could take it's return signal from a speaker out using a dummy load or something so you only get the response of the amp? Otherwise you're not ever going to be able to use it live other than straight into a PA.
The latter as best I can tell - it mimics the behaviour of the amp on a given combination of settings. It cant determine how that behaviour would change with the change in settings, like how eqs will interact and interact with the gain and whatever else.
There is suspicion that it wont be able to accurately characterise some amps as well. I dont know about that, but its plausible.
As I understand the sampling now - I *think* you plug it in the loop so it captures the pre, and give it a signal from the mic so it gets the power amp + cab + speaker + mic. This is, again, as I understand it, how it seperates the amp and cab impulses.
-
I don't see why it wouldn't capture even the oddest preamp configuration as accurately as the ones we've seen. Take a Bogner or an ENGL drive channel, for instance. Both drop off a lot of bass and highs throughout the gain staging and then use a mid-sucking tone stack to achieve the harmonic content added throughout while not having the end result sound shitety. Distortion as we know it as guitarists is actually a synthesizer. It ADDS artifacts that were not there before, in addition to clipping. As long the Kemper can identify that and your EQ settings are not radical on the amp that is profiled, we should still see a functional tone stack on the Kemper to manipulate the new "neutral." So, in a nutshell, if it can identify the difference between what went into Fender and Mesa and came out the speaker, it should be able to do that every time with any amplifier, preamp or audio device, with the onboard controls being not well suited to anything but an amplifier. On a YouTube vid, the uploader said it will do Bass amps without a problem. That leads me to believe we're looking at a device that can do more than it's marketed for and it gets me very excited. 10,000 models can be stored onboard. I don't know that many guitar amps I'd like to have, but when you start into vintage compressors and high-end microphone preamps, I'm sure the slots could be filled. Fack. Postulations get me excited. :lol:
-
Distortion as we know it as guitarists is actually a synthesizer. It ADDS artifacts that were not there before
explain please
-
Distortion as we know it as guitarists is actually a synthesizer. It ADDS artifacts that were not there before
explain please
Using the "synthesizer" word like that is a mistake but i understand what he means and that's what counts at the end... 8)
-
Stolen from Wikipedia:
Harmonic distortion
Main article: Clipping (signal processing)
Harmonic distortion adds overtones that are whole number multiples of a sound wave's frequencies.[1] Nonlinearities that give rise to amplitude distortion in audio systems are most often measured in terms of the harmonics (overtones) added to a pure sinewave fed to the system. Harmonic distortion may be expressed in terms of the relative strength of individual components, in decibels, or the Root Mean Square of all harmonic components: Total harmonic distortion (THD), as a percentage. The level at which harmonic distortion becomes audible is not straightforward. Different types of distortion (like crossover distortion) are more audible than others (like soft clipping) even if the THD measurements are identical. Harmonic distortion in RF applications is rarely expressed as THD.
And then this page should clear up the my synthesizer wording. I suppose I should have said "behaves as an additive synthesizer does." Sorry about that part, but hey, we've all called someone what they behave like, yeah? Take a really nasty fuzz pedal, for example, and get some inter-modulation going by playing unrelated notes. Yeah. :D
http://music.dartmouth.edu/~book/MATCpages/chap.4/4.2.add_synth.html
Our guitar amplifiers, even when not over driven, add harmonics based on the original to the original signal. This is why a clean tube channel sounds better to our ears(or warmer or whatever that's not the point) than say a transistor based one that boasts an amazingly low THD percentage. Even when run cleanly, harmonics are added to the signal. It's all a lot to get into, really. I just did this up real quick before I start the heavy drinking and then it'll not make a bit of sense at all. I'll start on how the 60 cycle hum in single coils is still creating impurities even with a noise gate or something(not that it's always bad, just that it is). It's mess in my head regarding how I understand and relate things and I do my best to make it understandable the way I see it if someone asks. Maybe someone else could also chime in and add something on the subject? Maybe adjust my view if it needs adjusting?
-
So ... when my amp heats up and the speaker moves air, it's working a bit like a hair dryer?
-
So ... when my amp heats up and the speaker moves air, it's working a bit like a hair dryer?
The air coming out of hair dryers doesn't oscillate as such, so no. I love you, Frank. I bet you smell awesome in real life.
-
I love me too. I smell of cinnamon buns and ponies.
EDIT: just please, don't ever take me seriously
-
Ah. I thought you were trying to invalidate me. I literally just had this conversation with my circuit analysis professor a few weeks ago. He's also a music geek. Made his own modular synth with midi control. Pretty neat stuff. But cinnamon buns and ponies? I was thinking more like bananas and sunshine.
Merlin Blencowe wrote this and I think it might help as well. Page 8, in particular, explains more on the behavior of 12AX7s in regards to producing certain types of harmonics.
http://www.freewebs.com/valvewizard1/Common_Gain_Stage.pdf
-
Why has no-one mentioned boobies yet in this thread?
-
Distortion as we know it as guitarists is actually a synthesizer. It ADDS artifacts that were not there before
explain please
I'm with him on this one. I built a cab simulator the other day for my brother and I was trying various pedals in front of it to try and emulate (sort of) an amp. The difference between an OD and a distortion is plainly apparent in this scenario. The OD is designed to push the front end of an amp into distortion. That just doesn't work with the cab sim. A distortion actually creates the distortion internally and what comes out of it sounds like a pushed amp. These did work. I found it interesting anyhow.
-
Why has no-one mentioned boobies yet in this thread?
I still haven't recovered from the Tanya Song photo shoot download.
Give me time...
-
In can't stop thinking about this Profiling amp. We're all kind of second guessing it to a degree. But if it's just a case of a quick procedure like in the video then it's a monster of a product. A demo is the only way but at a music show, it's gonna be a big queue I reckon.
Anyone know when it's going on sale?
-
No date that I could find, but Sweetw@ter does have it up on their site. Some good photos of the thing in higher resolution, too.
http://www.sweetw@ter.com/store/detail/ProfilingAmp/
What's with the @? Can't seem to get that out of the link.
-
its the language filter because you typed tw at
-
No date that I could find, but Sweetw@ter does have it up on their site. Some good photos of the thing in higher resolution, too.
http://www.sweetw@ter.com/store/detail/ProfilingAmp/
What's with the @? Can't seem to get that out of the link.
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/ProfilingAmp/
There you go. Though folks still have to cut/paste it because my cheat still disrupts the link.
-
s####!!horpe
-
Scunthorpe?
-
There is a Kemper Facebook page. June this year could be the launch date.
It certainly caused a bit of a stink on the Ax Fx forum!
-
There is a interview in this video on how it works but I'm none the wiser :?
http://www.musotalk.de/event-reports/video/article/musikmesse-2011-kemper-profiling-amplifier/p
-
From the Kemper website:
We spent considerable time researching the dynamic behavior of the tube. It was also necessary to study the interactions between the tube and surrounding circuits, which become very complex when the tube starts to distort. We were lucky to find a way to extract this exact tube behavior by analyzing the intermodulation products of crossing sine sweeps. The relation between the intermodulations and the unprocessed sine sweeps tell us the full story about the distortion shape and dynamic of the tube and the behavior of the surrounding circuit. It can even deliver the information about several distortion stages in a row, so long as there is only one stage significantly distorting. This measurement is independent of the frequency response of the amplifier. Once the distorting part has been analyzed, it can be separated from the transfer function. The frequency response of the cabinet is then easy to determine and separate.
Aside from the ease of profiling the whole amp, there is another good reason not to analyze the amp part by part: we capture the sound of every component at the place where it belongs, including all interactions between the components.
-
Still seems like a lot of effort to produce an imperfect model of a tube amp. For all the clever mathematics and expensive custom chips and simulated circuitry, there still has never been a modelling amp system that sounds and feels the same as a real valve circuit, especially not at the first onset of audible distortion. And there never will be.
Soory but I just never find simulations of things quite as satisfying as the real thing.
Just sayin.
-
Still seems like a lot of effort to produce an imperfect model of a tube amp. For all the clever mathematics and expensive custom chips and simulated circuitry, there still has never been a modelling amp system that sounds and feels the same as a real valve circuit, especially not at the first onset of audible distortion. And there never will be.
Soory but I just never find simulations of things quite as satisfying as the real thing.
Just sayin.
That's a helpful thing to say, really. Eventually, it will happen. Maybe not today, but somewhere in time there will be the exact digital equivalent. Until then, skepticism and nitpicking will passively create the advances.
-
Still seems like a lot of effort to produce an imperfect model of a tube amp. For all the clever mathematics and expensive custom chips and simulated circuitry, there still has never been a modelling amp system that sounds and feels the same as a real valve circuit, especially not at the first onset of audible distortion. And there never will be.
One day there almost certainly will. And as such, every step getting there is worthwhile.
-
Digital cameras and video managed to edge out analogue, so I cant see why it wont in amps and effects.
I love the sound and responce of a valve amp too but owning loads & loads of lovely expensive amps in the form of different profiles that, could be very close to the original amp in a small unit would be something very lovely to have.
-
I just think the software engineers that design these are barking up the wrong tree by believing that their simulations can ever fully model the sound of a tube. Every time I've had to use a modelling amp I've thought to myself ... ok, nice programmable EQ, but why not just put a tube in there?
It would save so much effort and expense and it would sound better. The best solution is the simplest.
-
Oh, they will and it will be ridiculous the amount of control you'll have. The thing to remember here is that software only has to be written and then it's almost cost free to distribute. Saying it's completely impossible to convert these processes and signals into a workable algorithm isn't really giving a lot of credit to those with a greater understanding than you or I. Sure, a group of kids from MIT could probably whip this up and completely blow your mind in a few years, but it's better for us as a whole that they stay on course and work on the very important technologies. Digital amplifiers aren't going to go away because they are not as good right now. The incredibly inexpensive and accurate product they will eventually become is too promising to those that stand to profit. To say it will never be is a bit backwards. No one is making you purchase anything and you are free to make your decisions based on all you have, but to say never ever ever going to happen? That's just sticking up for the money you've already spent, although it was not spent badly.
-
Scunthorpe?
I think it's safe to say I'm the only one here born in sunny scunny
-
I just think the software engineers that design these are barking up the wrong tree by believing that their simulations can ever fully model the sound of a tube. Every time I've had to use a modelling amp I've thought to myself ... ok, nice programmable EQ, but why not just put a tube in there?
It would save so much effort and expense and it would sound better. The best solution is the simplest.
Vox did. The tonelabs have a 12AX7 in there. Sounds and feels more natural to me than any other modeller I've used. Still inadequte to me, in various ways, so I moved on.
I believe zoom have done similarly with somethingorother, I forget, not really interested, just aware of it.
-
I just think the software engineers that design these are barking up the wrong tree by believing that their simulations can ever fully model the sound of a tube. Every time I've had to use a modelling amp I've thought to myself ... ok, nice programmable EQ, but why not just put a tube in there?
It would save so much effort and expense and it would sound better. The best solution is the simplest.
The point however, is that eventually, they'll be every bit as good and in the long run much, much, much cheaper. The distance they've already come in a very short time is already incredible. I prefer valve amps at the moment, but I'm not going to kid myself that at some point no one on the planet will be able to hear the differences. Sure lots of people will still buy valve amps, but for the same reasons people still buy Rolexes; not because they keep the best time.
Nobody thought digital watches or cameras were any use once upon a time...
-
+1