metal riffing: nailbomb vs warpig

[dheim]

here's a bunch of quite generic death-black metal riffs played with both bridge and neck pickup.
native wave files show a much greater difference between nailbomb and warpig set, though... something got lost in compression!

i did this quite in hurry, if recording is not very clear i can repost with a little wavelab intervention... let me know!

[FernandoDuarte]

The speakers from the notebook doesn't help, but it's hard to decide which one is cooler... May be wrong, but I think in a 2 guitar band, they work together fine...

[dheim]

sure! nailbombs are better for lead work, in my opinion, but warpigs are tighter and more powerful on rhythm tracks... in general i love both of them!

[MDV]

Nice recordings!

[JMP2203]

are these alnico v? or ceramic?

[dheim]

they're both alnico

[Pickup Artist]

I'd appreciate more details on how you recorded the guitar parts here as it's pretty impressive. I like the that lead over the rhythm especially.

In particular; were the guitars recorded acoustically with a microphone or  with amp emulation software and speaker emulated output - or some kind of modelling effects hardware going direct into Cubase or some other DAW software.

[Alex]

They sounded quite identical to me to be honest.

[dheim]

I'd appreciate more details on how you recorded the guitar parts here as it's pretty impressive. I like the that lead over the rhythm especially.

In particular; were the guitars recorded acoustically with a microphone or  with amp emulation software and speaker emulated output - or some kind of modelling effects hardware going direct into Cubase or some other DAW software.

thank you! anyway they were recorded with a PODxt directly into Cubase (with a nice external soundcard to kill latency) and no further effect or equalization applied to tracks... the same for the bass track.

[dheim]

They sounded quite identical to me to be honest.

that's for various reasons, i think...
1)modeling maybe levels a bit different tones. just a bit, though... i can still hear differencies very clearly when i play
2)compression kills a lot of frequencies (the file is at 192 kbps but it's still an heavy compression)
3)i couldn't say it for sure, but i noticed that to evaluate different pickup tones it's better to play on the same backing track (as i did in this "shootout" http://bareknucklepickups.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=15397.0 using a standard backing track recorded with a somewhat neutral pickup - the JB)... ears judge tones also by confronting them with surrounding sounds, so (maybe) if you use the same sound for both rhythm and lead track they "compensate" each other...
when i'm the only guitarist in the band i'm currently playing with i've got a pretty nice tone (i use a valve amp for rehearsals and lives), but when i play along the other guitarist (who's got an ear-piercing screechy solid state tone and no money to get something better  :)) my tone seems the darkest and deepest doom sound on earth...
4)you'd better use headphones...  :P

[Alex]

Well, I found it to be a POD thing that clips sound quite the same even with different guitars. At least with my old POD (I haven't tried the XT).

[dheim]

for sure modeling (at least with PODs, but i heard similar comments regarding the 2000$ axe-fx as well) takes control of your tone a bit more than a traditional "analogic" setup. anyway i still think that for recording purposes (at least if you don't record in a professional studio and you've got plenty of time, but that's another world) good modelers (and PODs are indeed, in my opinion) can be of great help... many professional bands use them at least for some guitar tracks...

[AndyR]

Nice recordings - I can hear a difference between the two, but I couldn't actually describe it. For personal taste I definitely preferred the Warpig version :D

Sooner or later I'm going to end up with a Warpig in something - I can see it coming :lol: