Amp/Guitar modeling and related discussion thread
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: Tech Talk
Forum Description: Discuss musical instruments, equipment, hi-fi, speakers, vinyl, gadgets,etc.
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=55033
Printed Date: November 22 2024 at 01:46
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Amp/Guitar modeling and related discussion thread
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Subject: Amp/Guitar modeling and related discussion thread
Date Posted: January 25 2009 at 23:55
|
Okay, when I think of a name I'll change the thread title to someone not silly, but I have no idea where this is going to lead. First off, gotta grab some posts from another thread and put 'em in here. EDIT: Okay, more suitable title up. |
Replies:
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: January 25 2009 at 23:58
Yeah, I'd like to think so too, but remember THIS IS Line 6 we're talking about, and you and I both know they are hardly listening in to what people want for new products, and plus, you go on the Line 6 forum, there is still heaps of guys there that just rock Strats and Gibson and aren't interested in a shred your face off type speed neck guitar like we are, so obviously Line 6 is going to cater for those guys, who seem to be in the majority over there anyway. |
HughesJB4 wrote:
Posted By: cobb2
Date Posted: January 26 2009 at 00:13
| I have a V-Amp II which I use for my Les Paul custom and Ibanez RG1570L and it does justice to both these models in different ways. I don't know why the V-Amp gets such a poor rap here. For me it works beautifully through my Behringer mixer, pa amp and speakers. |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: January 26 2009 at 00:22
|
^For it's price, yeah, it's good (I paid only 189 dollars for mine, when they were 299 dollars RRP, so I got a great deal on mine), But compare a V-Amp 2 to the real amps it's modeling and you'll see why a professional touring guitarist would not go within 10 feet of one of these. The Dual Rectifier models honestly don't feel anything at all like the real deal amp. A lot of the dynamics are missing from the sound and the EQ-ing just doesn't feel and react the way the real amp does. The JCM 800 model, honestly, barely sounds like the real thing at all IMO, it just sounds kind of flat, dull, fizzy and slightly lifeless compared to a real deal Marshall JCM 800. The Behringer V-Amp 2 was released in 2002 as well, and we have had another 6-7 years of modeling technology advancement since then, and I've heard computer software amp modelers, like the latest edition Guitar Rig, Peavey Revalver MK III and a few others that make the V-Amp 2 sound like a toy in comparison. |
Posted By: jimidom
Date Posted: February 09 2009 at 08:27
|
Sure, there are better modelers out there. For only a few dollars more than the V-Amp2, you could get the Line 6 Pocket Pod. However, ALL modelers are compromised when compared to the real thing. None of the modelers I've used over the past decade (Pod 2.0, PodXT, J-Station, DG-Stomp, V-Amp2) have had the same feel as a good tube amp (natural breakup when overdriven, reaction to the players picking technique, etc.). So considering that, the VAmp-2 is still a bargain. ------------- "The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." - HST |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: February 09 2009 at 09:05
|
^ I think the technology has made tremendous progress ... but when it comes to comparing a modelling amp to the real thing, I guess that there's still a huge psychological factor. On one side you have a small digital device, on the other side a huge amp and cabinet, the amp with glowing tubes. The real amp just looks so much more impressive ... and also sound-wise, you'll typically test the tube amp at a much higher volume than you would test the modelling amp with. I'm really curious what an actual blind test would reveal ... you would need to listen to both amps through a monitor system (modelling/line out vs. miked real amp), and you shouldn't see the amps while you're playing. |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: February 13 2009 at 03:06
|
Well, before I get into Mike's post, I'd like to throw some stuff out there. I'm using the Behringer V-amp 2 right now, released in 2002 and was designed to compete head to head with the Line 6 POD 2.0. I've tried the POD 2.0 and if I must be honest, some of the amp models were completely unusable and despite being twice the price of the V-amp 2, I felt it was actually an inferior product sound wise, although clearly much better build quality, which is where the extra price comes in. The V-Amp 2 admittedly also has some rather appalling and IMO, totally unusable amp and cabinet simulations, but for my needs, it gets me a better sound than a POD 2.0. Going through the cab simulations in the V-Amp 2, I found about 10 or 11 out of a possible 15 to be unusable, but fortunately I have no real desire to even want to really use that many cab sims, so fortunately those 4-5 other sims work for me right now. Of the amp sims I found the JCM800 model to be shockingly bad. Doesn't even sound remotely like a real JCM800 at all. A real JCM800 will blow your face apart, but this was just piss weak sounding and just complete wrong and totally lacking in dynamics. It just sounds like they mixed a bunch of crap amps in one and called it an amp sim really. The Soldano SLO-100 model, although I've never heard the real deal amp before, is actually pretty good for what it is, and quite usuable for lead tones, and easily better than the Line 6 POD 2.0 SLO 100 simulation. I use the Dual Rectifier model for rhythm tones. The sound is actually not that bad, but compared to the real deal Dual Recto, it honestly doesn't really get there. Really lacking in dynamics, the EQ-ing just feels weird and wrong, but overall the amp sim is usuable, although far from being particularly good. I can't say I use any other amp sims other than the generic V-amp 2 clean setting that comes with it, that's my sound really. But fast forward to today's amp modelers and you'll see the landscape has changed. Behringer basically left the amp simulation market a few years ago. Sure, they still make the V-Amp 2 and their modeling amps, but the company no longer seems interested in developing their amp simulation products, so they are effectively out of the game. Korg, well basically everyone I know that has owned a Korg modeling unit has sold it as soon as they could and it seems barely anyone owns these. Pretty much everyone I've spoke to about them says they are pretty mediocre sounding at best. There was the Johnson J Station that was released quite a few years ago, but it appears Johnson basically just left the J Station as it was and never developed it further and I don't know anyone that owns one of them either, I guess people sold them or just never even heard about the company in the first place and never bought one. This basically leaves us with Line 6, Boss, Fractal Audio Systems, Digitech and Zoom for hardware modelers. I've never tried the Digitech GSP 1101 which is the flagship of the Digitech amp modeling line. They are priced about 30 per cent or around that figure above the Line 6 X3 Live and Boss GT-10 and seem extremely well featured. Professional guitarists are even using these things for their preamp, which says a lot about them and reports from users suggest they are a great unit for guys into the really high gain stuff, which really captured my interest. I think it may actually be a competitor to the X3 POD Pro, because it's certainly not in the same price range, it's a rackmount unit and you need to buy a seperate unit to switch channels on it. I guess it's more marketed towards seasoned players more so than the X3 Live and Boss GT-10, and because of the price, don't think I'll buy one, unless I saw a great deal on one, maybe I'll change my mind. I've decided against purchasing the GT-10 because it seems no one is impressed by the high gain amp models, which is what I need. Well featured unit and if it sounds better than the GT-8, it certainly can't sound bad, but I shall give it a miss. I basically narrowed it down to the X3 Live, and I will be able to find one of these below RRP fortunately. The latest firmware was well received by many X3 users I've spoke too, and many people that nearly sold their X3 decided to keep it after getting the update. Some of the high gain clips I've heard from the X3, are quite simply, very impressive indeed. I can understand why it's so popular among members of Sevenstring.org and Metalguitarist.org. It seems almost no one at those forum boards have a GT-10 unless it's for the effects only, but plenty of guys are using the X3 Live for their main tone, effects and recording capabilities. A lot of guys there actually don't use the cab sims at all, prefering to buy a cab loaded with speakers of their choice and using that instead of cab sims. I guess considering the needs of 7 and 8 string guitarists, needing a cab and speakers capable of delivering a tight low end is far more important than for 6 string players, which seems to be what the majority of Line 6 forum board people use. Some people are using tube power amps with their X3 Live as well, and not always a solid state one like you'd expect, but apparently it works well and some feel the tube coloration can actually have a positive effect on the tone. It's definitely been an interesting time around now, some 18 months after the release of the X3 Live, and seeing the reviews, hearing the sound clips, hearing about problems, hearing about people enjoying their unit and seeing what rigs people use with them, EDIT: Well, as you can tell, Behringer has decided to stay in the amp modeling game and has released the next gen of V-Amp. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: February 13 2009 at 04:54
|
^ I'd like to add the VOX Tonelab SE/LE to your list: http://www.voxamps.com/us/pedals/tonelable/ - http://www.voxamps.com/us/pedals/tonelable/ I own the previous version (SE) and I always liked it ... its unique feature is the built in tube which is used to simulate a real tube amp, while all the built in preamps are digitally modelled. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: February 13 2009 at 05:11
|
Wow, I missed the VOX amp modelers. They aren't as common and I admit they didn't come to mind instantly. Thanks for catching me on that. Two of the Zoom amp modelers also feature real tubes built into the units too. I tend to think it does help in the tone in a real way as well, not just there for marketing hype and looks. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: February 13 2009 at 06:21
|
^ indeed, like this one: http://www.zoom.co.jp/english/products/g71ut/ - http://www.zoom.co.jp/english/products/g71ut/ . But there's an important difference compared to the VOX Tonelab. The Zoom modelers use the tube as a preamp, while the Tonelab uses it to simulate a real tube amp. In tube amps the tubes interact with the cabinet, and the simulation of this interaction is the unique feature of the Tonelab. I must say that it sounds really nice! Ultimately though, I think that in the meantime the purely digital modelers have advanced significantly (the Tonelab was introduced in 2003). ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: jimidom
Date Posted: February 13 2009 at 09:46
|
The Vox Tonelab is excellent! At $300 it's still less expensive than the Line 6 Pod XTLive. I haven't used any of the Zoom modelers yet, but I may try one out someday soon. Their multi fx units have been quite good over the years. The technology has indeed improved with modelers over the last few years. Manufacturers are using tubes more than ever before, which gets you closer to the real thing than ever before. Tubes in the preamp section of any amp are good to have, but tubes in the power amp section are almost an absolute must. The Tonelab uses a 12AX7, which is actually a preamp tube, in the power amp section along with a "virtual transformer " and dummy speaker load. Vox fully understands that in order to get that elusive "brown sound", you must overdrive the power amp tubes, not just the preamp tubes. In the end though, with theTonelab you're still overdriving a preamp tube. It's not the same thing as overdriving an EL34 or 6L6, but it's close enough I guess because overdriving the power tubes of a real Marshall Plexi or Mesa Mk I would mean an invitation to deafness not mention possible eviction. ------------- "The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." - HST |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: February 13 2009 at 10:27
|
^ I don't think that tubes are necessary to get a really good sound - I own a Tonelab LE and as much as I like it, I prefer the X3 sounds. Besides, what you can't easily do with a Tonelab (or any other hardware) is to record the guitar dry and then generate the tone later during playback in the DAW. Of course if you only focus on live performance, that doesn't really matter ... but most musicians will at one point want to record their music, and then it's really cool it you can record your guitar with the same tone that you're using live, without any problems at all - and you can even tweak it after the fact (the recording), which opens up a new dimension during the mixdown/mastering stage. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: February 14 2009 at 19:39
Ahh, thanks for point out the difference in the use of tubes there. There is an Australian guitarist, Jeremy Barnes, that uses a G9.2tt and when I saw him doing a clinic he was using that as his main tone device put through a Traynor tube combo, sounded pretty good (I was about 15 meters from the stage too) but it somehow came across as slightly flat sounding and not quite as good as a true tube amp tone (the Traynor amp is not a high gain amp btw, he uses the clean channel of it and the G9.2tt), but nonetheless, it seemed good enough for this guy and he's a professional gigging musician. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: February 15 2009 at 02:18
|
^ I think that most of the gear that has been mentioned in this thread is good enough for a professional gigging musician. It's not only that most people in the audience could never hear those fine nuances, I also think that the difference between a really good performance and a crappy one lies mostly in the guitarist, not in the gear. Provided that it's set up properly, of course (mixing gain/clipping, effects etc). ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: cobb2
Date Posted: February 16 2009 at 00:35
|
For any interested, this is in the coming soon list from behringer: http://www.behringer.com/EN/Products/V-AMP3.aspx#features - http://www.behringer.com/EN/Products/V-AMP3.aspx#features
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: February 16 2009 at 00:47
|
^Woa, wait? What? No way!  Seriously, I thought Behringer was not going to do anything after the V-Amp 2, because after all, it's an 8 year old product and it made me think, the company was not continuing developing amp modeling. Good lord, I might buy this when it comes out. Seriously, about time they did this, this will get them some good market share, because the V-Amp 2 was a better product than the POD 2.0 IMO. And if the USB connectivity works good, you know what? I'm selling my V-Amp 2 and buying the V-Amp 3. Hell yes, this is awesome news  Behringer back in the amp modeling game= thumbs up worthy. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: February 16 2009 at 01:56
|
^ I'm thrilled about the direct monitoring ... see my thread about the subject in the Line 6 support forum: http://line6.com/support/thread.jspa?threadID=54054&tstart=0 - http://line6.com/support/thread.jspa?threadID=54054&tstart=0 My only problem with the Behringer: I didn't read anything about a software plugin ... that would be the icing on the cake. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: DaleHauskins
Date Posted: February 16 2009 at 15:14
|
This working Los Angeles guitarist has been using for some time the latest from Roland the Boss GT-10 http://www.roland.com/products/com/GT-10/images/top_L.jpg - http://www.roland.com/products/com/GT-10/images/top_L.jpg http://www.roland.com/products/en/GT-10/index.html - http://www.roland.com/products/en/GT-10/index.html After using for tours,and tracking sessions the GT-8 for a year 1/2; I LOVE the my new updated GT-10 pedalboard (No more tone sucking!) Any Line 6 pedalboard when tracking/recording either from a decent tube amp or direct, comes out sounding much like a fly. Tschüßlly |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: February 16 2009 at 22:59
"Any Line 6 pedalboard when tracking/recording either from a decent tube amp or direct, comes out sounding much like a fly" I have to say it, this is absolutely ridiculous. You sound as if, you tried using the original POD released in 1998, just said "nah, doesn't sound good, I'm switching to Boss" and then never bothering to try anything else Line 6 made. I tell you know, they have come a long way from their beginnings. I can guarantee you , you will find sound clips of the X3 that sound absolutely massive if you take the time to look. In fact, a certain Porcupine Tree album was done entirely with Line 6 amp simulations  .....still sounds pretty huge to meMost amp modeling users I've spoken to agree the X3 does a far superior high gain tone than the X3, which is why you barely see that many metal guitarists using a Boss GT-10, while the Boss GT-10 is better for mid gain sounds. Simply, anyone that can't get a massive recorded tone out of the X3, hasn't put the time in. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: February 17 2009 at 01:41
|
^^ honestly, this sounds much like "gear protection syndrome" to me.
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: April 08 2009 at 23:44
Well, given the V-amp 2 had software that let you tweak the tone settings, I could only suspect an improved model would have it too. What you have to take into account is, the V-Amp 3 is going to sell for 249 AUD, which is still half the price of a POD 2.0. And mind you, the V-Amp 2 sold at 249 AUD, and already sounded better than the POD 2.0. Sure enough, the V-Amp 3 has 32 amp models, just like the POD 2.0 and V-Amp 2, but I suspect what models it has, are designed to compete in sound quality with the XT PODs at the least, if perhaps even the X3 series since it's (the V-Amp 3) coming out 2 years after the X3 was released. Now that Behringer has a modeling device not only half the price of the POD 2.0, but with a USB 2.0 interface, direct monitoring, improved amp/cab/effect simulations, they have produced an absolute bargain. I will eventually sell of my V-Amp 2 for one of these, no doubt, to use as a second amp sim device if friends want to come over and jam with me and don't want to bring an amp. I really hope the cab sims have been improved, because as good as some of the amp sims in the V-Amp 2 were, the cab sims are pretty poor for the most part. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 21 2009 at 22:36
|
The following post is dedicated to my man Mr Prog Freak. Something special arrived in the mail about 2 hours ago:  Well, I took it out of the box, put it on the floor and took a photo of it as you can see. I plugged it in.........and well, realized that I had no idea what to do what so ever  Okay, so well, in a few minutes I had it set up and plugged in, but this baby is gonna take me weeks, perhaps even months to unlock the full potential and to get a tone I want. Unfortunately, this is no tube amp, and that is not a good thing. Yes, upon comparing the various Fender clean amp models of my V-Amp 2 to the ones on the POD X3 Live revealed more complexity and depth of tone and *sounded* closer to a real deal tube amp, that is to say the actual tone itself is more tube-like with more tube-like harmonics and the other various good things about tube tone, but.......the dynamics. Every review, the countless thousands of reviews I've read saying it lacked dynamics, it's all true. I get to finally try it in the flesh and to be honest for something that took this long to come out after the POD XT and even my V-Amp2, I'm a bit underwhelmed with the lack of dynamics. That is not to say there isn't dynamics there, there obviously is and yes there is more than my V-Amp 2, but for something in the modeling world released in 2007, it could be a lot better than what it is. That said, I plan to buy a tube power amp down the track as well as a real cabinet rather than using the cabinet emulations, that should improve the tone a bit and add back a bit of the dynamics if other people I have to using that kind of set up are anything to go by. -------------
|
Posted By: burritounit
Date Posted: May 21 2009 at 22:39
this is amazing!!! ------------- "I've walked on water, run through fire, can't seem to feel it anymore. It was me, waiting for me..." |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 21 2009 at 22:49
|
For those wondering how much I paid, these cost 1299 AUD in Australia, but I scored mine for 550 AUD plus another 40 bucks for shipping, that's 590 AUD if you can't do math:P. Given this, I'm extremely happy with the purchase, despite the lack of dynamics, because hey, I got a stupidly good deal. It looks like the previous owner used it for about 3 weeks, and just put it back in the back, so I got it in excellent condition. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 22 2009 at 03:11
|
^ Finally!
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: DaleHauskins
Date Posted: May 22 2009 at 19:35
|
Greets all, Just recently just back from a beautiful sweet tour through Hawaii with Keys of Creation... I still truly love my GT-10,and was blessed+lucky I brought along my very versatile,but wicked and warm soundin' GT-10;specially when I got to do some tracking sessions along the way.It's all in one box...No tone suckin' here... (I was specially very happy I brought along my likkle T-Rex "Replica" pedal via midi;dangerous whilst dubing out for the crowd.) Blessings,Tschüßßßßly from sunny Los Angeles ! ------------- Ｄａｌｅ Ｈａｕｓｋｉｎｓ (858) 401-2973 (310) 293-0432 https://artistecard.com/Dalehauskins |
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: May 23 2009 at 10:02
|
I always wonder what one could come up with by spending more time seeing what you could come up with a basic set up (guitar(s), amp (no 'S'), some pedals) . Let's face it, getting the most of these amp modelers means spending time reading manuals, tweaking, resetting, and so on. Seems to me, bands like the Beatles used their imagination to come up with sounds . Need to sound like you're underwater ? Record someone blowing through a straw into a glass or bowl of water. You're a musician after all, not a technician. Play ! ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 23 2009 at 10:27
|
^ keep in mind though that the Beatles - at least by the time they became experimental - also had a host of technicians at their disposal ... BTW: Configuring amp modelers is not exactly rocket science anymore ... get yourself a Line 6 TonePort if you like, and play around with POD-Farm on the computer. It's literally like using analog hardware. Sound-wise there's still much room for improvement as far as emulating tubes and speakers is concerned ... but that can't keep me from using the technology. And I've been using it from day 1 (since the original POD came out almost a decade ago). ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: May 23 2009 at 15:10
|
Used to have a POD 2.0, also had a Boss GT-6. And frankly, the time that would have been taken up figuring how to take full advantage of either (or any other) was better spent on practicing, playing & jamming on guitar. I have a YCV50 Traynor tube amp, a modified TS9 (by Paul Gamache), a Boss FBM '59, a Boss Chorus CE-2 (made in Japan, black Label), and a Line 6 ToneCore Ubermetal. Apart from that I would't mind an echo/delay pedal and if I could get it back an Electric Mistress. The sound comes from your fingers , not from electronics ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 23 2009 at 16:05
|
Maybe it's because I'm an IT professional, but I never had any problems figuring out gear like the POD. In fact it really seems simpler to me than having a dozen pedals and stomp boxes ... but of course each one of us should use whatever they find most intuitive themselves. And I agree that most of the gear talk is superficial and the music really comes from your fingers ... but if the sound is not pleasing that might make it difficult to really get into the right mood for playing great music. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 24 2009 at 00:34
Good stuff man  How were you running the GT? Through an amp (if so, what amp? FRFR set up? Or just totally direct to FOH? -------------
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 24 2009 at 01:24
|
I don't buy the sound comes from your fingers bullsh*t and never really did. If it's true, just walk onto the stage with nothing and apparently the sounds of the guitar and amp are going to magically going to come out of your hands and fingers. Bullsh*t. Tone is the result of many many factors. The body wood of the guitar, the materials in the bridge and type of bridge, the wood of the neck, the wood of the fretboard, how the neck is constructed, what brand of strings, what gauge of strings, what the nut is made of and then what the frets are made of. Then we have what amp settings you use, what amp you use in particular , what pedals you have connected, whether they are true bypass or not. On an album it comes down to how it mixed and mastered, how many times you tracked the guitar and what mic you used etc etc. On stage, it's about the venue size, whether the floor transmits too much bass, whether you are going direct to FOH and coming out of studio monitors, whether you are going through your amp mic'd up and sending that to FOH. In the end, your fingers can shape things like picking dynamics, articulation, subtlety, nuance. When you hear a great guitarist, like Guthrie Govan or David Gilmour, they have that ability to do that, but they also choose certain gear too because they have tonal needs in mind. So debrewguy, tell me why you had a Tube Screamer modified if you apparently think you can sound great without decent gear? f**k that man, don't spend money, just walk into a room empty handed and guitar tone magically comes from your hands and fingers Fact is, my old practice amp sounds like a buzzy piece of sh*t no matter how much I practiced and get better as a guitarist. I sound 1000 times better than my Line 6 POD because it has the tonal options I need. -------------
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 24 2009 at 01:36
|
Also, there are plenty of amps that assume a level of intelligence from the user that you will need to tweak to sound good. Pretty much all Mesa Boogies amps take even longer than an amp modeling to dial in a good tone. You can probably get a good tone with an amp modeler in about 7 days, with a Mesa Boogie, it can take months and even years. Tweaking doesn't get in the way of creating music unless you let it. With any piece of gear, you should be tweaking anyway to get a good sound, chances are if you plug straight into an amp, if might not match well with your pickups and pedals straight away. In about 99 per cent of cases, it wont sound good instantly. Funny how many bands and guitarists these days are using Mesa Boogie amps and amp modelings, tweaking the hell out of them for hours and yet make money playing gigs and recording music
-------------
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 24 2009 at 06:34
Most gear talkis superficial? So you mean, Steve Vai just wasted his time talking to Carvin about his Legacy amps to get the tonal needs he wanted, he just wasted his time talking to Ibanez about his signature guitar and asking for specific pickups to be put in there, a specific tone wood to be used? I guess I wasted my time researching and disussing with people whether I would be happy with an X3 Live and should just buy a cheap mic and record my practice amp that sounds like buzzing bees and mud. Yeah right. Come on Mike, that's ridiculous. Be realistic, people need to discuss gear to get the tone they want, otherwise you're going to end up stuck with gear you don't like. It's not superifical, it's reasonable and rational to talk and discuss it with others that know their sh*t, -------------
|
Posted By: cobb2
Date Posted: May 24 2009 at 09:51
| Playing with the gear is half the fun. That's why I love virtual amps with a gazillion different sound possibilities on them, just to end up with 5 settings you use for most songs, a couple of months down the track. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 24 2009 at 10:34
I said "most gear talk". What I mean is that many times people talk about their gear and you get the distinct impression that they're suffering from the "the grass is greener" syndrome. Some may have a high end tube amp and crave a modelling amp because they're tired of having just one sound. Others may have a modelling amp and crave for a real tube amp, thinking that it would push their playing to the next level. One guy might have a Morley wah pedal and dream of a Dunlop Cry-Baby because Hendrix played one.See what I mean? I know that gear is really important to you, but I know for a fact that it's really not important at all to the listener. Sure, if you have a crappy sound then most people will hear it. But only few will hear the difference between a properly set up state of the art modelling sound and a real tube amp ... or between a GT-10 and a X3. And that is the level of most gear talk, and what I would call superficial. To these people I would say that they should devote more attention to what they're playing, than to how it sounds. It's only me of course ... and I might be totally wrong. So feel free to ignore me!  ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: May 24 2009 at 10:41
------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 24 2009 at 23:39
I understand what you're saying and we've had this conversation before, certainly, but the fact is, in the real world, the primary reason for saving up your hard earned money on good gear isn't for the audience to hear you, but to be able to please yourself so you can say "I like the voicing of this amp/the tonality of it" or whatever else it may be about that piece of gear that is pleasing to the individual. This is how it is for most people. I know this, because I spend time posting or lurking on many guitar forums in the gear sections. Pretty much none of the guys I've spoken to want just for the audience to hear them, but a piece of gear that is going to satisfy their ear too And because of this, whether the audience notices or not is irrelevant to most musicians. I've been told by a guy that has been playing for over 10 years that I jammed with that brought along his 3499 AUD Peavey XXX head, 2000 AUD cabinet and other a thousands dollars worth of pedals, that me playing through my V-Amp 2 and fairly cheap studio monitors I sounded good. To be fair, the V-Amp 2 does sound decent, but compared to his expensive Peavey tube amp, it wasn't exactly mind blowingly amazing. I've been told I sound good through a Marshall AVT 100 and a Randall RX-75 while using really cheap guitars with poor quality pickups. Funny, because both amps sound like complete crap to my ears because unlike the audience I cannot get past the bad tone coming from the amp and speakers and just listen to my playing without having to think how poor the amp sounds. Was I being I sounded good because my playing was good or because I actually had good tone? Maybe both, but to me personally, the gear sounded like crap. The tone was thin, harsh, lifeless and dull no matter how lively my playing might have been. It's because I constantly notice these kind of details that I need a certain level of gear. True, a POD X3 Live is 1299 which is a lot cheaper than a tube preamp made by Mesa Boogie or a classy manufacturer like that (technically I can't compare an X3 Live to an actual amp since it's a preamp by nature), but after a few hours per day of tweaking since I got this on Friday, I'm getting better lead guitar tones than a poorly set up tube amp. True, a well set up tube amp beats a well set up modeling unit, but a well set up modeling unti always beats a poorly set up tube amp. So in my favor is the fact I'm a person with the kind of patience to read manuals, tweak things, research constantly on the internet. So my tone is going to beat the pants off the expensive Mesa Boogie rig that isn't set up well because the owner didn't bother to read the manual. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 25 2009 at 02:24
|
^ technically though the X3 Live is not a preamp, but preamp, amp, cabinets and microphones (although of course you can turn off the amp/cabinet simulations). So in all fairness, when comparing sounds you should try to mike (sic) an expensive tube amp properly and compare that to what the X3 Live generates through its line out.
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 25 2009 at 03:14
I think you missed the point of what I was saying, I may not have been clear enough though to be fair. Yes, I know it's a preamp, amp *simulations* effects, cabinet, mics etc I own the bloody thing for christsake, of course I know this , but for all intents and purposes, it's a preamp in the proper sense of the term.Just like an separate preamp needs a a power amp with a cabinet to make sound, so does a POD, hence my comparison. A POD is not an *amp* in the proper sense of the word, because you need actual amplification to even hear anything out of it. An update, I managed to get some nice rhythm guitar sounds out of this thing after 4 days -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 25 2009 at 05:29
|
^ cool! I know that you know the X3. I still don't agree with how you liken it to a preamp though. It has a line out which you usually connect to your mixer directly, without any amp in between, while your typical preamp has an output that you wouldn't normally connect to your mixer, but to a power amp. Of course you can set the X3 to act as a preamp though, and I know that many guitarists use it that way. Nothing wrong with that, as long as you accept the hassle of having to mike the cabinet.
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 25 2009 at 07:16
|
I guess, we had a different idea of looking at it. I wasn't looking at it from the perspective of it having the line out connected to mixer approach, since I connect my X3 Live to active monitors and thus any power amp/speaker configuration I would need to use at any point in time. Moving on now, I'm going to start trying to record with this thing now that I believe I've dialed in some decent tone. As long as I don't run into any hassles, I'll try to post clips once my internet connection is back up to 12mbps. Edit: Just recorded some stuff, but unfortunately clips have to wait, but I got 4.67ms of latency. I guess this means I'll be keeping the POD for a while yet:) -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 25 2009 at 12:37
|
^ did you achieve the 4.67ms with Asio4All? If so, you should consider that AFAIK the Line 6 driver software switches to 16bits when using Asio4All ...
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 25 2009 at 23:48
|
^I used ASIO4All, yes. And before you ask, I tried the ASIO X3 Live driver and Line 6 decided you only needed to go as low as 128 samples for the buffer size. This would be great except for the fact latency is not going to be any lower than 10.9ms. Why Line 6 decided to cap the lower limit at 128 buffers just really just beyond me. I also can't get lower than a sampling rate of 48KHz which also doesn't help latency. If I want lower, ASIO4All is the only driver that is going to get me there since it allows me to use a 96 KHz sampling rate and a smaller buffer size. So if it's true that I can only get 16 bits, what I lose in bits I make up for in the sampling rate. How that actually compares in the real world is another thing obviously. Plenty of people are recording their X3 Live through ASIO4All because they suffered the same problem of the Line 6 ASIO driver not allowing a buffer size below 128 samples and yet some of these guys sound amazing, so I'm really not concerned as long as the latency is below 5ms which it is:) -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 26 2009 at 01:51
|
^ That's all true, but if you have a X3 why bother with latency anyway? Using the X3 for monitoring you can get near zero latency ... ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 26 2009 at 02:18
|
^Not entirely sure what you mean. Ableton Live Suite 8 is telling me I'm getting 10.9ms with the POD X3 Live ASIO setting, so are you saying that since I'm using the X3 Live as my soundcard/monitoring anyway I should actually be achieving less latency in the real world and that Ableton is showing me a number with errors? Sorry if that was perhaps a dumb question, but I honestly wasn't sure if I'm reading what you're saying correclty -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 26 2009 at 02:32
|
It's difficult to explain. I'm talking about a scenario where you want to use the X3 to record an audio track in Ableton Live, with several other tracks (including the click) to play to. The important thing to know is that Ableton compensates for the latency of the inputs and outputs (at least if you tell it to do latency compensation in the options menu). Now, the trick is not to monitor your playing through Live (select "Off" instead of "In" or "Auto" for the track you're recording). Arm the track for recording and play something ... you should hear the sound generated by the X3 directly, not the signal routed from the X3 to the computer, then from the Line 6 driver to Live (via ASIO), then back to the Line 6 driver (via ASIO), then to the X3 again. That's the so called roundtrip latency, which you don't want during recording. So in a nutshell: Turn off monitoring in Live 8 and try to use the X3 for that instead. Once you do that, ASIO latency is taken out of the equation, as long as you make use of the Latency Compensation in Live 8. What I do is I switch between Asio4All and Line 6. When I want to record guitar I switch to the Line 6 drivers with very high buffer settings (1024), since latency isn't an issue (as explained above). But when I want to record midi instruments I switch back to Asio4All, since for those instruments I have to monitor through Live/ASIO. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 28 2009 at 04:29
I can bet it's just really FG-325 sounding like it's being played by a good player rather than it sounding like " a 2000 dollar guitar". Someone else picking up a guitar does not change the inherent tone of an instrument. Player from player is a variable, but the inherent tone of an instrument is set in stone. It's not a hard concept to understand mate. I don't even understand why you've come into this thread and even started just saying this. I didn't buy an X3 Live with the intention of sounding like my "idols" whatever that even means anymore, I bought it because I needed a flexible device that is going to offer me different amp/cabinet/mic/stomp box simulations and also have a unit that allows me to record directly into my computer without having to f**k around with mic placement. I live at home with my parents and II have a limited budget. If you could care to donate money for me to live by myself so I can afford a house and various tube amps and real pedals, microphones, another recording interface, then hey I can start recording via a tube amp. But unfortunately that is not going to be the case so the X3 Live is the best solution I can have right now given my budget and my living situation. I need 4 channels. One is an extremely clean sound with no break up The second is a clean sound with breakup The 3rd is high gain rhythm tone the 4th is a high gain lead tone. I also would a need a MIDI control output. The only amps of that I know off the top of my head that can do this is a Marshall JVM and MI Amplification Revelation. I do not have 3399 AUD nor the 3699 AUD for either amp respectively. Nor do I have a place to consistently crank them up to make them sound really good. The fact is, no matter what gear you have, you need to tweak it to make it sound the best. Some of my most favorite albums of all time have been recorded with amps that require months and months of tweaking to sound amazing. Images and Words was recording using Mesa Boogie amps, notorious for being extremely tricky to dial in. But isn't it funny how now it's known as one of the greatest prog metal albums of all time, but I do not see your name on the credits of any extremely innovative and creative albums despite your apparently "concentrate on the song" attitude. Petrucci also got some pretty gnarly tone as well on that album to boot. Opeth has used a Boss GT-8 for an album too. Whether Opeth is to your taste or not, a lot of people liked Ghost Reveries, so clearly the GT-8 did not get in the way of the writing process. Steve Wilson has used a POD for either Deadwing or In Absentia (don't remember which exactly) yet he got great tones and made an album a lot of people loved. Tweaking and technology only gets in the way of the music creation if someone lets it. When I bought my X3 Live, within about 4 days, of perhaps 2 hours of tweaking per day, and even between tweaking to check the tone I'm constantly writing new riffs, I was already recording and putting down some music on my computer. Using a modeling unit/amp is a totally reasonable and rational approach for recording/using for writing music just as using an amp cranked up and mic'd up. -------------
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 28 2009 at 07:46
|
A bit more playing around with the POD today. One thing I found a little unfortunate and a tad disappointing was that unless I used the semi-parametric 4 band EQ I can't get usable sounds out of the POD. Of course, however once you do apply some EQ, you can start getting really good tones. Okay, so I found out several days ago, but today I tried more amp models, and all the high gain models need the semi parametric EQ otherwise they sound like sh*t. After a bit of screwing around and finally figuring out how to get the Line 6 Bender to work, I found it was unfortunately even worse than I predicted. I already knew from reviews before buying it that you can't play more than one note at once without severe pitch distortion between however many intervals you try to play, but I thought that since at least you can get usable sounds out of it when you set it to fixed pitch shift, you could surely be able to make it work using the expression pedal, only playing one note at a time and then shifting the note. Unfortunately that was not the case, the pitch shifting effect when using the pedal was not able to yield results that were in tune, effectively making the feature completely useless unless you deliberately want that crap sounding out of tune pitch bend. Makes me want an Axe FX.......... -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 28 2009 at 11:17
| ^ I think you always need some EQ to get a good tone ... simply because every guitar is different. A cool thing that you can do with the POD is to record the dry signal and then not pass it to the POD-Farm plugin directly, but route it through a EQ in Ableton first. Gives you much more flexibility than the 4 band semi parametric EQ of the POD X3. |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 29 2009 at 03:25
|
^What I meant was, the 3 band+presence controls by themselves were not enough to make any of the high gain simulations usable. There was just the dreaded Line 6 fizzyness, forcing me to use the semi parametric EQ. On a real amp (I mean a proper, quality tube amp) I wouldn't have to resort to an outboard EQ for a good tone for just practicing or playing live purposes. I played a Mesa Boogie Lone Star Special with switchable wattage a little while back allowing me to put it on 5 watt mode and crank it even in the store and was able to get great tone with nothing in between the guitar and amp except for one cable. Granted the tone wasn't suited to metal playing but more liquid high gain soloing, but the point being all I used was the controls on the front of the amp, just the gain, bass/mid/treble/presence and volume controls and just smooth creamy tone without the fizzy harshness that seems inherent to Line 6 stuff. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 29 2009 at 13:26
^ here we go again, comparing €300 gear with €3000 gear ... 
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 29 2009 at 23:34
|
^In Australia, it's actually 1299 AUD gear versus 4295 AUD gear. Either Line 6 stuff is extremely cheap in Germany or Mesa Boogie stuff is even more over priced in Germany than Australia. Unless you were talking about me having paid 590 AUD for mine though, but I prefer to talk about it in terms of brand new pricing for both. I actually take back a little of what I said. The Soldano SLO-100 model, after I turned the 4 band semi parametric EQ off was still quite usable, it's actually a lot of the amp models that I believe to be more suitable for my rhythm tone that require the 4 band semi parametric EQ. I don't really need the Ableton EQ until post processing anyway, for practicing and jamming just using the semi parametric EQ yields great results for my rhythm tones. Interestingly, I couldn't get the Peavey 5150 to sound great at all. I got okay at best out of it, but since it's such a widely modeled amp you'd think they would have done a better job of getting it right. I tried every possible combination of cabinet/mic models, 4 band semi parametric EQ settings, nothing could get it better than okay sounding. Actually quite a few other people share my sentiments on the 5150 model not being particularly good, so it's not just me anyway. The 5150 model on the Roland Cube is better than the X3 Live, and the Roland Cube was released years earlier. It's not a great concern, since anyway I've found great lead tones using the SLO-100 and great rhythm tones usng the Dual Recto and Triple Recto models but still, I can imagine people buying this and hoping the 5150 model is going to kick ass when it doesn't even sound that good. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 30 2009 at 01:24
|
^ we could go on like this for months and never reach an agreement. I really like some of the X3 models, and I don't even have to use the semi parametric EQ to get a sound that's ok for practicing purposes. I'm sure that not all of the 78 models sound good, and maybe none of them is truly great, but I really don't care. I won't spend a four figure amount on a tube amp that might give me a better sound but is *much* less convenient to use.
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: May 30 2009 at 03:21
|
It's not so much an argument but I'm making more of a commentary and just sharing my opinion on what I think works well, what doesn't work so well, what sounds good and what doesn't. Ultimately I think some of the stuff I'm saying could be useful for potential X3 Live buyers. I think a product like this has a lot of pros and cons, much like many other products and it's particularly interesting to me and possibly others hopefully to know what some of these are. Also just tested the two Diezel VH4 models. I've never had the pleasure of using or even seeing one of these in real life, but I'm getting good sounds from the simulations, so definitely another one I might consider trying out for recording purposes perhaps. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: May 30 2009 at 03:30
|
Of course I think your comments are useful ... people who think about buying an X3 Live should know that a real tube amp still has the potential to sound much, much better. Eventually Line 6 will publish a new version of their modeling technology, and I'm sure that it will sound better than their current technology but there will still be tube amps that sound better. I know that all this must be really confusing to those who never played a real tube amp and are now wondering whether they should get one or a modeling amp instead. It's a different situation for me - as a beginner I had a solid state amp (Peavey), then I got a tube amp (Engl) ... and today I'm using a modeling amp. So I know all three worlds (analog solid state, analog tube, digital modeling) first hand ... ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: GaryB
Date Posted: June 01 2009 at 09:10
|
I am technologically challenged, period.
When jamming along with CDs in my music room or getting together with friends for impromptu jams I use a Fender Blues Jr amp (easy to carry) and a Pedaltrain with a Jim Dunlop wah wah, and Danelectro Cool Cat, Daddy-O, Surf n Turf (where do they get those names?).
A few years back I met a very nice lady named Michelle Penn who is an Indy recording artist with five CDs to her credit. She sang and played two or three guitar parts on the CDs. We would often sit around and discuss different equipment and she kept referring to something called a Pod that she used for recording. I was clueless.
I then decided to record my own music just for fun so I picked up a Boss BR864 digital recorder with about a hundred different built-in effects. I then recorded a ten song CD with three to five tracks on each song. By using the built-in effects I recorded all the tracks (including bass tracks) using the same acous/elec guitar. I didn't have speakers for the recorder so I used headphones.
Like I said, I'm not a techy but I had a lot of fun with this project and can now see that all of this new equipment gives someone endless possibilities when it comes to their personal music.
BTW...I recently picked up the Jimi Hendrix Signature pedal by Digitech. It's pretty hi-tech for me but I plan on spending more time with it (not to sound like,or to cover Hendrix but just to see what all it can do).
|
Posted By: jimidom
Date Posted: June 01 2009 at 10:32
------------- "The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." - HST |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: June 01 2009 at 12:17
Plenty of people have a different approach to how they write and record music, which I think is totally cool and it's interesting to hear that despite you being "technologically challenged" that you used a digital recorder. I'm 20 years old and I think I'm fairly open minded to trying out and embracing new things. I play a 7 string guitar for example. Despite Ibanez releasing the first readily available 7 string in 1990, 19 years later people are still afraid to try them out. Others just tend to dismiss them entirely and one reason for many has been because various nu metal bands were commonly seen with them causing many people to believe they were purely for just simple, low down riffs, but that is absolutely ridiculous because at the end of the day, it's just a guitar, it still has the other 6 strings of any normal 6 string guitar. If I wanted a guitar to tune down to B, I'd buy a six string and tune that down lower, but what I wanted was 7 strings to increase my range. You can keep dimissing it, or you can do as I did, and discover that a 7 string guitar opens up a world of new possibilties with more extended chord options, arpeggios, soloing possibilties and just in general is allowing me to do things that were impossible on a 6 string guitar. Same thing applies to an 8 string, 9 string guitar or even beyond that. They are just tools for making music, just as a Line 6 POD, Boss GT, Digitech GSP1101 or an actual amp. At any time they get in the way of making music, it's because of the user, not the gear itself, despite what Debrewguy might think. I've heard so many great sound clips and songs made with amp modeling gear that I think it's easy to see the actual song writing and recording process gets done rather well if someone puts their mind it, gets off their ass and just goes for it. -------------
|
Posted By: GaryB
Date Posted: June 01 2009 at 20:05
|
As you know, Boss puts a whole lot into a small package. The BR864 is about the size of a laptop computer but has 8 tracks with 64 virtual tracks, a drum machine, looping, bouncing, auto punch-in/out, mixing, mastering, individual track EQ, etc. Someone with a little bit of experience could really do a lot with it. In recording my CD I probably used only 20% of this machine's capability.
The down side for me was having to bounce all the tracks down to two in order to use the USB port to transfer the songs to my computer to burn a CD.
I have no common sense when it comes to spending money. So, I picked up a ZOOM MRS-1608 with a built-in CD burner. It is a 16 track but can record 8 tracks simultaneously without bouncing. I have not used this yet but I'm working on some songs and plan to have an 8 to 10 song CD by the end of the summer.
Making my own CDs is for my own enjoyment. I give copies to family and friends if they want them.
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 03 2009 at 03:12
I have recently acquired an X3 pro, and so far, I've spent more time trying to get a nice sound out of it than writing music with it - but complex musical "instruments" can take a long time to pick up!
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 03 2009 at 16:48
|
^ have you connected it to the computer yet? POD-Farm is quite easy to use ... certainly more comfortable than using the X3 Pro directly.
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 04 2009 at 00:50
|
POD Farm uses too much CPU - yes, it's friendly, but when you've got a heap of VSTs for synth and vocal processing, it doesn't make sense to have this resource drain running too. I'm getting used to the X3 interface - it's certainly friendlier than the XT Pro, that's for sure!
Besides, the famous Line6 "fizz" can only really be cured by EQing, which is actually easier at the interface itself, or during post. I still haven't managed to get rid of all of it - but our most recent recordings sound fairly good (check out the http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=51556&PN=2 - Certif1ed the Band thread
 ).That said, the way I've been getting sounds is to dial up a preset in POD Farm standalone, copy the settings on the box (which is only connected to the PC via an audio interface at present) and tweak the EQ - and that can take a very long time.
Just choosing a nice tone from the hundreds available can take ages - and once you've found one, further tweaking is always essential, because they never sound exactly the way you want them (especially the distorted settings, which are the ones we use most often). Only the POD XT preset Du Hast seems nice enough to use "out of the box", but even on that, I turn the gain and presence down a shade.
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: June 04 2009 at 00:55
|
The X3 Pro is a cool piece of gear. I nearly pulled the trigger on one
myself, but I couldn't justify spending 900 AUD plus another few
hundred dollars for the floorboard when I could just get all the inputs
and outputs I needed plus a floorboard for 590 AUD. The thing that bothers me about it is that it's a 3 space rackmount unit, just never understood why they didn't reduce the size of it, but ah well. I definitely agree on the EQ-ing part, for my rhythm tone it I found I absolutely had to use the 4 band semi parametric EQ to dial out the fizz. Certainly lots of amp models, but fortunately I was able to narrow it down to about 10 at most, so I didn't need to spend heaps of time tweaking since I had any idea before I bought it what amp models were useful to me and what weren't. So far I've narrowed it down to 5 amp models for the 18th bank (a user bank, since I avoid the presets completely). On Channel A, Line 6 Super Sparkle set with 0 drive so it stays clean regardless of whether I use the humbuckers or split coil mode. I then have compression set up so if I need a slight boost, I hit the compression switch. Channel B I've got Line 6 Clean, set to slight dirt, so I get a lightly over driven clean tone. Channel C I'm using the dual tone feature and using the 2001 Diamond Plate and 2001 Treadplate dual models for the rhythm guitar sound Channel D is of course my lead tone, the 1993 Solo 100 Head model. On Channels A, B and D, I've got reverb and delay, but in addition to that on Channel D I've got the Screamer stomp box model, the 4 band semi parametric EQ set to boost certain mid range frequencies that I like boosted in addition to cutting high frequencies I don't want. I have the wah module set to Fassel. Channel C, the effects on are the Screamer stomp box model and of course 4 band semi parametric EQ which helps to bring out pick attack and that "percussive chunk" that I love about Mesa Boogie Rectifiers. I'm definitely a very mid range heavy guy, you will not hear ultra scooped out Dimebag-esque tones from me ever. I notice some young kids like to get on a Mesa Boogie Rectifier or using a Rectifer amp model on a Line 6 device or whatever and they scoop out all the mids and set the gain to maximum and want to get this grinding sound, but to me that is completely wrong and you totally miss the point of a Rectifier if you do that. Rectos in particular get easier to play when you back off the mids i.e that become less stiff, more compressed feeling, less resistant to picking if you will and this effect is of course enhanced further when you increase the gain. For me and a lot of other guys, the fun with the Recto begins when you slam the mids over 70 per cent and back down the gain a little. The sound is more focused, less compressed and it feels more stiff as you play. Bumping up the mids a lot, as well as backing down the gain which reduces the compressed, less resistant feel, creates a more unforgiving playing experience. If you're having a bad playing day, or if someone that doesn't have good chops plays through it, it sounds like garbage, because all the mistakes in your playing get magnified with these mid heavy settings. But when you're having a good day and you hit the strings the right way, it is infinitely more rewarding to play than the low mids, high gain setting. There is so much more pick attack, it sounds more focused and the subtle details of your playing stand out more. It's intimidating at first for many less experienced players, but I think if they learn that about the Recto and Recto models, it's great incentive to work on cleaner, more precise chops and understand the importance of really knowing how to attack the strings for that great rhythm sound for thrash metal and/or death metal. -------------
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 04 2009 at 10:28
|
Some really cool tips in there - thanks!
The only decent amp I've ever played with is a JCM 800, and the Line 6 model isn't even close to how I remember the tone (this was back in the 1980s, after all, so my memory may be rose-tinted, but I'm sure the JCM has a certain presence that none of the amp models get).
It's even worse with bass amps - I can't find a tone that really gets the HiWatt, Trace Elliot, Marshall, Peavey or Laney sounds; they all sound like variants of the same thing to me. We've got a Bass XT Pro as well as the regular XT Pro, but the X3 just seems to add a whole load more bass amps sounding really similar to each other - no character!
Any tips on getting a half decent bass sound out of these things?
I know what you mean about the box size; we've now got a 2U space in the rack and nothing that'll go in it.
For guitar, I've been seriously tempted by the Ibanez WD7 "Weeping Demon" pedal - I really want OTT Dive bombs and wah effects, because a lot of our music hinges on our warped sense of humour. I'm not a serious player, but I'm a serious composer with serious fun in mind.
Are these things any good? (I'm counting this as modelling, because of the impossible stuff it's supposed to be able to do). ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 04 2009 at 10:55
I meant that you can use POD-Farm as a frontend for the X3 ... it's easier to use, you can play around with the different settings and models just by dragging elements on the computer screen rather than using the tiny display and overloaded buttons/dials of the X3 (Pro). ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 04 2009 at 12:18
|
^At the moment, it's not close enough to the PC to be able to plug it in, so that's another issue. Even standalone, it's not a very pretty app, resource-wise - every time you change an amp setting, you get a 15% CPU spike and an increase in memory usage. It's not very good at cleaning up the handles behind it. Also, if you have other runtime apps that use cycles, like plug-ins, then POD Farm starts getting noisy. It's really bad on my laptop, unless I switch off all the powersave stuff and other background bits and pieces. I know it's not really meant to be used on a laptop, but I do a fair bit of mobile recording in rehearsal studios. Gearbox is by far the superior app for this purpose. As I said, the X3 interface is bigger and better by far than the original XT - but once you know the settings you want, it's not hard - so I agree from this viewpoint - POD Farm is excellent in that respect - for modelling. Not so nice when it comes to actual recording in a "proper" studio environment though. The work in getting a good sound is all in EQing, once the guitar and amp tones are setup - the X3 dials are much better for this than either POD Farm or Gearbox, where the mouse controls are clunky and can't replace a solid knob.  /stops before someone makes a tacky joke... ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 04 2009 at 12:36
|
^ I'm usually not trying to get a perfect sound when I'm just playing around ... I know that it also depends a lot on your mood, sometimes you perceive sound differently. Currently my strategy is to always record the dry signal, come what may. That way I can always tweak the sound later. I also use the EQ effects in Ableton Live rather than the Line 6 EQ ... the one in Live is 8 points, fully parametric with many hull-curve variations. Not only that, but I can also place an EQ before the plugin and tweak the raw guitar signal before it enters the modeller. http://www.digitalmusicdoctor.com/reviews/compare/eq/equalization.htm">  ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 04 2009 at 16:57
|
I must say I've been impressed with some of the tones you've got. There's just no way to get a "perfect" sound when using a modeller - they're just not the same as tubes. But getting the "right" sound for the song is a different ball game - and often that can depend on other variables like performance, so I like to get the guitar/amp to sound and feel the way I want - like PM said, sometimes you want a really taut sound, and sometimes flabby is actually better. If you're a precision player, then unforgiving is probably best - and I like those kind of tones for the more precise riffing, etc. For my solos, which are almost always done a la Nigel Tufnel (since I have never professed to be a lead guitarist - I'm a keyboard player first, singer second, bassist third, and I know a few guitar chords and that's all I want to know), I prefer something that masks my loose playing a bit, so Ill do plenty of scooping, and try to get the distortion just this side of fizzy before whacking on some delay - and getting a sound I can play with. Any more hiding can be done later - but I prefer to play with the sound, and get the results during improv rather than try anything as serious (or dull, IMHO) as actually composing a guitar solo! I try to keep plugins away from the guitar if I can help it, though. We've got too many Sonitus ones on the vocals and synching stuff on the keyboards for that. Horses for courses, naturally - you get good sounds, and I'm liking the sounds I get more every time I record stuff, and that's what matters. Have you listened to "Driven"? (our most recent posted piece) I'd be interested to know what you think of the four guitar tones I developed. http://www.ilike.com/artist/Certif1ed?ct=news_126,news_artist_activity,news_126_artist_activity&emerging=true&autoplay=662013 - http://www.ilike.com/artist/Certif1ed?ct=news_126,news_artist_activity,news_126_artist_activity&emerging=true&autoplay=662013
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: cobb2
Date Posted: June 04 2009 at 18:57
|
Mine is set up for live performance only, how it sounds coming out of the PA at playing levels. I don't care what it sounds like when recorded and I don't adjust the VA sounds when I do record. I have Sonar for that. I use four main sounds on one channel number A- clean, B- distorted with ambience and chorus, C- good mellow growling heavy sound, D- Lead (the ibanez Prestige allows plenty of sound variation on these with its 5 channel pick-up variations). This means, that at the most I only have to hit the foot switch twice to change during a song. I use two other channels only which are set up for clean, mildly distorted songs a-la doobies, eagles, and another channel I have set up specifically for led zep sounds. None of the sounds are out of the box presets. I'm a firm believer in the KISS principle. That's why, for 95% of the songs we play I remain in the one channel and usually with only a single stomp to change during the song. A lot of time went into these set ups, but now it is actually easier when playing live because I don't have an array of pedals to worry about and no amp to tweak during songs. In fact I love it and the freedom it gives (in the end) and would never go back to an amp.
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 05 2009 at 02:16
|
^ back when I played in a band, I used an even more simplistic approach: - Engl Tube amp 1x12, only clean channel used (the other channel was not working properly - I never had it repaired) - Ibanez Tube King preamp That was it ... no other effects whatsoever. I set the Engl clean channel to a very slightly distorted clean sound (not ultra-clean, but still clean). The Tube King was set to almost full gain and volume. So I didn't even use different sounds for rhythm and lead. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 05 2009 at 02:23
Are you referring to me? If so, thanks ... I don't usually spend too much time on getting a perfect sound, I think that it's not really possible, especially when using modelers. I guess that I simply have a good ear for mixing, which doesn't mean that I still make blatant errors simply due to a lack of experience and routine. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: June 06 2009 at 01:51
I've yet to hear an amp simulation from Boss, Behringer or Line 6 that could really get the JCM 800 sound. At best it gets about half way there then something about the rest of the sound just isn't right, so I just don't ever use that amp sim. Can't add much to the bass amp model discussion, honestly never heard any of the bass amp models in person in a way that I could hear the tone well enough. I don't think Line 6 spent much time on the bass amp modeling end of things anyway, since most people are going to be happy enough with a bass sound that fits in a recorded mix. The Weeping Demon is just a wah, it wont do that dive bomb thing you want. For that you need something like a Digitech Whammy Pedal. The X3 has a built in pitch shifter, but unfortunately it can't even track more than one note at once, so it's borderline useless for my taste. -------------
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: June 06 2009 at 02:10
|
The one sound for both rhythm and lead just doesn't work for me to be
honest. I wish it did, but I've just never been happy with how it
sounds. Some people are just happy to use one sound even if it's a compromise for both, that isn't me though. My rhythm sound is just a pure rhythm tone that I think doesn't work well for lead playing and my lead sound just doesn't have percussive enough attack for rhythm playing and having reverb and delay on is not suitable for high gain rhythm playing as it can mush up the sound. For lead playing, my pick attack is generally fairly light and my left hand touch is extremely light too. For Rhythm my left hand touch is as soft as my lead, but my right hand will dig into the strings quite hard which is why I favor a sound for rhythm that gives that percussive attack sound. Also for me, back in the day of real amps, it was just a pain, because I couldn't afford (and still can't) amps with MIDI switching and a rack where a single push of the button gave me the right settings. So it was the dreaded tap dance, that was made worse on 2 channel amps. If I wanted a rhythm sound (when switching from clean), I have to hit the channel switch button, as well as a noise gate. Want a lead sound, gotta hit the boost pedal, the reverb pedal and what not. Want a clean sound, gotta turn off half the pedals and hit the channel switch. Sometimes I would forget to hit a pedal, or just would think a pedal is on but it really isn't. It just ended up annoying me and now I'm glad to have a Line 6 X3 Live, where all I have to do is hit A, B, C or D and the POD does the rest for me. No more turning on or off stomp boxes because they are already set up to be on or off automatically when I hit the desired button. From now on, I either use amp modelers, or if I can afford it, an amp with MIDI switching and a rack, because I really do hate the pedal tap dance that much. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 06 2009 at 03:59
|
^ I totally agree on the "pedal tap dance" issue ... the simpler, the better. BTW: I'm with you on a slight delay/echo for the lead tone, but reverb ... not in a band situation IMO, because at most venues you already have plenty of reverb for everything, whether you want it or not. I think I'd go for a slight chorus instead, but for that to sound great you need stereo. And stereo in turn is bad when performing live, since for most venues you have to go mono. About different tones for rhythm and lead: Of course today I would do that too, since it's so easy to implement with amp modelers. But I would probably try not to use two entirely different sounds. The lead tone would be louder and boosted in the mid range. But then again you can't really play with a "mid-less" sound in a band (like some Rectifier-freaks prefer), because while that might sound cool when played standalone, it doesn't integrate well into the mix when played in a band situation ... you'll conflict with the bass and still be barely audible. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: June 06 2009 at 05:17
|
^Definitely agree on no reverb when playing live. I haven't actually played in front of people for a while, but for school last year I played in front of about 1200 people or so, didn't need any reverb from the amp. It would be great to have a sound that would cater for lead and rhythm for me, but that sound just doens't exist for me. If I were Joe Satriani, sure, it makes sense to have one sound and he doesn't need a specialized sound for rhythm or lead, he just hits a boost if he wants more gain. I spent a lot more time playing rhythm guitar for the type of stuff I want to record though, so I really just prefer to have a sound that is exactly what I need and want, no compromises. And hey, listen to "That One Night", the live Megadeth DVD, Glen Drover switches between two different tones for rhythm and lead, one is a more percussive lower gain sound and one is a higher gain, darker sound with more gain and I think it sounded alright. As for mid scoop, I just don't do it partly because it doesn't work in a band, but to me more importantly, I don't think it sounds good. The worst metal tones I've ever heard (pretty much all of Pantera, Metallica's ...And Justice for All and a few others) are always mid scooped, trebly and bassy. The grindy sound that results from that just doesn't sound good to my ears, and in the case of Cowboys from Hell in particular, it doens't help the actual mix of the album is brighter than what I prefer too. And then especially when I compare the tone to stuff like Gojira and Between the Buried and Me (especially the Colors Live DVD) which is very mid focused with a good treble and bass content without being grindy or piercing or muddy, I think you really start to hear how mids are actually where all the heaviness and focus lies. Hopefully the 14 year old kids that play Line 6 Spiders on the Insane setting with gain set to 10, middle to 0, bass to 10 and full treble, begin to realize that type of tone actually has no balls. But as I've said, it's true it's easier to play an amp/amp modeler with the mid scoop, extremely high gain setting, but personally I think people should push themselves to improve their chops and bump up the mids and stop relying on so much gain. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 06 2009 at 05:49
|
^ I love the Line 6 Insane model, but I usually play it at gain 5, bass 10, middle 10, treble 10, presence 6 ...
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 06 2009 at 06:32
I was just under the impression that the WD7 was a Wah on steroids - ie, it's configurable - but have read that it's not as good as a vintage Wah. I was just curious to hear from anyone that had actually used either of these boxes, because, like you say, you just can't do this stuff with Line 6 gear at the moment. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: September 25 2009 at 18:31
|
Okay, 3 months later, I know a bit more about my POD X3 Live now, how to use it and more about it's strengths and weaknesses. First off the DI capabilities of the POD are honestly just not as good as having a real DI box. Whenever I try to reamp with any other amp sim than POD Farm (I've tried 8505, 7170, SoloC and a few others) they just end up revealing the weakness of the POD's DI. I'm under the impression POD Farm is designed somewhat to compensate for the fact the POD's DI is not the best. Hopefully by the time the next POD comes out they improve the DI, but I wont be holding my breathe, since by that time I'll most likely have moved onto miking up real amps and using a more expensive interface. If you want to use other amp sims, get a real DI Box, or would like to reamp with real amps..........well, buy a reamping box. One thing I've started to learn about recording guitar tones in general, is that you really have to keep the content above 7KHz controlled and in check (bear in mind I'm talking about metal/high gain tones, since this is what I work with for the most part) . Now mind you I'm still working out how to do this, but listening to some of my favorite guitar tones I've noticed this seems to be one of the factors that separates amateur tones from the pros. Of course in pro circles it's quite standard to low pass at 10-12-Khz, but sometimes I even use 8 or 9Khz, just experimenting really. Since a lot of pros are using real cabinets (which are a lot better than what you get with the POD's amp sims, but more on that in a few minutes) they aren't having to deal with too much in the way of excess high since these are truly the real deal and you get that proper high end roll off beyond 5-6KHz that keeps things smooth. What you want to aim for is getting the 'brightness' more in the high mids, because trying to get it in the highs just ends up very scratchy sounding at worst and at best somewhat fatiguing for the listener. Just listen to a bunch of great metal guitar tones (this is of course somewhat subjective) End of Heartache - Killswitch Engage Dead Heart In a Dead World - Nevermore This Godless Endeavor - Nevermore Watershed - Opeth The Way of All Flesh - Gojira Death of a Dead Day - SikTh Stabbing the Drama - Soilwork The upcoming Scar Symmetry album (not released yet, but even on the myspace samples with the crappy low bit rate I could tell the guitar tones are absolutely incredible) Doomsday Machine - Arch Enemy Endgame - Megadeth I don't expect everyone to be a fan of the artists/albums. Admittedly I'm not a fan of half the songs on Doomsday Machine, Watershed's last 2 tracks are kinda weak and Stabbing the Drama is inconsistent. But at least give the tracks you like a listen, because these are great references for guitar tones and production. Hell, if you don't like an album at all, even just listening to short bits of one track to be able to hear the mix and guitar tone is enough, because ultimately there is something to be learnt from all of these albums production and guitar tone wise. But back to the cabinets. I think the amp sims are quite good, but the cab sims hold the POD back. I know I've said this before, but the more I've gotten into production, the more this has struck me as true and important to know in order to unlock the best out of the POD/Pod Farm. The amp sims are pretty good as I said. As stated many times, doesn't sound like the real thing, but it's just as good IMO, just different. However, unfortunately with the cab sims, different story. I'd like to be able to say "ohh, sounds good, but just different", but I honestly think this is not the case and they just aren't that good. They seem to be the cause of the frequencies that really give the POD an amateurish quality to the sound. In the past I knew the 4 band semi parametric EQ was important, but recently it's struck me as it being entirely essential to getting the goods. If you want to get a great source tone (which is what you want to be aiming for ultimately, but some pros use post processing EQ so it's not a sin to do that either, unlike what some purists would have you believe) from the POD, learn to use the 4 band effectively. Make it your friend, learn to love it. The normal 3 band+presence controls are just not enough, period. You always use impulses, true enough, but some of the clips I've heard by some of the most experienced POD/POD Farm users suggests that with a bit of work you can work around the limitations of the cab simulations and get something really great. Get those low mids and those high mids in check and you'll truly in business. Another thing I noticed, recording straight from the POD vs using reamping via POD Farm: I was never able to get that more pro sounding attack to my sound recording straight via the POD. Starting using the POD Farm VST plug in and voila, suddenly my guitar tone started to sound more professional and you could actually hear that sound of the percussive chunk of really digging into the strings. Also in general the entire thing just seemed to sound different somehow. The same EQ settings on the POD did not sound the same as the same settings on POD Farm. Now that I've said all that, I've gotta work on getting a good bass tone. So far, I just high pass at 40 Hz and low pass at 3KHz since nothing I play requires much in the way of high end content, but otherwise I need more help in this department. |
Posted By: meatal
Date Posted: October 01 2009 at 21:08
|
Just kinda seen this post and thought I'd throw in my two cents if worth anything, I have a POD XT Live and quite like it. But because I use quite a bit of gain and am louder "Live" I run my guitar into a gate pedal first so when I mute I'm dead quiet cause the Pod and the amp are not getting any signal at all. I did however notice when recording leads ( and not just with the pod but other digital amp simulators) when I held or bent high notes you could hear for lack of a better word "digital read of the notes" so I found a way to get rid of it and it also made for a better sound "Live" is I go out of my Line 6 into a Hughes & Kettner Redbox (The old one)and then via XLR into my recording unit or my amp (Which for live isn't an amp at all it's a powered wedge monitor) but my live and recording sound remain pretty consistant. Sorry little off topic . Also, for leads I ran into a tube mic preamp first and it does help a little warming up stuff. Just ideas. Anyways, like my Line 6 but it did take quite a bit of tweaking to get a sound I like. Just like any unit. That being said, if I wasn't lazy I'd still drag around my tube stuff, I did prefer it. ------------- The bitter harvest of a barren land, I'm painting pictures you don't understand. (Fates Warning) |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: October 02 2009 at 05:34
|
^So you don't reamp then? I tend to just reamp through POD Farm, so admittedly a tube preamp would do nothing at all. What I am going to do however, is invest in a proper firewire interface and DI box so my DI tracks can improve in quality. Although that was interesting though, I've heard some other people do the tube preamp approach too. Regarding noise, what pickups are you using ? I just got active pickups installed in my Ibanez RG 7421 (7 string), Seymour Duncan Blackouts to be precise and they are very quiet compared to passive humbuckers. I was originally gating at -66dB on the Noise Gate, now I'm using about -79dB, it's crazy how much difference switching to active pickups make. I would have responded earlier, but I spent all day testing my new pickups haha. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: October 02 2009 at 06:15
|
I read a really nice article today about the new Guitar Rig 4 (also in the "Sound & Recording" magazine issue that I mentioned in the thread about compression) ... it included an interview with Peter Weihe, who is an expert when it comes to guitar recording and whose studio was used as a model for creating the new Control Room feature of Guitar Rig 4. Very interesting, and very impressive!
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: meatal
Date Posted: October 02 2009 at 18:32
|
Pickups in my strat & mini-V are, Seymour Duncan Trembucker (cut through excellent when using higher gain and intricate picking) and a Hot Rail for lead. In my custom Tele, a Dimarzio Air Norton and a Hot Rail. But lately I've been using 2 Dimarzio Custom wound EVH pickups and their surprisingly great. The comment about the pre-gating before my POD for live, is when using high gain I really hate that sshhhh sound when the gates close usually no matter how fast you set them, and during recording I was getting tired of editing. So with that extra gate and cutting of my guitar signal when I stop playing, there's no hiss at all. Although I do turn that gate off when recording solos so I can get more sustain/feedback etc...
------------- The bitter harvest of a barren land, I'm painting pictures you don't understand. (Fates Warning) |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: October 03 2009 at 02:16
|
^ I love the Variax ... zero hum, and only if you use extreme distortion you get a slightly elevated ground noise. With typical configurations (even metal) you can simply record without a gate, or with a threshold at -70dB.
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: October 04 2009 at 01:22
|
Walking advertisement for the Variax lol. Yesterday I was out jamming with some guys, cranked out tube amp combos, I had my X3 Live plugged into the effects loop of one of the amps to use the power amp section, and with the Blackouts I seriously didn't need more than -75dB to keep my guitar quiet. For this reason alone I don't even want to go back to passive pickups. They are also way more articulate than my old stock pickups, as well as having far superior note separation under high gain even with complex chords. The high output allows me to back off the preamp gain level, allowing more dynamics to come through. Can your Variax do that? They aren't for everyone, but to Meatal, you'll probably find if you switch to active pickups some of your problems with noise will just go away and you'll need to use less threshold on your noise gate. Oh and BTW Trembucker simply denotes they are made to be used with a trem equipped guitar, so it doesn't tell me anything about what actual pickup it is. You can buy a Seymour Duncan JB model in trembucker form and you can buy a '59 model in trembucker form, but they sound nothing alike. Also read my post on the other page Mike about the frequencies thing. It might inspire you to get studio monitors so you'll actually be able to hear everything. -------------
|
Posted By: friso
Date Posted: October 04 2009 at 08:02
|
I'v disigned a les paul that is being built by a guitar builder in the Netherlands. It has a bigger body then the normal les paul and a mahony body. I choose to not have digital effects and pre-amps and active elements on it. I always had the feeling if it was working back then, it should work now. I'm only using analogue stompboxes since I got so mad about my digital effect paddles.
I guess I will never understand the fuzz about digital effects, amplification and recording equipment. From my point of view it destroyed everything what had been important in music: The real deal. With digital effect all human mistakes are filtered out of the music, as if Jimi Hendrix had a perfect clear distortion sound. This is simply not the case, nor is it important to have a clean distortion sound. The hum belongs to the distortion. Real warm sound can compensate for all humms in recorded music for me. Having said that, I'm still happy you guys keep me up to date with your digital recording/playing knowledge. |
Posted By: meatal
Date Posted: October 04 2009 at 22:38
|
Ooops! To clarify, my main pickups are Seymour Duncan Parallel AxisTrembuckers (Original) in Bridge postition and the Seymour Duncan Hot Rail in the Neck. And I don't have any ground hum at all, I'm using the gate to competely shut off my guitars signal through my POD and then to my amp, so my amp/monitor doesn't have any operating noise/hiss, even at super high volumes. As for recording monitors I still use my Yamaha NS-10's (used them for so long I'm comfortable with them) w/matching Yamaha sub woofer. Actually have 2 pairs of them the industry standard ones everyone knows (black box w/ white cone 6" spkr and tweeter) and the actual early NS-10's from the 1970's that had (10" oval spkr and a tweeter). Unlike a lot of you recording using your computers, I guess I'm a little old school, coming from having a studio way back when and using 2" reel to reels, Fostex G-16's reels, I worked for Roland for years and then moved up to my VS-1680EX's and VS-880EX's synched, I know how to push the limits of these machines and have used them for over 15 years, and well I'm too lazy to change. And I have lots of people keep telling me to just use my computers/programmes but I hate relearning crap, wasting time. I can get jobs done quicker this way. Don't get me wrong I do use the computer for a few things (editing etc,,,), but any mastering (a real artform in itself) is always sent to professional. And to add to Kingfriso's comments, I agree technology has sucked some of the life out of music, however there are still a few bands that record old school "live" off the floor, sure they multitrack, but use whole takes instead of overedited computer perfection. Trying to be a little more human again. ------------- The bitter harvest of a barren land, I'm painting pictures you don't understand. (Fates Warning) |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: October 06 2009 at 01:26
|
Given active pickups have been around since, sh*t, the 70s or something, I don't really understand the concern. Digital stomp boxes have been around for longer than I've been alive (I'm 20), so it's not like it's some "new fangled oddity". but whatever, I'm pretty much sick of arguing the "analogue vs digital" debate. Good tone is good tone no matter how you get there. And good music is good music no matter how the end result is achieved. The "real deal" is just the music. As far as I'm concerned, if I enjoy it, it's the real deal, whether sampled replaced drums or not, digital amp modeling or not. If you like a guitar tone and later on find out it was done with a digital amp sim, do you suddenly throw the music away because it's "all wrong and not analogue"? Is it not possible to just......well, enjoy it, regardless of what gear was used? Mind you, I'm not saying digital and all this modern stuff is the be end all, if I decide ti pursue audio engineering more seriously I'm going to go out and buy tube amps, real microphones, a real drum kit and learn how to mic it up in the traditional fashion (as early as sometime next year I might be doing that stuff), but the current modern digital technology has its merit. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: October 06 2009 at 01:52
Absolutely - the Variax uses active pickups. They're also piezo, which means that they don't pick up any hum caused by other electric devices (like computers, light dimmers or washing machines). Because it's such a clean signal I can boost it before feeding it into the amp simulation. However, most preamps are designed for typical guitar signals and in those instances boosting the signal will only saturate the preamp. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: October 06 2009 at 07:45
|
Oh yeah, they are active. I forgot about that somehow, weird me. But yeah anyway, my point was more really that your guitar can't do the sound of Blackouts Which I guess maybe doesn't bother you, you seem happy with it, which is what matters Especially since I got my Blackouts, the more and more I realize there will probably never be a guitar modeling solution available for me. Unlike amps, you're really physically touching the guitar all the time, so you end up getting an emotional bond to it, how it feels, how the particular piece of wood/it's pickups sound etc and I couldn't let go of that. And for many too, the point of owing a Les Paul, a Strat, a super Strat and a Tele and perhaps an acoustic is that they all feel different and inspire you to play a certain way, something not really possible with a Variax. I'm interested to see how far the concept goes, because I wonder what the market is like for the Variax. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: October 06 2009 at 08:09
|
^ The Variax clearly isn't suited for modern Thrash/Death metal sounds ... it's basically 100% vintage. Currently I'm quite happy using the Variax for its acoustic models, the Sitar/Banjo/12 string models and the Telecaster/Stratocaster sounds. I use the ESP for pretty much everything else. It surely would be nice to have active pickups in the ESP - that way I could further reduce the noise/humming. BTW: My Variax 700 is actually nice looking ... the body is transparent blue, and except for the missing pickups it looks pretty much like any other nice guitar in the 1000-1500 EUR price range. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: October 07 2009 at 02:30
|
EMGs or Blackouts would work well in your ESP. It's got a mahogany body, right? You mentioned latency in that other thread, strange. The Line6 ASIO driver seems to report inaccurate latency readings. Pretty much everyone on the Sneap forum that knows their stuff have said 128 samples for 2.9ms, 256 is 5.8ms and so on. Of course, once you start trying to record more than one thing at once (multiple mics etc) then firewire becomes handy, since a lot of high quality firewire devices can easily reach 32 samples. I might be getting a firewire interface later this year, for my 21st birthday, but I'm not sure yet, we'll see. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: October 07 2009 at 02:40
|
^ 128 samples = 2.9ms It's not as simple as that. Depending on the sample rate, the numbers might be correct ... but on top of the ASIO latency you have the latency of the audio interface itself. ASIO only deals with the transportation of audio from one application to another. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: October 07 2009 at 03:42
|
IIRC the POD adds about 1-2ms of latency from what I've read on the Line 6 forum boards, which isn't too bad. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: October 07 2009 at 04:06
|
^ What's bad is that I can't get it to work reliably on my computer with anything below 1024 samples, while I can use Asio4All with 64 samples perfectly fine. I'll definitely get another audio interface soon. This is the one I think I'll get: http://www.thomann.de/gb/esi_maya_44e.htm - http://www.thomann.de/gb/esi_maya_44e.htm Screw USB or Firewire ... PCI-E is fine for me! ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: October 07 2009 at 05:01
|
Wow, can't get lower than 1024, something must be wrong especially since you have a faster computer than me (but your computer is just barely faster though IIRC). Maybe with USB 2.0 I have on the POD instead of the USB 1.1 that you have for your Line 6 interface is giving me an advantage, who knows? I sure don't really 1024 would definitely bring audible latency issues, you're definitely right about that. I've been working with 24 bits and 128 samples without a single problem for dry/DI tracking and audible latency is non existent for me. Just been playing around with 8505 before too, sounds really great. The POD doesn't have a dedicated 5150 model. It has the 5150II , but it's a different beast to the 5150, and having 8505 is a good thing to have around to fill that void for the POD's lack of 5150. It can't be tweaked a whole lot (there isn't even a presence control, strangely, only bass, middle and treble) but what it does, it does extremely well. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: October 07 2009 at 05:14
|
^ I got really good results with the GR 4 Ultrasonic & Gratifier ... I'll try to record some riffs later today and experiment with the different models. BTW: I couldn't work with 128 samples either ... especially for fast riffs the latency is annoying. For example, try playing Iron Maiden - Losfer Words, just the riff in the beginning. It's played on the A string throughout ... try to get the timing right with 128 samples, I definitely can't. I can though with 64 samples. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: October 09 2009 at 04:14
|
Side by side comparison of Diamond Plate and Gratifier is a most do for you sir. But then again, if you've haven't played a real Recto in recent years, I guess look at it not so much as what sounds more realistic, but what just sounds better to you. Well, I haven't tried playing Losfer yet, but I guess if it turns out I get latency problems as well with that riff, than it might be time to look at one of these for christmas: http://www.mackie.com/products/800r/index.html - http://www.mackie.com/products/800r/index.html I couldn't even get Revalver to work in real time when recording (i.e, monitor through Revalver as I recorded) via my POD and this firewire device should do the trick. That said, I can always keep using my POD as a dongle so POD Farm will still work (And I can't really sell it at this stage anyway, not having any guitar amps per se), but plug it into the Onyx via the S/PDIF input and ultimately that will do my recording for me. That method seems to work well for many others , so I figure I cannot do wrong if I go for this. -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: October 09 2009 at 04:50
|
^ Of course you have a point - I really haven't played a real amp in years. On the other hand I'm listening to music all the time ... and from a mixing/mastering standpoint, the sound of the guitar in existing recordings should be a benchmark. I only just read an article about mixing, and the guy (he runs a successful studio in New York) said that when you're mixing you always need a point of reference - anything else is "just fiddling with knobs". Losfer Words is a cool exercise for left/right hand coordination - and latency will simply make it harder to keep in sync to a metronome or drums, since your brain tries to sync the picking movement to the beat you hear, but since the actual sound is delayed it also tries to compensate for that at the same time. It's a certain kind of "sluggishness" ... which you would also encounter in real life if you tried to record using monitor speakers which are too far away (1 meter = 3ms latency). That's also why it's a good idea to use headphones when recording ... Well, my new sound card arrived today ... let's hope it works better than the Line 6 interface. Yesterday I tried again and for some reason the dry signal is too faint. This might be what you meant by your complaints about Line 6 Interfaces as DI boxes ... but if that is so, I wonder why nobody mentions this in reviews or guitar forums. The ESI Maya 44 e has a special "High Z" input for guitars and operates in 24 bit by default, so hopefully it will solve all my problems. :-) ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: October 09 2009 at 05:04
|
Ohhhh, awesome, so it arrived My internet connection is being annoying, hence me not being on MSN much lately, but hopefully at one point you can tell me what think about the card there since that's getting a little off topic here anyway. Indeed, as on the previous page, I gave a list of what I consider to be some of the benchmark tones in modern heavy metal. I tend to use a wide range rather than a small range, so I don't get stuck ending up having my tones sounding exactly the same as something I've heard before. To me it's more about finding what frequencies in the guitar tone need working on, rather than striving for a particular tone, if that makes sense. Maybe it doesn't, heh. The DI issue is mentioned on the Sneap forum, no surprise given the discerning ears on that board. Well anyway, I look forward to hearing some stuff you record via your new PCI-E card, sounds like a very nice device indeed. -------------
|