Digital Modelling vs The Real Thing

[charic]

[quote name='silddx' timestamp='1334410696' post='1615855']
Wow! How amazing is that!
[/quote]

Not a ridiculous price either... kinda scary!
[url="http://www.dv247.com/guitars/kemper-profiling-amplifier--82068"]http://www.dv247.com/guitars/kemper-profiling-amplifier--82068[/url]

[charic]

That'll teach me not to watch videos

[ThomBassmonkey]

[quote name='charic' timestamp='1334409374' post='1615834']
Agreed, incredible stuff!

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyPgBzqKlUs[/media]
[/quote]

Yeah, that's very impressive. Well out of my budget though I'd love to have a play with one to see things like how much mic placement affects the sound etc, but since it's actually replicating the sound rather than being programmed to sound like it, I can imagine it's very accurate.

Edit: Forget the bit about the mic placement, I'm thinking about it as a pre-amp. With the DI out rather than it being micd, you're replacing the mic anyway.

Edited April 14, 2012 by ThomBassmonkey

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='silddx' timestamp='1334409902' post='1615842']
But please, don't be giving it large with that sh*t about insulting audiences by using modelling rigs, or that they sound inferior to the 'real' thing, because that is just ignorant and misguided. Cheers.
[/quote]

The important part is I was saying 'my audience', vs. telling people about their own audience, as in 'your audience won't know the difference', I know my audience, personally for the most part, they can tell. I've been saying loads of time: more to it than sound. Your audience doesn't come for your rig, mine does, if I went without rig, it is equivalent to you going without sitar player, I just used you as an example because I have that information to hand. This is what I mean by not all gigs are the same.

[peteb]

It may be that there will be digital profiling / modelling amps on the market that are as good as the real thing. I haven't heard one yet, but it could be just around the corner.

You will know that they have arrived when the likes of Steve Lukather, Philip Sayce, Steve Morse, etc start using them without being paid shed loads of money in endorsements!

Edited April 14, 2012 by peteb

[charic]

Really cool A/B on that vid about 15 mins in!

[xilddx]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334411206' post='1615871']
The important part is I was saying 'my audience', vs. telling people about their own audience, as in 'your audience won't know the difference', I know my audience, personally for the most part, they can tell. I've been saying loads of time: more to it than sound. Your audience doesn't come for your rig, mine does, if I went without rig, it is equivalent to you going without sitar player, I just used you as an example because I have that information to hand. This is what I mean by not all gigs are the same.
[/quote]
Fair enough mate. Apologies, I see what you mean. Sort of Mr Foxen and his travelling amplification extravaganza. I've not come across anything like that before so I misunderstood.

[xilddx]

[quote name='ThomBassmonkey' timestamp='1334411090' post='1615865']
Yeah, that's very impressive. Well out of my budget though I'd love to have a play with one to see things like how much mic placement affects the sound etc, but since it's actually replicating the sound rather than being programmed to sound like it, I can imagine it's very accurate.

Edit: Forget the bit about the mic placement, I'm thinking about it as a pre-amp. With the DI out rather than it being micd, you're replacing the mic anyway.
[/quote]

I costs less that what I paid for my Fender twin, Hot Plate and effects. It's about the cost of three PODs. Absolutely amazing bit of kit.

[51m0n]

[quote name='peteb' timestamp='1334402003' post='1615672']
[color=#222222]It seems to me that there is an awful lot of justification going in this thread. For example, Silldx mentioned that the engineer at a recording session didn’t use the best mic to record the vocalist so that he could get a better live performance by allowing her to play her keyboard at the same time. His mate then piles in and says this was, in fact, an inspired choice and gave some spurious reason that her voice is somehow better suited to the lesser mic. This, of course, is b0110cks – the engineer was forced to compromise and didn’t use the better mic for practical reasons.[/color]

[color=#222222]If you are trying to get to gigs on public transport or you have a hairdresser’s car that you can’t carry any gear in, then a pod seems a practical solution, as is carrying one bass in a gigbag. If you then work out how to get the best out of it you may then manage convince yourself that you got the pod because it is better than the amp it attempts to imitate, rather than the real reason, which is that you didn’t want to have to lug a heavy amp around![/color]

[/quote]

No I said this:-

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1334335926' post='1614861']
Not a problem, especially with Kit's voice, a large diaphram condensor is going to tend to get very spikey with the strident upper mid range on her voice, an SM58 may well be exactly the right tool to dial a little of that out. Good call again IMO. Shame he didnt have a third ribbon to try on her voice
[/quote]

And I said it for a very very good reason.

I've heard the result of Kit's voice being recorded with an AKG C414, a classic high quality large condensor mic, and its very very strident in the upper mids, far too much. I had to do an awful lot of vaery careful work on her voice to make it sound big and natural and not so peaky.

This was as a result of the mismatch of the mic used to record her voice, it simply isnt suited to that kind of mic.

One of my first comments to Kit about this was that I would love to hear her voice captured with a quality ribbon mic, or a really good dynamic, both would help in this area. As would a pucker tube mic possibly, but I've never used one on a female vocalist so I'm not sure 100%. Her response was that the best her voice has ever sounded on a recording was when it was tracked with a ribbon - so I know I'm not making this up to justify something, its a happy accident IMO.

An sm58 is not often considered a great vocal mic for the studio these days, but you would be amazed at how many great vocals are made with its close cousin the SM7, (closer to an SM57 as it goes, but still in that ballpark). How about that little known album Thriller by some wannabe Michael Jackson?

It is absolutely possible that an SM58 bcould sound better on certain voices than an LDC. Not always, but sometimes, and Kit actually happens to have a voice where that is the case IMO. Marti Pello of Wet Wet Wet fame liked the sound of a Sennheiser e845 on his voice, more than any fancy LDC that he had at his disposal.

Its not b0110cks, its a fact, if you knew much at all about tracking you would have stopped to think about that possibility before making that comment.,

I'm done here, bye.

Edited April 14, 2012 by 51m0n

[charic]

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1334440509' post='1616334']


No I said this:-



And I said it for a very very good reason.

I've heard the result of Kit's voice being recorded with an AKG C414, a classic high quality large condensor mic, and its very very strident in the upper mids, far too much. I had to do an awful lot of vaery careful work on her voice to make it sound big and natural and not so peaky.

This was as a result of the mismatch of the mic used to record her voice, it simply isnt suited to that kind of mic.

One of my first comments to Kit about this was that I would love to hear her voice captured with a quality ribbon mic, or a really good dynamic, both would help in this area. As would a pucker tube mic possibly, but I've never used one on a female vocalist so I'm not sure 100%. Her response was that the best her voice has ever sounded on a recording was when it was tracked with a ribbon - so I know I'm not making this up to justify something, its a happy accident IMO.

An sm58 is not often considered a great vocal mic for the studio these days, but you would be amazed at how many great vocals are made with its close cousin the SM7, (closer to an SM57 as it goes, but still in that ballpark). How about that little known album Thriller by some wannabe Michael Jackson?

It is absolutely possible that an SM58 bcould sound better on certain voices than an LDC. Not always, but sometimes, and Kit actually happens to have a voice where that is the case IMO. Marti Pello of Wet Wet Wet fame liked the sound of a Sennheiser e845 on his voice, more than any fancy LDC that he had at his disposal.

Its not b0110cks, its a fact, if you knew much at all about tracking you would have stopped to think about that possibility before making that comment.,

I'm done here, bye.
[/quote]

Awesome post

[LukeFRC]

[quote name='silddx' timestamp='1334313815' post='1614244']
We did some live studio recording with Ash Evans at his studio a couple of weeks ago [i](He was first to record Noah & the Whale, and Mumford & Sons, and has since worked with Emmy the Great, Sparkadia, and ASH to name a few. He is 1/3 of the band [url="http://http//soundcloud.com/emperoryes"]Emperor Yes[/url], does live sound for Three Trapped Tigers and CLARK and was responsible for setting up the [url="http://houseofstrange.wordpress.com/"]House of Strange[/url].). [/i]His approach is very quick and dirty. Hardly gives a sh*t about equipment (he has so good stuff though) and mic placement (as long as everything is phased properly). His philosphy is that the performance is everything, and that sound is a bit of an illusion, you can make a good performance sound great with reasonable sound quality, but the best sound quality can't make up for a poor or under-energised performance.

On his desk he had an original Roland Space Echo. I said 'WOW! Those are very sought after' He said it's a piece of sh*t that takes 15 minutes after powering up to make remotely usable, and thinks free digital plug ins for delays are way better.

He didn't care what amps our guitarist used as long as they were reasonably quiet - tried an old Vox (too noisy) went with a little Fender combo that was newish and just threw a mic in front of it. No pissing about. Told the four violinists to use their pickups, the mics only recording was poor, the pickups and a mic sounded so much better. He really liked the POD sounds I had so he just got me a big monitor and a tiny 4 channel mixer to play through in the room but the signal went strainght to the desk from the POD. Dums miced very simply (bass and snare miced with two Coles for overheads. Set them up and left them, no messing.)

All this straight onto Logic Pro.

I've heard the recording completely unmixed and the sounds are lovely. We are all delighted. Can't wait for the mixed versions.


[/quote] sounds cool- I have the early mumford and sons stuff- and compared to the dull flatness of the album it's amazing.
[quote name='silddx' timestamp='1334330738' post='1614743']
But also how many bassists (or guitarists) have no idea what a standby does for a valve amp. and how to use it, or understand the resistance of cabinets to heads, or that resistance is needed to stop a valve amp self destructing ?

Give almost all musicians a 4 way parametric with Q to play with and they will look at you like you've just asked them to sh*t in their grandma's eye.
[/quote] I would actually get quite excited by that. I used to do PA before I played anything, learnt at church and the like growing up. Well for various reasons I avoid PA stuff now (never have so many grown men got so territorial about some sound gear before- and in many cases so wrong) but looking at the new desk they have (digital btw) and it has 4 way parametric with Q to play with... and shows you what it looks like on a wee graph. pretty cool. Be a pain/different to work that desk quickly mind you have to change each channel one at a time.
anyway. yes please, I would like you to give me a 4 way parametric with variable Q please, shall I PM you my address?

[quote name='silddx' timestamp='1334402458' post='1615683']
I had a valve Fender Twin, and a bunch of expensive effects. The POD is way more versatile and reliable, portable, powerful, etc. But the fact is, I LOVE the sounds I get from from it. It really is that simple. I don't need to justify anything other than that. You are clutching at straws Pete. I do understand why people are distrustful of new technology, however.
[/quote]
I think POD stuff is great- if you can get it to work for you. When I tried it I seemed to spend the whole time fiddling to make it sound great and getting annoyed at the interface- out of the FOH I sounded great but without good stage sound I couldn't stand it. my current amp does one sound and I run it flat most the time. But you compare the pod to all that gear you had to lug around... I know what I wouldn't mind fiddling as much for saving that hassle.
I would say that for bass it would make more sense to me if they went away and listened to a load of folk- and maybe collaborated with people and came up with a digital amp that did one or two original sounds and did them well.... actually as I write this I realise it's already been done.... and a lot of people seemed to like the TC Rebel Head.... that overdrive knob to me sounded like it was a better implemented version of the SVT model on my old POD.

That kemper thing looks great... in my opinion it's things like the TC Rebel Head that manage to take the technology and make it into something that people want and buy.

[Mog]

Had to stop using the POD lately because no matter what I tried I couldn't stop clipping the input. Shame really. Had some great tones in there.
At the end of the day if you know your gear you'll know how to make it sound good.
Simples. Is a modeling unit going to sound exactly like an SVT CL. No, but if you know what you're doing you can get close enough.

[crez5150]

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1334440509' post='1616334'] No I said this:- And I said it for a very very good reason. I've heard the result of Kit's voice being recorded with an AKG C414, a classic high quality large condensor mic, and its very very strident in the upper mids, far too much. I had to do an awful lot of vaery careful work on her voice to make it sound big and natural and not so peaky. This was as a result of the mismatch of the mic used to record her voice, it simply isnt suited to that kind of mic. One of my first comments to Kit about this was that I would love to hear her voice captured with a quality ribbon mic, or a really good dynamic, both would help in this area. As would a pucker tube mic possibly, but I've never used one on a female vocalist so I'm not sure 100%. Her response was that the best her voice has ever sounded on a recording was when it was tracked with a ribbon - so I know I'm not making this up to justify something, its a happy accident IMO. An sm58 is not often considered a great vocal mic for the studio these days, but you would be amazed at how many great vocals are made with its close cousin the SM7, (closer to an SM57 as it goes, but still in that ballpark). How about that little known album Thriller by some wannabe Michael Jackson? It is absolutely possible that an SM58 bcould sound better on certain voices than an LDC. Not always, but sometimes, and Kit actually happens to have a voice where that is the case IMO. Marti Pello of Wet Wet Wet fame liked the sound of a Sennheiser e845 on his voice, more than any fancy LDC that he had at his disposal. Its not b0110cks, its a fact, if you knew much at all about tracking you would have stopped to think about that possibility before making that comment., I'm done here, bye. [/quote]


Great post..... I think Dynamics for vocal tracking are often under used in studios these days.... I remember when working for Beyerdynamic years ago that Phil Collins would predominantly use an M88 for vocals ins the Studio and Live as he believed that it gave him 'His' sound..... apart from being a fantastic microphone anyway he was probably right. I use a cheap and cheerful AKD D380 when I sing live as it suits my vocal tone very well.

Edited April 15, 2012 by crez5150

[umph]

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1334440509' post='1616334']
No I said this:-



And I said it for a very very good reason.

I've heard the result of Kit's voice being recorded with an AKG C414, a classic high quality large condensor mic, and its very very strident in the upper mids, far too much. I had to do an awful lot of vaery careful work on her voice to make it sound big and natural and not so peaky.

This was as a result of the mismatch of the mic used to record her voice, it simply isnt suited to that kind of mic.

One of my first comments to Kit about this was that I would love to hear her voice captured with a quality ribbon mic, or a really good dynamic, both would help in this area. As would a pucker tube mic possibly, but I've never used one on a female vocalist so I'm not sure 100%. Her response was that the best her voice has ever sounded on a recording was when it was tracked with a ribbon - so I know I'm not making this up to justify something, its a happy accident IMO.

An sm58 is not often considered a great vocal mic for the studio these days, but you would be amazed at how many great vocals are made with its close cousin the SM7, (closer to an SM57 as it goes, but still in that ballpark). How about that little known album Thriller by some wannabe Michael Jackson?

It is absolutely possible that an SM58 bcould sound better on certain voices than an LDC. Not always, but sometimes, and Kit actually happens to have a voice where that is the case IMO. Marti Pello of Wet Wet Wet fame liked the sound of a Sennheiser e845 on his voice, more than any fancy LDC that he had at his disposal.

Its not b0110cks, its a fact, if you knew much at all about tracking you would have stopped to think about that possibility before making that comment.,

I'm done here, bye.
[/quote]

sm7 isn't cheap and cheerful, they are great mics though

[xilddx]

Another little update on this subject.

I just got the masters of an album I played on, I did three numbers as guitarist, and one as bassist. It's Sheema's (the sitarist) solo album. There are some superb musicians on there, some from Peter Gabriel's usual band (not the current 'SO' band) and really fantastic live horn and string sections. It's a very quirky album with a great range of styles on it.

I had some fantastic feedback from the co-producer (who is not easy to please apparently) and and the mixing/mastering engineer about my guitar and bass sounds (and performance, which is hugely gratifying). I asked the engineer particularly about my bass sound and he said how good it was, and that he barely needed to eq it, it was great as it was. I'm delighted by that, and the track sounds ace to my ears. I recorded them all at home with the POD X3 LIVE into Logic 9 on my MacBook.

He is going to send me the mixed isolated bass track so I can compare it with the raw bass I sent him. So when I receive it I'll post a short clip of each and a snippet of the final mastered song so you can form your own opinions. I don't know if it will demonstrate anything other than that a POD can sound lovely, but I'll do it anyway

[Skol303]

Interesting thread! The same discussion also applies to vinyl vs digital music and 'in the box' vs 'out of the box' mixing.

Here's a few flippant, sweeping statements on the subject...

- Practically nobody apart from well-tuned studio engineers can consistently tell the difference between analogue and digitally modeled gear. Most listeners certainly couldn't and neither do they care. Lucky guesses notwithstanding

- Analogue gear is expensive to buy and maintain. It also tends to be heavy to lug about.

- Digital gear suffers from people using the same old presets on everything.

- Analogue gear has real knobs and switches. People like real knobs and switches.

- Analogue gear is what most of us grew up watching our heroes use.

- Digital gear is more versatile.

My opinion is that arguing the toss based on sound quality is becoming increasingly pointless as the quality of digital modeling improves. Making a choice based on other considerations (e.g. "I like knobs!") is perfectly valid and all down to user preference.

[winterfire666]

in my opinion the kemper profiling amplifier is the best of both worlds, easy to use like analogue and the ability to accuratey clone classic rigs or your rig/your sound but with the advantages of bieng in the digital realm with extensive editing options, control and connectivity.
its the single best purchase i have ever made and i literally couldnt do with it now.(certainly wouldnt want to anyway)
it really does sound the business on bass or guitar, i also use some channel strip profiles to process vocals and keys now too.
highly recommended :^)

Edited October 23, 2013 by winterfire666

[Lord Sausage]

If anyone can be arsed tell me which one of this tunes is POD and which is Amp (guitar)

[url="https://soundcloud.com/asedya/third-degree"]https://soundcloud.c...ya/third-degree[/url]

[url="https://soundcloud.com/asedya/1-out-of-10"]https://soundcloud.c...dya/1-out-of-10[/url]

Actually the Ampeg guy can tell me which is ampeg too!

Edited October 23, 2013 by Lord Sausage

[phil.i.stein]

just got a Zoom B3.

at least half of my analog pedals will be for sale.

[Guest bassman7755]

[quote name='Skol303' timestamp='1382545280' post='2253498']
- Digital gear suffers from people using the same old presets on everything.
[/quote]

The presets on modellers are pretty much universally rubbish, generally they insist on over using the processing capability of the unit. IMO it is this that accounts for most of the "it sounds artificial" comments from people.

The only sonic difference I can detect between modellers and real amps is the slight processing delay which is about 5 ms on modern units which is not much but I still find it mildly offputting on bass (not so much on guitar).

Edited October 24, 2013 by bassman7755

[51m0n]

[quote name='bassman7755' timestamp='1382605720' post='2254170']
The presets on modellers are pretty much universally rubbish, generally they insist on over using the processing capability of the unit. IMO it is this that accounts for most of the "it sounds artificial" comments from people.

The only sonic difference I can detect between modellers and real amps is the slight processing delay which is about 5 ms on modern units which is not much but I still find it mildly offputting on bass (not so much on guitar).
[/quote]

Its strange isnt it, 5ms is equivalent to standing 5ft from your amp. Seriously, sound travels 34cm per 1ms.

Personally I can stand 5 ft from my amp and its not an issue, but I personally find a delay of 5ms when hooked up to an interface noticeable enough to be a real distraction. I cant figure out why that is, maybe because when I'm hooked up to an interface I am concentrating with headphones on producing the tightest possible performance, and in that case 5ms feels an age, whereas if I'm funking it up with the band then the environment is very different, far more visceral and I dont notice the delay at all.

[Guest bassman7755]

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1382606586' post='2254183']
Its strange isnt it, 5ms is equivalent to standing 5ft from your amp. Seriously, sound travels 34cm per 1ms.

Personally I can stand 5 ft from my amp and its not an issue, but I personally find a delay of 5ms when hooked up to an interface noticeable enough to be a real distraction. I cant figure out why that is, maybe because when I'm hooked up to an interface I am concentrating with headphones on producing the tightest possible performance, and in that case 5ms feels an age, whereas if I'm funking it up with the band then the environment is very different, far more visceral and I dont notice the delay at all.
[/quote]

Yes its the same for me. I put it down to the brain having certain expectations of the latency in various circumstances which get messed up even with very small artificial delays.

Edited October 24, 2013 by bassman7755

[xilddx]

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1382606586' post='2254183']
Its strange isnt it, 5ms is equivalent to standing 5ft from your amp. Seriously, sound travels 34cm per 1ms.

Personally I can stand 5 ft from my amp and its not an issue, but I personally find a delay of 5ms when hooked up to an interface noticeable enough to be a real distraction. I cant figure out why that is, maybe because when I'm hooked up to an interface I am concentrating with headphones on producing the tightest possible performance, and in that case 5ms feels an age, whereas if I'm funking it up with the band then the environment is very different, far more visceral and I dont notice the delay at all.
[/quote]

But when you're with your band you are also a good few feet from the other instruments so your bass notes are hitting you at more or less the same time as your drummer and the other instruments. In headphones you don't have that issue but any latency from your floor pedal will be out of sync with you backing music. I have to say I have never noticed this when using my POD though, in any situation.

[BigRedX]

Moaning about digital modelling for bass sounds is mostly pointless, since for the last 15 or so years pretty much every recorded bass guitar has had some digital modelling applied to it whether it be a "vintage" EQ or compression plug-in to a full-blown amp sim (or more).

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='Skol303' timestamp='1382545280' post='2253498']
- Analogue gear is expensive to buy and maintain. It also tends to be heavy to lug about.
[/quote]

That doesn't work at all.