Real amps vs fake amps

Just don't read it?

No, there is no affiliation between SD and Kemper or Fractal Audio. Fractal and Kemper are direct competitors; anyone with an interest in promoting one of them would surely have an interest in putting down the other.

My personal pros and cons for various scenarios and for general use are in the first post of the thread. I asked questions in the first post that I hoped players with various experiences would answer.

Just leaving this here:
Daze of October said:
If you're boosting the volume with an outside source, you're modeling, plain and simple.  Any way you slice it, that's a fact.
Click to expand...
 
Yes, obviously I can just choose not to read it.  Sorry, I wasn't being productive in my griping.


My point is really that it seems a lot of energy is going into defining what is and is not modeling, and some of it seems to be kind of quarrelsome just for the sake of being quarrelsome.  Which is comparatively unusual on this forum.
 
Jumble Jumble said:
Just leaving this here:
Daze of October said:
If you're boosting the volume with an outside source, you're modeling, plain and simple.  Any way you slice it, that's a fact.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

You can leave whatever you want, I really don't care, and it's highly likely nobody else will, either.

So, on that note, I'm still waiting to see some of these articles Seymour Duncan have paid you to write.  Can you refer me to some of them?  :laughing11:

 
Sure. This article, and all the articles it links to, were written by me.

http://www.seymourduncan.com/blog/the-tone-garage/guitar-wiring-diploma-course/

I also interviewed Slash's tech, Ace, for them:

http://www.seymourduncan.com/blog/seymour-duncan-artists/in-search-of-the-secrets-of-slashs-sound/

That's taken the thread really quite far off topic, so let me get back on: has anyone with a modeller of any kind tried plugging it through a power amp and into a real guitar cabinet? What were your impressions?
 
Jumble Jumble said:
Here are some different playing situations and the pros and cons.

Home practice (no limit on noise level)
Surely a real amp wins here outright. If you can crank it without getting into trouble, then it's just too much fun to do anything else. A modeller through some big speakers will be fun, but it won't be the same.

Home practice (with a noise limit)
There are two ways around this. One is to get a really small tube amp, like 5W or even 1W. This supposedly allows you to crank the output up, driving the amp, without it getting too loud. I don't know about you, but this doesn't work for me. I still have to turn the amp down really really quiet if I don't want the neighbours to hear. You might be able to plug headphones into your little tube amp, but then the cab is having no effect on the sound so you're not getting the full experience.

The other option is of course to use a modeller - you can run it at any volume you like without affecting sound, or you can plug in a set of headphones. This will basically sound like you're sitting playing in the control room in a studio with your amp next door, mic'd up. This is a great way of doing silent practice.

Recording
Real: Of course you can set up your real amp, get the exact tone you want, then mic it up. A good engineer should be able to get the tone of your amp as you hear it from your favourite part of the room, on to tape. The only downsides of this are: you need a good engineer; it takes time to set up; you need to rent studio space for the whole time you're recording.

Digital: If you have a good modeller then this works just as well as a real amp. With the Kemper (and I think the Axe FX II), you could even set your own amp up in a studio, profile it, and then have that sound whenever you need it. This means you can do the rest of your recording at home without the need for studio rental. Of course, the usual modelling thing also applies: you can have a LOT of amps, some of which would be very very expensive to rent or buy.

Small gigs
What I mean here is a gig where your amp is providing the sound that the audience hears - no PA system and no mic on the amp. What to use:

Real amp - pros: You get the feeling and fun of playing in front of a real cab.
Real amp - cons: What you hear and what the audience hear might be different, depending on where a listener is in the room.
Digital amp - pros: You hear what the audience hears; more amps available.
Digital amp - cons: Might be difficult to get feedback; no feeling from the cab.

Big gigs

Very similar pros and cons

Real amp - pros: You get the feeling and fun of playing in front of a real cab.
Real amp - cons: What you hear and what the audience hear will be different, as the audience hear the mic output.
Digital amp - pros: You hear what the audience hears; more amps available.
Digital amp - cons: Might be difficult to get feedback; no feeling from the cab
Click to expand...

So, here's the thing.  Allow me to point this out.  Earlier in this thread when I pointed out I couldn't get any "feeling" from a modeler, I was inexperienced and never used one, right?  Yet, here is quoted text from you saying the same exact thing; a modeler lacks feeling.

Here's another thing.  The audience is NOT going to hear what you hear, either way!  As you move around an area, sound changes.  Stand right in front of a cabinet and you will be greeted with an ice-pick of a sound.  Move over a few feet and the sound you hear will be VERY different from what you hear head-on!

So, you want to profile an amp?  What if I wanna profile a Bogner Uberschall with one of these fancy devices?  First, I'm going to need an actual amp of the amp I want to profile, especially if it's one not preloaded in the Kemper!  What if I wanna profile an Engl Powerball II and there's no preset for an Engl Powerball II?  That means I'm going to have to get one first!  I've already ran into a roadblock before I even started recording.

Ah, and I'm still waiting on those recordings of the real thing vs. the fake.  You did say you were going to provide them, didn't you?
 
Jumble Jumble said:
Sure. This article, and all the articles it links to, were written by me.

http://www.seymourduncan.com/blog/the-tone-garage/guitar-wiring-diploma-course/

I also interviewed Slash's tech, Ace, for them:

http://www.seymourduncan.com/blog/seymour-duncan-artists/in-search-of-the-secrets-of-slashs-sound/

That's taken the thread really quite far off topic, so let me get back on: has anyone with a modeller of any kind tried plugging it through a power amp and into a real guitar cabinet? What were your impressions?
Click to expand...

Hmm, Ace says Slash's tone is "all him," and he uses a pedalboard, which, according to Ace is right in front of him.  No modeling effects there.  I just thought I'd throw that in.  :eek:ccasion14:

Do you want congrats for writing an article on wiring a guitar?  A lot of people know how to wire a guitar, wiring a guitar isn't rocket science.  After you've done it a few times, it probably comes as a second nature.

 
The Kemper is a profiler.
The Axe FX is a modeller.

They are both arriving at a similar result via different means.

If you want a profile for a Kemper, and you don't have that amp you can buy or find those profiles online already done for you.

I have personal experience of being an Axe FX owner and have heard them through many set ups. It does respond to feel and rolling back the volume control, it is very much the equal of amps.

Periphery and Animals as Leaders also use the Axe FX as does Dweezil Zappa, Madonna and the guitarists in her band and many others. Oh also the guitarist of Neil Diamond used one on the last tour.

An Axe FX into a power amp into a guitar cab is a workable solution. You would not need cab modelling in this instance. If it's a valve power amp and not flat you would turn sag to 0 in the Axe FX to turn off the power amp modelling.

The Axe FX also works well in 4 C M set ups.
 
Jumble Jumble said:
That's taken the thread really quite far off topic, so let me get back on: has anyone with a modeller of any kind tried plugging it through a power amp and into a real guitar cabinet? What were your impressions?
Click to expand...

I have!  I've noticed that while it's fun to play, it's not as versatile as having a real pedalboard in front of me.  With the pedalboard, I can turn the effects on and off on a whim, I'm not stuck using one for an entire song if I don't want to.  It's a one person job!

My overall impression of the sound is that it's flaccid and lacks the little nuances of a real amp. 
 
So is that the first time you've read the first post then? Weird. But yes, there are things I've said in that first post that agree with your opinions, which is what makes it so weird that you thought I was attacking them so much.

Yeah, if you don't have access to a Bogner, and you want to play through one, you're screwed whether you have a profiler or not. The only difference I guess is that if you're lucky, someone on the internet might have profiled one and you might be able to download it.

As for the clips, yes, those are still planned. I think by the time I have done everything it will be early in the new year before they get uploaded. I might start a new thread for them.

You asked for articles, I linked them. Now they're the wrong kind of article.  I also do the wiring Q&As on SD's facebook page roughly once a month. No, I don't want congratulations, you just didn't seem to believe me that I'd written articles. I hesitated to link them as I knew you'd pick holes in them instead.

That's interesting about the modeller -> power amp, although I'm not sure why you couldn't still have a pedalboard in front of you. Was it just a matter of practicality?
 
Jumble Jumble said:
has anyone with a modeller of any kind tried plugging it through a power amp and into a real guitar cabinet? What were your impressions?
Click to expand...

I have tried this with the AxeFX and the results were not stellar.  The AxeFX seems to be better plugged into a really high quality PA, or even a (really) good home stereo system.  It expects the a full audio bandwidth to be there, or it sounds muddy.  For gigs where we need to supply the PA, I've had very good results plugging the AxeFX into our Bose L1 line array systems.  The guitar sound is excellent, coverage is uniform, and you can still hear the vocals!

Another really great use of the AxeFX that I've discovered recently is that you can set up a patch with just EQ and effects in it.  No guitar amp model whatsoever.  This allows me to plug my (very nice) new acoustic guitar into the same channel that I just had my electric guitar plugged into.  Hit a button and it's the best acoustic guitar sound you've ever heard.  Can't do that with an AC30.

Regarding the sound quality and 'live' feel of the AxeFX, I personally feel it's excellent.  In many ways I think it's better than using a guitar amp.  I believe this to such an extent that I've sold (or almost sold - see below) ALL of my guitar amps.  There's just no point in having them around anymore.  For about two decades I was a guitar amp builder, modifier, and repairman.  I saw everything on my bench, played through dozens of amps, and built a lot of experiments in pursuit of great guitar tone.  Now I have an AxeFX and I'm happy.  Unbelievable!  :eek:ccasion14:

And those amps?  The one amp I thought I would never sell, Mayfly serial No 2, is up for sale:  http://www.spacemanmusic.com/Amps/Tube+Amps/Mayfly+BC-30+Head+with+1+X+12%22+Cabinet
A really great 'real' amp.  Please buy it  :)
 
Mayfly was that with the Ultra or the II ?

All things considered though a good FRFR system is a good bet with the Axe FX to take advantage of all it's features. But there are  a number of power amp and cab users out there.
 
stratamania said:
Mayfly was that with the Ultra or the II ?

All things considered though a good FRFR system is a good bet with the Axe FX to take advantage of all it's features. But there are  a number of power amp and cab users out there.
Click to expand...

The Ultra.  Got it before the II came out.  No regrets, no burning desire to upgrade.
 
Jumble Jumble said:
Just briefly, because honestly I am done.

Who considers an AxeFX or Kemper to be the equal of a "real amp?"  Just you.
Click to expand...
Guys? Could use some backup here. 
Click to expand...

The AxeFX and KPA are both "real" amps. A "real" amp is a device that takes a small signal and makes it larger. Hence, "amplifier", or "amp", for short.
am·pli·fi·er
ˈampləˌfīər/
noun
noun: amplifier; plural noun: amplifiers

    1.  an electronic device for increasing the amplitude of electrical signals, used chiefly in sound reproduction.
Click to expand...

So, there's not really any such thing as "Real vs. Fake amps"; it either is one or it isn't.

Design differences make for different performance characteristics, which can be considered necessary/desirable or not. Necessity can be considered objective, desirable is subjective. Objective needs might be things like output level, physical size or number of channels. Subjective needs might be tonal characteristics, variability or appearance.

Given a particular model amplifier from a particular manufacturer, it may or may not satisfy one's needs and wants. If it does, and the price is fair, great. Buy it. If not, there are other models and/or manufacturers. Some people can't get happy and will design/build their own. In any event and for the most part, no two are the same, and in the case of older amps, even an array of the same model/manufacturer's amps will vary due to component and manufacturing tolerances, age, etc.

As with many things, there are different ways to get where you want to be. Without relating a long history of technology we've all heard dozens of times, suffice to say that we've gotten to the point technologically where it's possible to emulate the behavior of many devices in the absence of those devices. Time, temperature, material variations, construction details, performance curves, etc. can all be modelled in such a way as to remove any discernable difference between the original methods/devices and their replacements. So, now we can have a JCM800 or '65 Bandmaster even though they're obsolete and no longer produced, as well as various models of a Diesel, Bogner, Mesa Boogie or many others.

This has always been the holy grail because older designs are physically difficult to reproduce, handle or maintain, large, costly and of limited supply. So, designers have been working on emulators or modellers of various quality for a number of years. The early efforts were not very satisfying, but they gradually improved over time until we get to today, where we have the KPA (Kemper Profiling Amp) and Fractal Audio's Axe Fx II. Others will undoubtedly show up in the future, but as things are we seem to have found our grail.

There are two downsides at this point. One is cost. It's not just the signal processing electronics you have to emulate, you have to eliminate some other variables such as power amp characteristics and speaker/enclosure differences or your emulations won't work. So, in sum you need a powerful signal processor, then a transparent amplifier that doesn't add/subtract/modify the signal, and a transparent transducer (speaker) that converts the signal to mechanical energy without adding/subtracting/modifying it. Plus, some user interface parts like footswitches, controller pedals, etc. are all handy. Pretty tall order, but that's been done now, too. It's just expensive. To be truly set up, you have to plan on about $5K. But, it's the last rig you'll ever own, unless you want a spare, and it's every rig you've ever wanted to own.

The second downside is the learning curve. The KPA is easier to deal with, as it's basically a sonic Xerox machine, but you'll want to spend some time with it to utilize its full potential. Still, you're basically copying a tone and playing with it. Works extremely well, but it's not like having the actual amp you're emulating. Not because it doesn't sound like the actual amp; it does. But, you may not get all the variations that amp is capable of. Multi-channel amps, for instance, will need multiple profiles.

The Axe Fx is a bit different. It's like having your own personal densely packed 5000 acre auto graveyard attached to a broad-spectrum new car dealership from which to select/build a car. No matter what you want, it's either already there or you can build it, given enough time/knowledge.

So... can you sound like Jimi playing "Machine Gun"? Sure. But, only if you can play like Jimi. Nothing else holding you back. Can you sound like Mark Knopfler playing "Sultans of Suede"? Yep. If only you could play like Mark. It's not the equipment any more; you have no excuses. And here's the beauty part: you've got both of their rigs in the box, as well as thousands of others. Robin Trower? Larry Carlton? Alex Lifeson? Their rigs are all in there. Not kinda, sorta, in a way, but all the way - it's in there if you care to work at it and know how to play like those guys. I mean, it's just spooky. I'm never going back.
 
As an ex-amp builder I personally had a lot of fun tweaking the bazillion parameters in the AxeFX amp models.  Stuff like "output transformer bandwidth" and "feedback tone network".

But then I had the benefit of many years experience with the guts of old amps.
 
Mayfly said:
stratamania said:
Mayfly was that with the Ultra or the II ?

All things considered though a good FRFR system is a good bet with the Axe FX to take advantage of all it's features. But there are  a number of power amp and cab users out there.
Click to expand...

The Ultra.  Got it before the II came out.  No regrets, no burning desire to upgrade.
Click to expand...

OK got it, I have heard the II through all sorts of set ups, but the Ultra only through an FRFR set up. The Ultra is still a great unit.
 
Mayfly said:
As an ex-amp builder I personally had a lot of fun tweaking the bazillion parameters in the AxeFX amp models.  Stuff like "output transformer bandwidth" and "feedback tone network".

But then I had the benefit of many years experience with the guts of old amps.
Click to expand...

There are even more obscure parameters in the II, and more being added all the time. For instance, in the latest firmware revision you can now adjust "cathode squish". What?

Greatly improved “cathode squish modeling” for cathode biased power amp models. This improves the feel for affected amp types, i.e. Class-A, Mr Z, etc. Two new parameters have been added which allow the user to alter the pertinent variables: Cathode Squish and Squish Time. Cathode Squish sets the amount of bias shift due to cathode voltage rise and Squish Time sets the time constant of the cathode network. These parameters are set to default values upon selection of an amp type. Setting Cathode Squish to zero defeats the cathode squish modeling.
Click to expand...

Haven't played with it yet, but that's the level of detail they've gotten to. It's also indicative of the level of understanding of tube amps you may want to have to play around with the thing effectively. Might sound a little heavy for some, but on the plus side, the defaults are usually the correct starting points for the standard issue amp so you get the expected behaviour out of a model without modification. That is, you don't have to understand anything; you can just use the amp, which is what most folks do.
 
Cagey said:
Mayfly said:
As an ex-amp builder I personally had a lot of fun tweaking the bazillion parameters in the AxeFX amp models.  Stuff like "output transformer bandwidth" and "feedback tone network".

But then I had the benefit of many years experience with the guts of old amps.
Click to expand...

There are even more obscure parameters in the II, and more being added all the time. For instance, in the latest firmware revision you can now adjust "cathode squish". What?

Greatly improved “cathode squish modeling” for cathode biased power amp models. This improves the feel for affected amp types, i.e. Class-A, Mr Z, etc. Two new parameters have been added which allow the user to alter the pertinent variables: Cathode Squish and Squish Time. Cathode Squish sets the amount of bias shift due to cathode voltage rise and Squish Time sets the time constant of the cathode network. These parameters are set to default values upon selection of an amp type. Setting Cathode Squish to zero defeats the cathode squish modeling.
Click to expand...

Haven't played with it yet, but that's the level of detail they've gotten to. It's also indicative of the level of understanding of tube amps you may want to have to play around with the thing effectively. Might sound a little heavy for some, but on the plus side, the defaults are usually the correct starting points for the standard issue amp so you get the expected behaviour out of a model without modification. That is, you don't have to understand anything; you can just use the amp, which is what most folks do.
Click to expand...

That sounds AWESOME!!!  :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

I used to play around with the cathode bias network time constant all the time.  No, I'm not kidding. 
 
If you like that variable, there's a bunch more. I don't know if it'd be worth it to trade your Ultra up to a II, especially if you're happy, but a brief look around says they're still selling pretty consistently in the $1300-$1400 range. Now might be the time, since they're done with firmware upgrades on the Std/Ultra and the latest AxeEdit software won't work with the Std/Ultra (it's a compete re-write from #include stdio.h down).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

alexreinhold
Complex Amp Footswitch Question
2
Replies
29
Views
820
alexreinhold
alexreinhold
alexreinhold
Switcher for Pedalboard (Loop vs Front-of-Amp Dilemma)
Replies
16
Views
703
stratamania
stratamania
ragamuffin
Tried out some NOS tubes in my 5e3 build
Replies
3
Views
554
ragamuffin
ragamuffin
W
Happy trade
Replies
2
Views
379
stratamania
stratamania
alexreinhold
I have GAS for a Flying V - Help Please!
2
Replies
22
Views
754
somebodyelseuk
somebodyelseuk
Back
Top