A lot of people will disagree with my hardware modeler ranking

OneEng said:
A quick search and I found this: https://www.guitarplayer.com/gear/best-amp-modelers

Much better review. I would still like to see a ranking within a use model:

  • Best for live touring guitarists
  • Best for solo guitar performer
  • Best for home recording
  • Best for capturing authentic guitar tones
  • Best for small form factor live performances
  • Best for making your own tone (efx and amp routing flexibility)
  • etc, etc.
The article this thread is about had none of this context, did not outline the strengths and weaknesses of each device, and just blindly asks the reader to believe that "this is the best".

I did find the article kind of strange in its contention that Kemper was "Best for profiling". It's like me saying "my favorite daughter" when I have only 1 daughter :). In the write-up, they did elaborate on the performance strength and durability which is really where the headline should have been. Technically speaking either ToneX or Quad Cortex should have been "Best for capturing amp tones" .... not Kemper.

Still, this review was AT LEAST properly organized with context given for what each device was good for, and where they were less than good. Much more useful as a "Review".
Click to expand...
You are thinking waaaaay too hard about this.
 
OneEng said:
A quick search and I found this: https://www.guitarplayer.com/gear/best-amp-modelers

Much better review. I would still like to see a ranking within a use model:

  • Best for live touring guitarists
  • Best for solo guitar performer
  • Best for home recording
  • Best for capturing authentic guitar tones
  • Best for small form factor live performances
  • Best for making your own tone (efx and amp routing flexibility)
  • etc, etc.
The article this thread is about had none of this context, did not outline the strengths and weaknesses of each device, and just blindly asks the reader to believe that "this is the best".

I did find the article kind of strange in its contention that Kemper was "Best for profiling". It's like me saying "my favorite daughter" when I have only 1 daughter :). In the write-up, they did elaborate on the performance strength and durability which is really where the headline should have been. Technically speaking either ToneX or Quad Cortex should have been "Best for capturing amp tones" .... not Kemper.

Still, this review was AT LEAST properly organized with context given for what each device was good for, and where they were less than good. Much more useful as a "Review".
Click to expand...

I’m trying to wrap my brain around how they come to the conclusion that the QC is somehow better than Fractal for complex signal routing :unsure:
 
metropolis_4 said:
I’m trying to wrap my brain around how they come to the conclusion that the QC is somehow better than Fractal for complex signal routing :unsure:
Click to expand...
Pay Me Kim Kardashian GIF by GQ
 
TheTrueZoltan! said:
I don't think that the Helix' modeling is garbage in any way, I think that's just unjustifiably exaggerated.
I think the hardness I mentioned could be improved, but it's not so intrusive that I would classify it as unbearable, it's more of a subtle thing.
Click to expand...
Specifically the Mesa amps and I stand behind my assessment, they are bad.
 
metropolis_4 said:
I’m trying to wrap my brain around how they come to the conclusion that the QC is somehow better than Fractal for complex signal routing :unsure:
Click to expand...
Well .... I don't agree with all their conclusions either ..... especially this one.

I do like their review format though, which is the point I was trying to make in reference to the original review this thread is about.

FWIW, QC is demonstrably less flexible and powerful in its signal routing capabilities than Axe III Fx. To say otherwise clearly demonstrates that this fact was not investigated at all. In fact, all other digital guitar amps are less capable in this respect at this time (not really sure how anyone could best Fractal in this regard).
 
The fact that all guitar sites and magazines are shills and receive payment for their rankings and that any modeler can sound drastically different overnight with a firmware upgrade, all cursory reviews are meaningless and are more for entertainment purposes and advertising campaigns.
Even on the outside chance they were valid at one point, they are dated as soon as new code develops.

The only way to rank the devices is to try them all out.

OR..just watch Pete Thorn make everything sound great and be happy knowing that they can all do the job.
 
dean701 said:
The fact that all guitar sites and magazines are shills and receive payment for their rankings and that any modeler can sound drastically different overnight with a firmware upgrade, all cursory reviews are meaningless and are more for entertainment purposes and advertising campaigns.
Even on the outside chance they were valid at one point, they are dated as soon as new code develops.

The only way to rank the devices is to try them all out.

OR..just watch Pete Thorn make everything sound great and be happy knowing that they can all do the job.
Click to expand...
Sadly, there is a lot of truth to this. It seems like the review sites and major reviewers land into 2 catagories:

  1. Paid by one or more OEM to slant the discussion in favor of their product
  2. Click bait designed to drive more traffic through their channel
Neither one of which ends up being a good indicator of the usefulness of one device over the other to a particular user.

I would argue that most people aren't going to purchase one of each of the units, and use them with enough depth to determine (on their own with their own experiences) which device best fits their needs. This is very costly and very time consuming.

While I have to agree with you that the reviews all seem to lack objectivity, some are still much better than others.

What I did was to find people who had moved from a high end boutique tube amp rig, that gigged like I do with their rig, and see which digital amp they used. These people are my gold standard. Most anyone who was using a VHT, Fender Blackface, Friedman, Soldano, Dumble, etc that were very satisfied with their digital amp would likely be right up my alley of taste.

I looked at what worked for people that previously used the best tube amp rigs money could buy. When I did this (in 2013), Kemper and Fractal were the only serious contenders in THAT space.

Today, Line 6 has significantly upped their game from the old pods of the past, QC has entered the market and did "Kemper Profiling" better than Kemper did it, and even Fender has an up-and-coming digital amp that is improving quickly.

If I were to change lanes again today, there would be many more contenders for me to consider.

Now, I have had time on most of these devices as I have friends that gig that own them. Not the kind of time it would take to get each one as dialed in as my Kemper, but enough to see what they can do. That is also a good exercise ..... but seriously, how many people are going to take even this amount of time to qualify a device?

I think the best resource is people doing what you want to do with their rigs that previously had tube amp rigs that were top of the line they were using to do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GuitarJon
Mesa Dual Rectifier vs 8 modelers!
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
dk_ace
D
laxu
How complex are your go-to presets?
2 3
Replies
45
Views
2K
Joshual-L
J
Orvillain
A 4-cable-method comparison
Replies
15
Views
2K
laxu
laxu
Jarick
Amp Modeler Tier Ranking
11 12 13
Replies
241
Views
30K
JCW308
JCW308
KingsXJJ
Welp, looks like I am a Fractal Wh*re now.
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Stone
Stone
Back
Top