File this under Modeling. It’s not always Digital.

[Tanax]

I always thought that there are surely analog modelers too. But do they really, though?

I mean, think about it. For instance, BluGuitar Amp1 or DSM Humbolt, are those analog modelers? Why? Because they model other amps?
Are Friedman amps modelers because they "model" (and in his eyes, improves) Marshall amps?

Just the fact that it "models" the sound after another amp cannot be the sole reason something is a modeler?
So what makes an analog modeler a modeler and not just an amp that is inspired by another amp (like all amps, really)?

Absence of power amp? Absence of tubes? Floor-based instead of a stand-alone head/combo? Multiple amp "models" baked in?
Genuinely curious how people would define an analog modeler.

 

[likitlikeyoulikeit]

 

[Achilles]

Genuinely curious how people would define an analog modeler.

Really, there's no such thing if we stick to the words as used in guitar-speak.

Modeling is creating digital facsimiles of analog components.

 

[Tanax]

Really, there's no such thing if we stick to the words as used in guitar-speak.

Modeling is creating digital facsimiles of analog components.

So in that sense, modeling can ONLY be digital?

 

[Achilles]

So in that sense, modeling can ONLY be digital?

They're just words. We can chop em up and use them however we like.

But digital 'modeling' has been an accepted term for decades.
Trying to shoehorn analog and modeling together is a bit like forcing a round peg into a square hole.
Pun intended.

IMO

 

[laxu]

They're just words. We can chop em up and use them however we like.

But digital 'modeling' has been an accepted term for decades.
Trying to shoehorn analog and modeling together is a bit like forcing a round peg into a square hole.
Pun intended.

IMO

Emulation then? An analog emulation of how a particular tube amp sounds and behaves.

 

[Achilles]

Emulation then? An analog emulation of how a particular tube amp sounds and behaves.

The 1968 Ford Mustang is a car.
If in 2024 I decide to design a faithful homage to the 68 Stang - that also runs on gasoline, requires oil in its piston engine, and farts noxious fumes out the butt end - it's just another car.

There's quite a few adjectives you can add to it like emulation, homage, tribute, etc. I just don't think 'model' fits the bill.

 

[Tanax]

They're just words. We can chop em up and use them however we like.

But digital 'modeling' has been an accepted term for decades.
Trying to shoehorn analog and modeling together is a bit like forcing a round peg into a square hole.
Pun intended.

IMO

I mean, I agree. I don't believe analog modeling exists.
Digital modeling is modeling an amp sound digitally. If you do that analog(ally?), then that's just another amp.

Otherwise, like I said, a Friedman would be an analog modeler of a Marshall. Or a Friedman IR-X is an analog modeler.
Unless the argument is that an analog modeler can't have tubes. But there are things like solid state amps and we don't call them analog modelers so not sure that argument holds..

Emulation then? An analog emulation of how a particular tube amp sounds and behaves.

So the argument is that it's an analog modeler if it doesn't have tubes? What about solid state amps?

 

[laxu]

So the argument is that it's an analog modeler if it doesn't have tubes? What about solid state amps?

It doesn't matter if it has tubes or not. The goal of the device's design matters.

A Friedman IR-X is a tube preamp with a cab sim. While derived from a Marshall, it is never meant to be a replica of a particular Marshall.

By comparison something like the DSM Simplifier X would aim to replicate a Marshall Superlead (or at least its sound/behavior) in one of its modes, just via analog circuitry instead of digital modeling.

You could call it an "analog modeler" if you want. You could also call it a "tube amp simulator", "tube amp emulation", "inspired by these amps" or whatever.

The BluGuitar Amp 1 is maybe more in that "inspired by" area similar to how Friedman is inspired by Marshall. While you can dial the BluGuitar to sound like a surprisingly large variety of Marshall-based amps, and its channels are based on Thomas Blug's favorite amps, to me it's just another amp.

The upcoming Amp X I could see being more like a modeler because it's more direct about replicating particular amps, and its whole design is closer to a modeler in concept.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

It doesn't matter if it has tubes or not. The goal of the device's design matters.

A Friedman IR-X is a tube preamp with a cab sim. While derived from a Marshall, it is never meant to be a replica of a particular Marshall.

By comparison something like the DSM Simplifier X would aim to replicate a Marshall Superlead (or at least its sound/behavior) in one of its modes, just via analog circuitry instead of digital modeling.

You could call it an "analog modeler" if you want. You could also call it a "tube amp simulator", "tube amp emulation", "inspired by these amps" or whatever.

The BluGuitar Amp 1 is maybe more in that "inspired by" area similar to how Friedman is inspired by Marshall. While you can dial the BluGuitar to sound like a surprisingly large variety of Marshall-based amps, and its channels are based on Thomas Blug's favorite amps, to me it's just another amp.

The upcoming Amp X I could see being more like a modeler because it's more direct about replicating particular amps, and its whole design is closer to a modeler in concept.

Nah. An GT1000 doesn't stop becoming a digital modeler just because you load up one of the X-amps that's not intended to emulate any particular historical amp. A thing is called a modeler when the person calling it a modeler calls it a modeler. As long as other people know what the person is talking about, none of the semantics matters.

 

[Piing]

It is simply EQ. Analog EQ shaping the tone, solid state or tubes.

 

[Tanax]

It doesn't matter if it has tubes or not. The goal of the device's design matters.

A Friedman IR-X is a tube preamp with a cab sim. While derived from a Marshall, it is never meant to be a replica of a particular Marshall.

By comparison something like the DSM Simplifier X would aim to replicate a Marshall Superlead (or at least its sound/behavior) in one of its modes, just via analog circuitry instead of digital modeling.

You could call it an "analog modeler" if you want. You could also call it a "tube amp simulator", "tube amp emulation", "inspired by these amps" or whatever.

The BluGuitar Amp 1 is maybe more in that "inspired by" area similar to how Friedman is inspired by Marshall. While you can dial the BluGuitar to sound like a surprisingly large variety of Marshall-based amps, and its channels are based on Thomas Blug's favorite amps, to me it's just another amp.

The upcoming Amp X I could see being more like a modeler because it's more direct about replicating particular amps, and its whole design is closer to a modeler in concept.

Alright. What about the Friedman IR-D then? It is aiming to replicate the sound of a Dirty Shirley, no? So that's a modeler? But the IR-X is not?
What about the Friedman Plex? That's DEFINITELY aiming to replicate a Marshall Plexi. Is that a modeler?

 

[Frodebro]

The common use definition of modeling is to digitally replicate an analog amp. Sure, people can seek out exceptions that bolster their argument, but those exceptions do not change the accepted verbiage.

 

[laxu]

Alright. What about the Friedman IR-D then? It is aiming to replicate the sound of a Dirty Shirley, no? So that's a modeler? But the IR-X is not?
What about the Friedman Plex? That's DEFINITELY aiming to replicate a Marshall Plexi. Is that a modeler?

At best you could say the IR models a poweramp digitally.

The Plex is just a Marshall variant.

 

[Tanax]

At best you could say the IR models a poweramp digitally.

The Plex is just a Marshall variant.

That makes no sense as that definition is widely inconsistent. You could just say the DSM Humbolt has a "Marshall variant" sound in it? What makes it a modeler rather than the Friedman Plex? There's literally no difference other than the fact that the Plex has a power amp built in, and it's shaped like a traditional amp head rather than a pedal/effect unit.

 

[Achilles]

Greg Germino's been making dead nuts faithful Marshall copies for decades.
I can't think of a single reason to use the word 'modeling' to describe his work.

 

[Tanax]

Greg Germino's been making dead nuts faithful Marshall copies for decades.
I can't think of a single reason to use the word 'modeling' to describe his work.

Most people just have an "opinion" on what a modeler is to them, but it really makes no sense. They've just decided that this a modeler while that is not. Most people decide based on form factor. Some based on tubes or not. In laxu's defense, I suspect he hasn't really given it much thought which is most likely why he doesn't have a definition for it.

 

[EOengineer]

The idea of $2000+ analog modeling preamps seems both interesting and poorly conceived if the goal is to authentically reproduce the sound of famous tube AMPS.

Perhaps there’s a modeling power amp coming too though.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Where is King?