- Messages
- 11,322
This is kind of where I am as well. I suspect that I would like the way the 1st clip sat in the mix better than the 2nd .... but that is because the mids were a bit more pronounced. The truth is, after a little channel eq on the mixer, both of them would sound great (I am a big Mesa Mark IIc fan).
There's no way of knowing how it would sound in a mix without it being IN a mix, that's 100% contextual to what else is going on in the mix itself. Where everything compounds quickly in a mix, especially when you start double-quad tracking guitars, anything that's compressed-sounding going in is going to sound that much more compressed in the final result. With clip 1's compressed upper mids, if those got stacked with another track of the same the upper mids would smear and lose definition.
And I suspect what I'm hearing in a lot of ToneTalk episodes when Dave Friedman starts shitting on modeling, or even some of the producers they've had on, with "Modelers just don't sit the same way an amp does" is specifically because of things like specific areas being compressed in a modeler where they wouldn't be in an amp. This is also the reason I started dialing in my tones to sound as close to a raw amp in the room as possible, because it's REALLY easy to dial in what you want to hear right away, rather than what you need to have in the tracks so it creates what you want to hear with the rest of the instruments and then the mastering chain, which is going to compress it even more.