Line 6 Helix Stadium Talk

[MirrorProfiles]

It doesn't sound the same when cold, new tubes, tube bias differences, etc, etc. It does, however, generally sound "good". I think this is my strongest argument against the cult of capture accuracy.

Who’s to say that the differences as a result of inaccurate modelling or capture tech are the same sort of audible differences as different valves or voltages or pot values? Usually in these comparisons, the real amps always have something that gives them away as real and the modellers have qualities that sound digital. Matching the reference unit is imperative.

It’s throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[paisleywookiee]

I think this is my strongest argument against the cult of capture accuracy.

You’re such a smug prick. There is no cult. Just people wanting capture tech to do what it says on the tin.

 

[EOengineer]

You’re such a smug prick. There is no cult. Just people wanting capture tech to do what it says on the tin.

This is exactly what someone in the cult would say!

 

[paisleywookiee]

This is exactly what someone in the cult would say!

Come to the accuracy side. We have cookies.

 

[bucephalus]

Come to the accuracy side. We have cookies.

I reject all cookies

 

[synthpenguin]

I'm trying to imagine a company advertising their capture tech as "won't accurately capture your amp, but sounds nice and the FX are great."

 

[dbfretz]

Seems to only really be on this forum where people don’t think Proxy is accurate. Getting rave reviews everywhere else. Is it the best? Probably not, at least just now. Is it good enough? 100%.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Seems to only really be on this forum where people don’t think Proxy is accurate. Getting rave reviews everywhere else. Is it the best? Probably not, at least just now. Is it good enough? 100%.

I think it's been more about Agoura differences than Proxy ones?

 

[synthpenguin]

Seems to only really be on this forum where people don’t think Proxy is accurate. Getting rave reviews everywhere else. Is it the best? Probably not, at least just now. Is it good enough? 100%.

I think a lot of this forum seems to lean more high gain, where the differences seem more apparent (at least going by what I've heard). I haven't gotten a chance to experience it yet, but for my less-high-gain tastes it sounds great in demoes.

And fwiw a few of the large YouTube channels have openly said the same about the higher gain captures too, so it's not just here. Line 6 has said they're using info at this stage to refine things, so I'm sure it'll get way better, and this sort of fair criticism is great for that.

 

[BadCat90]

Sounds cool but it’s a different discussion. If you’d like to record a DI I’d be happy to reamp through a real 2203 for comparison

Appreciate that and yeah, probably not the best time and place to post. I’m just excited about my new toy.

 

[BadCat90]

No. Still doesn't stop the original clip sounding murky and a bit bland, tbh.

I mean, if this is the conversation you want. Sure thing. It sounded bad.

Fair enough. Thanks for being honest.

 

[OneEng]

Who’s to say that the differences as a result of inaccurate modelling or capture tech are the same sort of audible differences as different valves or voltages or pot values? Usually in these comparisons, the real amps always have something that gives them away as real and the modellers have qualities that sound digital. Matching the reference unit is imperative.

It’s throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

If you mean "real amp" is the amp in the room vs a capture into a FRFR speaker, then there is definitely a difference. If you mean a real amp recorded through a microphone and then sent through speakers, I think that in a blind A/B test with JUST raw guitar and amp tone, many would have a hard time figuring out accurately which is which.

If you are talking about amp plus effects, I think you go from "many" to "almost everyone" wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

If you put the guitar with effects into a mix, nobody anywhere could tell the difference.

I'm trying to imagine a company advertising their capture tech as "won't accurately capture your amp, but sounds nice and the FX are great."

I think a more likely advertising line might be "so close you can't hear the difference" but also talking about "and $20,000.00 of FREE studio grade guitar effects for FREE" and also "all in one easy to carry foot controller".

If capture accuracy alone is all you are interested in, stick with NAM and something inexpensive like ToneX.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

If you mean "real amp" is the amp in the room vs a capture into a FRFR speaker, then there is definitely a difference

No, I don’t mean that. Totally different thing.

I think that in a blind A/B test with JUST raw guitar and amp tone, many would have a hard time figuring out accurately which is which.

This has been the case for a while. When new modelling iterations come along, I want the gaps to get smaller. That’s what the discussion is about. We’re already well past this. Once you know where to look for differences, modellers do reveal themselves somewhat easily (even if most people would be fooled by it). Most people could be fooled by a Kemper tone but it doesn’t mean that there isn’t room to improve accuracy. If Kemper came out with a new update that sounded better in terms of gain and dynamics but the results were further from the source, you’d have mixed feelings, right?

 

[OneEng]

Here’s a clip demonstrating how dynamic the Agoura 2203 is just working the volume knob and pick attach. Idk how much more or less accurate the Agoura stuff is but it sounds and feels awesome.

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

I think that this tone in the mix would work very well for lots of songs. It definitely has a good cut to it. It does remind me though that the reverb in Stadium could use an update . The clip also highlights that the Agoura model responds nicely to the volume input as well as different pickup combinations.

Again, I think the most important thing is to be able to tweak easily to your desired tone. I would likely back off of the brittleness, put less reverb on it. But this is my point. Being able to get to a tone you love and that works in the mix is WAY more important than accuracy of a capture, or even accuracy of a model.

I always struggled in my tube amp days. My Fender black face was AMAZING for clean and blues tones .... and very little else. My VHT UL was AMAZING for high to mid-high gain, but only "eh" for everything else. Marshall JCM800? It has A clean, but certainly not a Fender clean. It was amazing at classic rock distortion.

With a modeler / capture device, you can have all of the above AND have all your pedal boards integrated.

I honestly can't imagine gigging with just a tube amp and pedal board again. It would be like living without a microwave at home ..... or an analog film camera .... or a record player :).

Even if I COULD hear a SMALL difference live (which I can't) it would be worth it times 100 to use one of these modern digital amps.

 

[dean701]

Fair enough. Thanks for being honest.

He's wrong. The playing was exceptional and the tone depends on the context. In a busy mix the reverb would put it behind everything but that may be intentional. As a solo instrument, with no accompaniment, it sounded very good.

 

[Sascha Franck]

For a change: Could we talk about some other things the Stadium series really needs instead of the endless accuracy talk?
What about a new round of a fine global blocks discussion?

 

[synthpenguin]

I think a more likely advertising line might be "so close you can't hear the difference" but also talking about "and $20,000.00 of FREE studio grade guitar effects for FREE" and also "all in one easy to carry foot controller".

If capture accuracy alone is all you are interested in, stick with NAM and something inexpensive like ToneX.

My point is more that companies know that the average user does care about accurate captures and models. I think most companies are aiming for that within the restrictions of their platform(s). Being content with whatever the current "close enough" is is totally fine, and even positive and healthy, but I don't think it makes total sense with such a new platform that has a dev team that is openly looking to improve accuracy.

 

[EOengineer]

For a change: Could we talk about some other things the Stadium series really needs instead of the endless accuracy talk?
What about a new round of a fine global blocks discussion?

 

[molul]

Any news or hints about what is coming in 1.4 and when that might be? I know 1.2 was pre announced to be about Showcase, 1.3 about Proxy, but I don't remember anything about 1.4?

Aah I missed the "firmware X has just been released. What's coming on firmware X+1?" posts

 

[OneEng]

This has been the case for a while. When new modelling iterations come along, I want the gaps to get smaller. That’s what the discussion is about. We’re already well past this. Once you know where to look for differences, modellers do reveal themselves somewhat easily (even if most people would be fooled by it). Most people could be fooled by a Kemper tone but it doesn’t mean that there isn’t room to improve accuracy. If Kemper came out with a new update that sounded better in terms of gain and dynamics but the results were further from the source, you’d have mixed feelings, right?

I think it is completely reasonable to want capture and modeler tech to get better. I think that it is getting better, and I think that Proxy will definitely be getting better (but honestly, I would prefer they update the reverb engine first :) ).

I also believe that the focus being ONLY about the capture accuracy in a product with as many goodies in it as Stadium is kind silly.

If a Kemper MK1 user ONLY looked at the NULL tests, they might conclude that an MK1 is about even with Proxy in Stadium and therefore MK1 is just as good as Stadium. Clearly that isn't the case for a number of REALLY good reasons.

As for the Kemper having a version with better gain and dynamics, but further from the source .... very good question. I don't profile tube amps myself (sold all mine about a year after I bought my Kemper). I think I might actually prefer something that subjectively sounds "better" and feels "better" to something that simply "more accurate".

But isn't this true of one tube amp vs another?

No one would EVER say a MESA Triple Rectifier sounded exactly like a VHT UltraLead .... or that one felt like another, yet I greatly preferred my UL over my friends MESA in both the way it sounded in the mix AND how it played live.

What is interesting is that once I had a Kemper and had a zillion rigs of amps I could download and tweak, I found stuff I liked even better than my VHT UL.

Are they accurate? Beats me. Does it matter?

Very interesting line of discussion.