New modeler: Analysis paralysis (book)

[laxu]

Sitting here enjoying the IR-X preamp, playing through my studio monitors, and feeling this void.

It sounds "great", but... even though it is tube preamp and sounds completely authentic, it dawned on me that nothing played through my studio monitors will sound more inspirational than this. This is the ceiling. A Fractal isn't going to sound more real.

Even if I buy a Fractal or a QC or a TMP, it will still have the same limits as my current setup. Maybe I can sweeten my enjoyment with some killer reverbs for better ambience to fool my brain, but thats about it. I have every variation of IR and eq shaping at my fingertips, I am running a tube preamp that sounds like a record coming through my speakers, but it is "meh" compared to playing a real amp.

And this is the same wall I run into when auditioning guitar plugins. They can sound great, but its always a "meh" experience. Every high gain amp starts to sound the same. Every IR, once you let your ears adjust, pretty much can be made to sound the same with eq tweaks.

I've got to get some air moving.

There's no substitute for some actual volume, and real guitar speakers tend to be easier to get satisfying results when you lose a bunch of variables like mics and their positioning.

 

[mercifulfuzziness]

There's an equally devoted amount of Tonex fans.

To me you can get pretty similar tones out of Tonex, QC or Fractal. So I don't know what is going on when some people say it's night and day.

Then it’s probably because of the skill of the one dialing in the tone, right?

I should probably have the one where even a dummy can dial in a good tone.

With the new Super Reverb in the Helix I finally found I was able to do it. But that’s because the stock was good.

 

[laxu]

Then it’s probably because of the skill of the one dialing in the tone, right?

I should probably have the one where even a dummy can dial in a good tone.

With the new Super Reverb in the Helix I finally found I was able to do it. But that’s because the stock was good.

Often no context is provided so it could easily be someone who just uses stock presets and if they don't immediately satisfy (basically by chance) then the modeler is no good to them.

Even more often people are complaining that their modeler at half the volume through studio monitors does not sound like their real combo amp on the floor...

 

[mercifulfuzziness]

Often no context is provided so it could easily be someone who just uses stock presets and if they don't immediately satisfy (basically by chance) then the modeler is no good to them.

Even more often people are complaining that their modeler at half the volume through studio monitors does not sound like their real combo amp on the floor...

I don’t play loud enough at home, I think, to notice a big difference in the IRs. I could listen to the Delixe from York and will only notice a small difference in all the mixes. I am sure there is more difference than that, maybe not.

But there is a level of volume that you need to hit to really notice the fullness of the modeler amps..

 

[GTR37]

There's an equally devoted amount of Tonex fans.

To me you can get pretty similar tones out of Tonex, QC or Fractal. So I don't know what is going on when some people say it's night and day.

it funny maybe I tested the wrong captures I just could not dig the ToneX
Cleans were decent but any of the heavier tones felt very one dimensional and flat to me

 

[laxu]

it funny maybe I tested the wrong captures I just could not dig the ToneX
Cleans were decent but any of the heavier tones felt very one dimensional and flat to me

My experience just using other people's captures was that there were really good tones to be found, but you had to hunt for them in a sea of crap.

 

[deadpool_25]

Maybe just wait for Fractal Gen IV.

 

[laxu]

Maybe just wait for Fractal Gen IV.

Might be a long wait tho. If they just put out the VP4, and still add Axe-Fx/FMx updates (albeit at a slower pace), then I assume most of their time is spent working on the new thing, but I don't expect it to come out next year.

 

[deadpool_25]

Might be a long wait tho. If they just put out the VP4, and still add Axe-Fx/FMx updates (albeit at a slower pace), then I assume most of their time is spent working on the new thing, but I don't expect it to come out next year.

He seems to be a fairly patient dude.

 

[Byrdman]

There was a MS80IR+ thread floating a few weeks ago where I posted side by side Choptones demos of Helix vs new zoom algos. Lets put it this way, if you listen to that and think the Helix algos are "head and shoulders above" then you are probably one of those people who hears the HX artifacts and conflate them with "realistic". That demo example showcases exactly what is wrong with the HX tones to my ears. Even on a low/mid gain amp there is a boxy compression that doesn't breathe.

But that doesn't matter. Helix is far in rearview mirror. Its been ten years they are due an update. I'm sure their next series will be fantastic.

First of all, I don't go by what I hear on highly processed tones from YT videos and audio samples to determine what sounds good to me or not. I plug shit in and play it. I know the artifacts are there, I hear them, I know they are not realistic, but they don't bother me that much because it's minimal and extremely close. Plus, no one in the audience except maybe the smug home guitar DAW player will be bothered by it. I play my Stomp XL in 4CM through my Marshall's and have fun. When I turn it up and play with my band, it's barely noticeable and it does everything we need well at a reasonable cost.

Well yeah. I said nothing derogatory about Helix other than it wasnt an improvement on what I have now and I got jumped by a handful of people. What else do you call that?

Second, no one jumped on you, well maybe 1 person did by saying you suck, so quit playing the victim card and begging for a pity party. YOU posted a topic for discussion, which IMO I thought was a good post and I even complimented you on your post, some people agreed with you and other's did not. If you don't want to hear other's opinions, maybe you should have written all that shit down on a piece of paper and taped it to your bathroom mirror so you can feel good about your guitar gear choices every morning.

You are the one insulting people by saying shit like "you are probably one of those people who hears the HX artifacts and conflate them with "realistic". " just because I did not agree with you, and this is not the first thread/post where you have come off as abrasive.

 

[mercifulfuzziness]

 

[Shredder777]

First of all, I don't go by what I hear on highly processed tones from YT videos and audio samples to determine what sounds good to me or not. I plug shit in and play it. I know the artifacts are there, I hear them, I know they are not realistic, but they don't bother me that much because it's minimal and extremely close. Plus, no one in the audience except maybe the smug home guitar DAW player will be bothered by it. I play my Stomp XL in 4CM through my Marshall's and have fun. When I turn it up and play with my band, it's barely noticeable and it does everything we need well at a reasonable cost.



Second, no one jumped on you, well maybe 1 person did by saying you suck, so quit playing the victim card and begging for a pity party. YOU posted a topic for discussion, which IMO I thought was a good post and I even complimented you on your post, some people agreed with you and other's did not. If you don't want to hear other's opinions, maybe you should have written all that shit down on a piece of paper and taped it to your bathroom mirror so you can feel good about your guitar gear choices every morning.

You are the one insulting people by saying shit like "you are probably one of those people who hears the HX artifacts and conflate them with "realistic". " just because I did not agree with you, and this is not the first thread/post where you have come off as abrasive.

Fascinating.

 

[Shredder777]

IMO just limit your options to a FM3, QC and TMP
FM3 is the cheapest and has the most in depth options. If you can get your hands on one to try that would be perfect to test it out.
QC and TMP are more hands on friendly. IMO with less advanced amp options you can also pull a tone quicker… just a trade off on nitpicking what’s more important in a modeller, but all 3 of them are top tier.

If you can’t try an FM3 and can try the others with a return policy then you’ve got nothing to lose. Might as well grab either and see how it goes first hand.

The "most appealing" to me is the TMP, but the thing that is keeping me from even trying it is that the power amp simulation is built into the models and there doesn't appear to be a way to run the preamps directly to a tube amp. The manual even specifically says, you can disable the cabs and run to a solid state amp feeding a guitar cab.

A tonex will allow me to run in any context. Play back captured amps, or just captured preamps.

 

[dk_ace]

I don’t think any of the options available today are really perfect. You can build a mammoth rig that duplicates the power of something like the FM9 in analog form, but that’s gonna be a lot of programming and cabling to manage not to mention the expense.

The best option for me has been the FM9 but planning ahead so that virtually everything I could want is available somewhere in my patch on a footswitch. That way I don’t need to bend over and try to do anything on the unit. The FM3 doesn’t have enough switching to do this for me. The only way I could use the FM3 is if I programmed everything per song ahead of time.

D

 

[Jarick]

The Cortex fans think differently I notice. Like the amps are waaaaay better. Is that a Mercedes vs BMW top of thing?

Fanboys can't be objective.

Maybe I'm deaf, but to me the models are close enough to not worry. I spent a good hour or so A/B comparing my Quad Cortex against the Boss IR-2. $1700 vs $200. Both sound more than good enough to gig with or do home recording. Fractal and Helix are in the same boat. I couldn't get past the Tonex software enough to use that for more than a couple days but I'm sure it's right there as well.

Are there subtle differences? Absolutely! The Fractal sounds a little more hi-fi, the QC sounds a little more scooped, the Helix doesn't have quite as much low end punch and resolution, and the Boss sounds a little more like a good distortion pedal than amp. But they're all just fine.

As for how I spent my money, I have an Axe FX 3, a Quad Cortex, an HX Stomp, and some other stuff. I would like to sell my Axe 3 and FC-12 and get an FM9 Mk2 Turbo. Then I want to shoot out the FM9 vs QC and keep the winner. I think I would probably prefer the FM9 mostly because I like the IEC cable, the rugged design, and the extremely mature development. I don't truly need to build everything on the fly like the QC, even if it is the easiest device to use IMO.

I'm also really interested in trying the GX-100. The IR-2 is really impressive and I think the more flexible routing of the GX vs GT could be a lot easier to use. Especially running mono into an "FRFR" cab instead of trying to do massive stereo effects like I was doing previously.

Again speaking for myself, I have no interest in running multiple modelers on top of each other, or assembling a big pedalboard with MIDI. It gets old really fast and I'd rather just have one high end modeler with everything self-contained.

 

[Jarick]

The "most appealing" to me is the TMP, but the thing that is keeping me from even trying it is that the power amp simulation is built into the models and there doesn't appear to be a way to run the preamps directly to a tube amp. The manual even specifically says, you can disable the cabs and run to a solid state amp feeding a guitar cab.

A tonex will allow me to run in any context. Play back captured amps, or just captured preamps.

Are you running the tube amp at high volume? If not, it probably won't matter and would likely sound better with the power amp modeling, especially at lower volumes.

 

[Frodebro]

The "most appealing" to me is the TMP, but the thing that is keeping me from even trying it is that the power amp simulation is built into the models and there doesn't appear to be a way to run the preamps directly to a tube amp. The manual even specifically says, you can disable the cabs and run to a solid state amp feeding a guitar cab.

A tonex will allow me to run in any context. Play back captured amps, or just captured preamps.

That does put you into a price range where you have quite a few options. You mentioned the Fractal UI a few times, and I would like to point out that it’s not nearly as ‘bad’ as the internet loves to insist it is. The learning curve is steeper than some others, yes, but the capabilities are also far greater. If that’s what is holding you back on the Fractal, it shouldn’t. It’s not an instant gratification device, but the payoff is worth the initial effort up front to familiarize yourself with it.

 

[Shredder777]

Are you running the tube amp at high volume? If not, it probably won't matter and would likely sound better with the power amp modeling, especially at lower volumes.

Good question. A decade+ ago I had an HD500 which I was running to my JSXs return.

At low volumes, the L6 amps that all had baked in tube saturation sounded good, but if I turned up just a bit over practice volume it started to sound flubby and distant.

In contrast, the Boss GT100 preamps of that era sounded just like actual preamps. They did what you expect when you turned up the amp.

I want to avoid a repeat of that scenario. The simulated tube saturation became an issue at a lower volume than you would think.

 

[Shredder777]

That does put you into a price range where you have quite a few options. You mentioned the Fractal UI a few times, and I would like to point out that it’s not nearly as ‘bad’ as the internet loves to insist it is. The learning curve is steeper than some others, yes, but the capabilities are also far greater. If that’s what is holding you back on the Fractal, it shouldn’t. It’s not an instant gratification device, but the payoff is worth the initial effort up front to familiarize yourself with it.

I'm not going to do Fractal at this time because of the interface and price. The FM9 has a decent compliment of switches, add a volume pedal and the rig costs 2K. But it still isn't something you would want to work on. It would basically just be a pedal switcher while I worked in the PC app.

I would probably do better to get an FX3 and Behringer FCB1010 footcontroller at that point. If I'm not working on the pedal, then why even have it in pedal format?

Summary:

Fractal - Disqualified by price/interface. Why have it in a pedal format if using the editing app? Might as well get the FX3 and a foot controller at that point. FM3 does not have enough switching features, and would still be using it with the editing app. Would rather own a JP2C than a FX3 and footcontrollers. If working on computer, might as well just be using Amplitube or whatever.

TMP- Does not simulate preamps and not designed to play into tube power section. So close yet so far.

QC- Last man standing?

 

[GTR37]

I'm not going to do Fractal at this time because of the interface and price. The FM9 has a decent compliment of switches, add a volume pedal and the rig costs 2K. But it still isn't something you would want to work on. It would basically just be a pedal switcher while I worked in the PC app.

I would probably do better to get an FX3 and Behringer FCB1010 footcontroller at that point. If I'm not working on the pedal, then why even have it in pedal format?

Yes and no
The Fractal footswitch that pairs with it even and FC6
Is super powerful and super versatile you can do anything w those it’s not just scrolling presets it’s like a pro style switching systems the functionality and editing options are pretty endless and they integrate so well

I still kind of feel you are leaning towards a tube amp but as Jarick said above and your own experience unless you are getting the volume up the advantage or that over a modelling pre diminishes IMO