Pick the real amp out from the emulations

[James Freeman]

I’m not sure some people realise how different (or even bad) these can sound when you don’t adjust for tolerances

Yes please! That's what makes it more interesting and fun, especially when it's bad.

For the Real amp, Helix and FM3 you have accurate input levels so they are the gain reference.
How accurate the Tone Stack, Gain, and Master is the interesting part, maybe even compare several settings in one video to have even stronger understanding of the model's range and accuracy compared to the real amp.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Yes please! That's what makes it more interesting and fun, especially when it's bad.

For the Real amp, Helix and FM3 you have accurate input levels so they are the gain reference.
How accurate the Tone Stack, Gain, and Master is the interesting part, maybe even compare several settings in one video to have even stronger understanding of the model's range and accuracy compared to the real amp.

It might be fun to do one starting off with them at the same settings.

One other thing is that I’d probably need to pick an amp and cab that I have that’s also in Helix, and then use the closest impedance curve in FM-3. Helix tend to model with the corresponding cab, besides some of the high gain amps which IIRC are modelled with the Mesa cab load.

And even besides that, don’t Fractal change the taper of pots to be more uniform? I’m not sure they still or always do but it’s been written in the past where they’ll change the original tapers to what they feel is more sensible. It would be fun to show how much these vary, which again is possible to do with the real amps too.

 

[Gearzilla]

I don't follow - it's an amp making amp noises. There're plenty of shootouts for crunch tones with very similar results as this one out there.

Nevermind clean tones, which modelers have been nailing effortlessly ever since the Pod XT days.

These tests basically demonstrate nothing other than various solutions can be dialed in to have a similar sound with a neutral playing sample through the same IR.

An actual demonstration of differences which would be a bit more time consuming because there’s a lot of variables to account for would be at a minimum to pick a gain and eq level and then to turn the volume and tone knobs of the guitar up and down while picking harder and softer or to have a uniform guitar dynamic and then to adjust the amp controls at various settings. Preferably both methods however either method would be more time consuming on its own and magnified in combination.

 

[Lysander]

These tests basically demonstrate nothing other than various solutions can be dialed in to have a similar sound with a neutral playing sample through the same IR.

...yes?

I mean, isn't that the point of modelers?

 

[laxu]

Yup. Or the same IR at the end which acts as a massive Filter.

I mean, in the real world would a Dual Rec be paired with Marshall Basketweave loaded with Greenbacks,
or a Marshall Superlead be paired with a V30 loaded Mesa Rectifier Cab?? Probably not.

A real cab acts as a massive filter in exactly the same way. Take the same cab and run for example a modeler to it and you will find a lot of your amp models sound more similar to each other.

I had a Victory VC35 at one point and was disappointed how it did not get that "Voxyness" through my 4x10 with Greenbacks but when I paired it with a 1x12 with an Alnico Gold it sounded godlike.

 

[Gearzilla]

...yes?

I mean, isn't that the point of modelers?

No, unless that’s just the point of them for someone.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

OK, so what's a good dynamic riff or song I can do a kind of "cover" of?

I had a quick think and skim of some playlists for inspiration. Everything that comes to mind for me, is either using pedals, lots of processing, blending/layering tones, lots of reverb or any combination of these. When I'm jamming along with stuff (say Wet Leg/Fontaines DC/The Black Angles) I'm thinking theres absolutely no way anyone would know or care what this tone was made with, and its all about its role within the song. I think to do any kind of test that people won't complain about, it would need to be dry, exposed and not layered too much with other guitars or instruments. And it has to have some gain, but not too much. Which is really just getting more and more niche.

I'm not saying this is the "dynamic" test, but its a totally different genre and style of tone to my other (or what Sonic Drive Jon would do in) comparisons or blind tests. Gain is lower, more power amp distortion, less highgain+V30 type tone. I didnt spend long on it, just ripped off a Black Angels song quickly.

Some are real amps, some are digital. Yes they have reverb/delay. Yes its in a mix. Theres no EQ or compression on the guitars, just amp+IR+Reverb/Delay. So still less processed than what you'd hear on any recording. FX are consistent across all of them. I didn't try to make them sound the same, I don't have enough amps that do this kind of thing to do it fairly, and besides, this is just about real or emulation, not how accurate these specific models are to their real counterparts. Do the real amps posses any qualities that reveal themselves that the emulations don't?

BLIND TEST

Listen to audio losslessly with Samply.app

samply.app

For this one, for each example say if it’s real amp or emulation.

 

[Gearzilla]

Do the real amps posses any qualities that reveal themselves that the emulations don't?

I haven’t listened to your new clips.

(IMO)There are times when a plug-in can yield superior recording results to an amp, and vice versa.

I use the various types of technology, and not invested in an outcome. As a matter of opinion I believe in general to analyze if there are differences in the dynamic capability(the response) of different amps/hardware modelers/plugins is something best done in person by an end user because of the numerous variables that can take place while playing— I alluded to a subset of some of them in an earlier post.

Differences may present or not depending on the circumstances.

However I do believe the ABX blind test format is interesting/useful for audio comparisons.

I think the most important thing overall is whether someone can get to the results they want with whichever technology. Preferred method being something that varies among people.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

(IMO)There are times when a plug-in can yield superior recording results to an amp, and vice versa.

I agree that either can yield better results but it’s not really to do whether they sound digital or analog as much as whether it’s the RIGHT tone for the song.

My job is as a mixing engineer, and these days it’s predominately pop and dance stuff. On the pop stuff, I think almost EVERY guitar track I get is using the most basic stock amp sims in plugins. Even from some of the most talented producers and musicians I’ve worked with, it’s almost definitely a DI+amp sims and tons of processing on top. If it inspires an idea and suits the song, they’ll just manipulate it to what they need and move on.

Could they sound “better”? absolutely, but there’s no point changing it when the song is built around them.

I still work with some bands and do recording in other genres. When I track guitars, it’s always real amps and I approach it differently. I don’t really care either way, it’s the end result that matters and you just do what you have to do to get there. I don’t really think there is a tone modellers can’t do, but to get there isn’t always very fun or creatively satisfying. If it works in the song, then no one is thinking about how it was recorded.

Curious if anyone is up for taking part in the latest test, or whether it’s just an absolute waste of time. I get baffled by claims (like I had the other day) that modelling is just inferior to the real thing. I think there’s so much other stuff that’s actually important than how you land on a tone

 

[la szum]

Try pairing a Dual Rec with a basketweave with Greenies

I earned a touche' and you are right on point with this, JT. Guess what kind of Cab/IR is included
with Devin's GOT Bundle?

Yup. That's the one.

 

[JiveTurkey]

I earned a touche' and you are right on point with this, JT. Guess what kind of Cab/IR is included
with Devin's GOT Bundle?

Yup. That's the one.

 

[Holden Afart]

Damn, you got me. I never  ever get these wrong.

I used my phone and when first listening I did think it could be D but then I heard the rest and thought it was probably F or G so I voted F.

As for how to properly set the amp and models. Wouldn't a spectrum analyzer be the best way? Match up all the frequencies as close as can be then make the clips. Or as someone else mentioned, just use the same model for them all and see how many people are certain that the amp is clip "X".

 

[MirrorProfiles]

OMG

 

[spawnofthesith]

lolz

 

[MirrorProfiles]

“D had an openness to the mids that the others lacked. It didn’t have the nasty fizz the others did, and the upper mid saturation sounded more real”

So there we have it.

 

[spawnofthesith]

I'm a tube snob and I think A sounded the best, so

I didn't listen til after the reveal, but with knowing the answer I can hear some things that might point to D being the real amp (dare I say though, not necessarily good things?)

I don't think I would have picked out D before knowing the answer though

 

[Elric]

Let me just add that if anyone re-listening to the first video now after knowing the results and starting to hear things, it's 100% bias.

Agree. I took care to vote without listening to/watching any of the videos since I wanted to ensure no input of any kind was biasing my vote.

 

[paisleywookiee]

Which one’s the Neural Quad Kotex, so I can hate on it?

 

[pipelineaudio]

Ladies and gentlemen, The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy

 

[Orvillain]

Funny that I'm turning into a Fractal fanboi and disliking my Helix.... and in this shootout I hated the FM-3 and thought the Helix was the real amp. lmaoooo!