Pick the real amp out from the emulations

[MirrorProfiles]

To be frank, that sounds like the sound is being sent down a plastic vacuum hose that's being swung around overhead. Blending the two mics on the cab seems to be the biggest part of the problem.

seems to be a pretty important part of the original tone to me, both in how it sounds on record and also based on the information from the recording sessions (from the sound on sound article):

I’m not 100% sure what amp was used, but I don’t think I’ve heard of them using 800’s on this album. I found some interviews where they said they used Rob Cavallo’s 100W Super Leads - would make sense as it sounds like they were still skint enough to be cycling to the studio every day when making the album, and they were using some Gallien Kruegers prior to this album.

There’s also their “Dookie Mod” amps that are modded super leads. They end up pretty close to an 800 circuit but with their own character. I sort of prefer stock 800’s personally.

before we get lost in the realm of swirly garden hose phasey hell, shall I reveal the results of the AC/DC comparison? I think there are those who realise basically no one can tell and those who won’t change their mind regardless (and will only share their thoughts once I’ve shared what they are).

 

[MirrorProfiles]

right well I may as well reveal the results of the AC/DC test. I believe I had 6 people respond (across here, another forum and some friends on facebook). Unless I missed anything, I don't believe anyone made their guesses with any confidence and it was generally a preference on a particular tone as the deciding factor. Absolutely fine, and nice to have you all take part.

The guesses I had were:

F
H
B
D
C
G

and I think most people actually said their answer as "____ or ____" so, each person's guesses with 2 options were

F & J
H & J
B & I
I & D
C & J
G & D

so fairly scattered around, with J being quite popular (as a 2nd choice), although with more people taking part it could easily average out.

----------------------------------------------------

A=Softube Silver Jubilee
B=Neural DSP Nolly Amp 2 (2203)
C=Amplitube JH Gold (JTM100)
D=Amplitube 8000 (2203)
E=Helix P75
F=mic'd amp (Marshall Jubilee 50W, EVH 4x12 cab, AT4050 in fig8, Chandler TG-2)
G=Helix Brit Trem Jumped
H=Real amp, same reamp as F but using an amp DI and an IR of that setup.
I=Amplitube Jubilee
J=Helix Plexi Bright

To correctly identify the real amp, you'd need to have heard something in F AND H that the others didn't have. I found it interesting that no one heard that these 2 sound essentially identical, and also that the mic'd tone didn't stand out in any way compared to the IR. If anyone wants the IR PM me and I'll send it over.

 

[Lysander]

right well I may as well reveal the results of the AC/DC test. I believe I had 6 people respond (across here, another forum and some friends on facebook). Unless I missed anything, I don't believe anyone made their guesses with any confidence and it was generally a preference on a particular tone as the deciding factor.

Yup, exact same outcome for me this time around. I could easily live with any of those tones, and if you swapped them in and out in real time i'd be hard pressed to even notice a change.

I was kinda shocked to find out my favorite (J) was the Helix Plexi Bright and my least favorite (B) was B NDSP's Nolly Crunch. I have used Neural plugins in the past and really enjoyed their sound every time.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

I was kinda shocked to find out my favorite (J) was the Helix Plexi Bright and my least favorite (B) was B NDSP's Nolly Crunch. I have used Neural plugins in the past and really enjoyed their sound every time.

I wouldn't draw too many conclusions of each one - they all have a wide range of how they can be dialled in and I think can sound equally great. Just so happens that for this test, with this IR, with how I dialled it on that particular day you preferred a different one. I often surprise myself when I'll include something I don't use often and end up liking it more than I'd expect.

 

[Lysander]

I often surprise myself when I'll include something I don't use often and end up liking it more than I'd expect.

Yeah. I also really liked Amplitube here, and i never gelled with that plugin in real life.

 

[jay mitchell]

To correctly identify the real amp, you'd need to have heard something in F AND H that the others didn't have.

Not necessarily. There can be a difference between a real amp/cab with a mic front of it and an amp recorded through an IR. That difference comes from room cues in the mic'ed sound that are absent from the IR. No matter how close you place the mic to the cab, an audible portion of the acoustic environment will remain. The way to compensate for that, which I successfully implemented almost nine years ago here: IR Demos: Convolver Content, is to use an IR that was acquired in the same mic position and that is long enough to capture all audible room cues. This is always longer than hardware modelers can accommodate, so you will have to convolve the IR somewhere downstream of the modeler. FYI, 500ms is usually too short. The demo referenced above used an IR that was originally 1.5 seconds long, shortening it by varying amounts in different clips for comparison with the mic'ed recording.

I found it interesting that no one heard that these 2 sound essentially identical,

They don't. See above. No matter what you do, you can't eliminate room cues from a close-mic'ed recording. Shortening an IR captured at the same location as the mic you use to record a clip will remove at least some of those cues, and the difference can be audible. To bring it out, play a loud chord and cut it off abruptly with your palm. The mic'ed recording will have residual sounds after the cutoff, whereas an IR of a length that a modeler can convolve will not. I've successfully identified the "real amp/cab" (see: Atomic Amplifire vs Boutique Tube Amp for one example) in demos using this property alone.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

CBA to make a new thread for this kind of tedious bollocks so here begins a new instalment.

Just sort of carrying over from my experiments with custom architecture on NAM last night. This morning I was a bit curious if I could get there faster with conventional modelling. This isn't so much about "PICK THE REAL AMP OUT" as much as "is there much to be gained by making custom NAM models".

I planned on including the AxeFX but honestly it's just too tedious to dial in. The model is good but you have to get your hands dirty way more than with other emulations. Going back and forth dialling it in, reamping, listening in stereo, tweaking and reamping again=not worth it. The others were all fairly minimum fuss (either just training a model or spending less than 5 minutes adjusting knobs).

I included NAM standard, NAM xSTD, ToneX, Helix, STL Amphub and the real amp (not in that order).

 

[Orvillain]

CBA to make a new thread for this kind of tedious bollocks so here begins a new instalment.

Just sort of carrying over from my experiments with custom architecture on NAM last night. This morning I was a bit curious if I could get there faster with conventional modelling. This isn't so much about "PICK THE REAL AMP OUT" as much as "is there much to be gained by making custom NAM models".

I planned on including the AxeFX but honestly it's just too tedious to dial in. The model is good but you have to get your hands dirty way more than with other emulations. Going back and forth dialling it in, reamping, listening in stereo, tweaking and reamping again=not worth it. The others were all fairly minimum fuss (either just training a model or spending less than 5 minutes adjusting knobs).

I included NAM standard, NAM xSTD, ToneX, Helix, STL Amphub and the real amp (not in that order).

I'll give proper feedback, but from the off... 'F' is clearly a load of old wobbly cockwang.

 

[Orvillain]

A has a grit to it that I don't like.

My order of preference: C, B, D, E.

F and A suck cock.

 

[jellodog]

F and A suck cock.

So that's a bad thing now?

 

[Orvillain]

So that's a bad thing now?

Do you really want Helix Native crawling out of your PCMasterRace RGB tower, like the girl from The Ring, and rubbing its sliders all over your booty??? Be serious, Joe.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

I included NAM standard, NAM xSTD, ToneX, Helix, STL Amphub and the real amp (not in that order).

Any thoughts @Deadpan ?

Think the little NAM architecture tweaks narrowed the gap quite nicely here.

BTW, if any AxeFX users have more patience than me and fancy trying to match the tone with the Uberschall model i’m happy to send the IR and DI (and amp reference files).

 

[Chocol8]

Do you really want Helix Native crawling out of your PCMasterRace RGB tower, like the girl from The Ring, and rubbing its sliders all over your booty??? Be serious, Joe.

Before or after tequila?

 

[Orvillain]

Before or after tequila?

She's got nothing to do with this.

 

[Deadpan]

Any thoughts @Deadpan ?

Think the little NAM architecture tweaks narrowed the gap quite nicely here.

BTW, if any AxeFX users have more patience than me and fancy trying to match the tone with the Uberschall model i’m happy to send the IR and DI (and amp reference files).

It is hard to tell which is which. I feel like D is the real amp with the others varying degrees of slightly different. For me much of the difference is also in the feel when playing.

It's like when I plug into two different versions of a pedal. I feel certain there is a difference, but when I reamp they are nearly identical as I take the guitar interaction out of the equation.

 

[Orvillain]

I feel like D is the real amp with the others varying degrees of slightly different.

Genuine question - you don't hear any drastic/radical/emphatic differences??? It is all just subtle to you???

 

[Deadpan]

Genuine question - you don't hear any drastic/radical/emphatic differences??? It is all just subtle to you???

I mean, there are definitely differences beyond being brighter or darker. Like note definition and roughness of the grain. It's hard to tell which is which.

 

[Orvillain]

I mean, there are definitely differences beyond being brighter or darker. Like note definition and roughness of the grain. It's hard to tell which is which.

Yeah for sure. That's the problem with A/B stuff, you can detect differences, but you can't always say which is which device. Because you're robbed of context. I can't always say which is Kemper and which is the real amp, but I can nearly always say there are differences, and then articulate why and how I'm spotting them.

For me, I heard significant differences with A, F, and then C, B, D, E... as a group, those four seemed more related. But A and F really jumped out as not being the same, and also being drastically different from each other too.

 

[riffy]

I also can discern differences between the sounds. But, I have no clue what is what. I mean, that’s just a testament to how good that they are. Any of them can be used in just about any context. It just depends upon the other instrumentation that it’s either supporting or leading.

 

[[Nathan]]

Dont mean to hijack but I also dont want to make a dedicated thread for a quick test. I'm in the middle of an amp shootout video and this is the real amp vs NAM switching on the bars. If I hadn't said anything I doubt anyone would be able to pick the switching. Even when I squint to hear the difference its extremely miniscule stuff. I tried out the xSTD captures as well as the standard ones and the xSTD came out a bit nicer. I'll give all these away on Tone3000 when I get the video finished, I just thought this was pretty on the money here.