The Digital Doubt

[Eagle]

What does "forgiving" even mean? Correcting clams? Fixing bad time or intonation?

Ever owned a Bad cat? Or a Matchless. Or the feel difference between a typical Marshall and Friedman. If you haven’t experienced it you won’t know what I’m referring too.

 

[FuzzyAce]

What does "forgiving" even mean? Correcting clams? Fixing bad time or intonation?

I think tube amps can be a bit more "peaky" (dynamic) until you get them to a certain volume.
I notice this when using clean presets on a modeler through a FR cab. The tone is way more contained and leveled off somewhat, whereas a clean tube amp in the room at similar volume is much more dynamic and touchy for better or worse. It's dying to be turned up. I think when using distortion the line between the two becomes relative because the range is narrowed and compressed. Just ime.

 

[mercifulfuzziness]

The digital version of an amp is always more forgiving ime. You may or may not like that but neither is likely to make you a better player. Practicing dry may though.

Agreed. And since I killed of reverb I don’t even miss it.

 

[Eagle]

I think tube amps can be a bit more "peaky" (dynamic) until you get them to a certain volume.
I notice this when using clean presets on a modeler through a FR cab. The tone is way more contained and leveled off somewhat, whereas a clean tube amp in the room at similar volume is much more dynamic and touchy for better or worse. It's dying to be turned up. I think when using distortion the line between the two becomes relative because the range is narrowed and compressed. Just ime.

This .
It’s the main reason that digital can’t do amp in the room and may never be able to unless fr fr gets a lot better in this area.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Graphs wouldn't lie.

 

[FuzzyAce]

This .
It’s the main reason that digital can’t do amp in the room and may never be able to unless fr fr gets a lot better in this area.

Yeah, and I'm not dissing modeler into FR, it's actually more comfortable to my ears in the room because it's less peaky. I can even turn the relative volume up higher because it's balanced.

 

[mercifulfuzziness]

Graphs wouldn't lie.

 

[FuzzyAce]

Yeah, and I'm not dissing modeler into FR, it's actually more comfortable to my ears in the room because it's less peaky. I can even turn the relative volume up higher because it's balanced.

But, I will say that turning off the speaker IR and just running into the FR directly gives a bit more range, and I like that too. The FR10 sounds good like that.

 

[AFKAEjay(retired)]

Why can’t you trust your ears?

We are complex, we are different. I don’t doubt digital, I doubt myself.

To me these are the key drivers for getting stuck in knob twisting.

You can’t trust your ears…fact..will never be resolved untill you start to use reference audio/sounds.
The human ear is good at A/B ing stuff…when you do so using trusted sources, you get better results.
Comparing sound A to B, of which none is one that has “proof of the pudding” that it works…no use at all.
I can play sound A and love it, switch to B and hate it for 30 seconds, then love it, and dislike A when I switch back…that’s how fast ears get used to stuff.

3 things that keep me away from endless tone search:
- It doesn’t matter all that much in the end. Mike Stern, Mancuso, players I love to listen to…but I really don’t like their sounds (chorus…jek). I’ve never turned away from a player cause of their sound.

- In live settings, the only bars I set are 1/am I comfortable 2/can I get it “in the mix”.

- Recording: I simply record DI signals, and use a plugin or reamp later. While recording all I need is “adequate”…that takes “the perfect sound” out of the list of conditions to start doing something…and I get more things done.

 

[jay mitchell]

Ever owned a Bad cat? Or a Matchless. Or the feel difference between a typical Marshall and Friedman. If you haven’t experienced it you won’t know what I’m referring too.

If you can't provide a good description of the term "forgiving" beyond simply dropping brand names, I've got to wonder if you really "know what I’m referring too (sic)."

A little context: I've owned a pretty wide variety of tube amps over the past 56 years, including multiple Marshalls and Fenders. I've played even more - e.g., Hiwatt, Acoustic, Ampeg, Sunn, Music Man, Mesa - for long enough periods of time to become familiar with their sound and feel. I'm knowledgeable enough about tube amp design to have developed modifications targeted at altering the sound and feel, and I've on occasion performed those mods on customer amps.

Having said that, I'll add that I haven't the slightest interest in owning a Bad Cat or Matchless. OTOH, I do have intimate experience with the difference between a stock Marshall and the same amp with additional gain stages and tone shaping from mods I developed and performed.

I'll repeat my request that you elaborate on precisely what you mean by "forgiving."

 

[Eagle]

It depends what you measure.
Two things the same that you plot and ten things you don’t. Digital is not the same and can’t be is just a fact. Horses for courses play what you enjoy.
The only thing I critique about digital is in comparison with the analog equipment it is supposed to replicate. In this regard it lacks the feel and dynamic regardless of how you amplify it. Will the audience know? No so it’s only about you. But if someone tells you a digital version of an amp or pedal is exactly the same they are just lying, probably to themselves too.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

This .
It’s the main reason that digital can’t do amp in the room and may never be able to unless fr fr gets a lot better in this area.

”I can’t figure out why this IR captured with a mic a couple inches from a speaker doesn’t lead to the same sound as the speaker played in an open room. I just need a better "FRFR"”.

 

[jay mitchell]

I think tube amps can be a bit more "peaky" (dynamic) until you get them to a certain volume.

To my ears, that's a bug, not a feature. If I'm looking for uncompressed ("peaky"), I want it to be there at any volume I need to play. Ditto more compressed ('smoother"). Tube amps have issues with both of those.

I notice this when using clean presets on a modeler through a FR cab.

That's not at all a necessary result of using a modeler.

The tone is way more contained and leveled off somewhat,

Then your modeler is dialed to match the sound of a louder amp, but you're playing it at a lower volume. If you really want your modeler to sound like the tube amp at low volume, try decreasing master volume and sag and increasing "damping" (i.e., negative feedback) in the modeler's amp block.

whereas a clean tube amp in the room at similar volume is much more dynamic and touchy for better or worse.

If you really want that but can't make your modeler do exactly the same thing, then there's a deficiency in your modeler, the preset you're using, and/or your monitoring solution.

 

[jay mitchell]

But if someone tells you a digital version of an amp or pedal is exactly the same they are just lying, probably to themselves too.

Broad generalizations are always false. If somebody tells me that I can't make "a digital version of an amp or pedal" sound the same, they are speaking from abject ignorance, of which they are probably completely unaware.

 

[Eagle]

If you can't provide a good description of the term "forgiving" beyond simply dropping brand names, I've got to wonder if you really "know what I’m referring too (sic)."

A little context: I've owned a pretty wide variety of tube amps over the past 56 years, including multiple Marshalls and Fenders. I've played even more - e.g., Hiwatt, Acoustic, Ampeg, Sunn, Music Man, Mesa - for long enough periods of time to become familiar with their sound and feel. I'm knowledgeable enough about tube amp design to have developed modifications targeted at altering the sound and feel, and I've on occasion performed those mods on customer amps.

Having said that, I'll add that I haven't the slightest interest in owning a Bad Cat or Matchless. OTOH, I do have intimate experience with the difference between a stock Marshall and the same amp with additional gain stages and tone shaping from mods I developed and performed.

I'll repeat my request that you elaborate on precisely what you mean by "forgiving."

Digital amps are more compressed feeling even when they don’t sound that way . Far more generic feel across similar but subtly different amp models, less touch sensitive. They sound smaller in the room and you can feel the latency in some platforms sufficiently to feel detached .
These things are lessening the fine nuances in your playing for good and bad. These are small differences but they matter to some people.
Most of this is only apparent to the player.

 

[Eagle]

Broad generalizations are always false. If somebody tells me that I can't make "a digital version of an amp or pedal" sound the same, they are speaking from abject ignorance, of which they are probably completely unaware.

Sound the same yes, feel the same no. Model every interaction in anything analog? No because it is everything that makes a difference.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Digital amps are more compressed feeling even when they don’t sound that way

Graphs don't lie. Graphs where?

 

[mercifulfuzziness]

Digital amps are more compressed feeling even when they don’t sound that way . Far more generic feel across similar but subtly different amp models, less touch sensitive. They sound smaller in the room and you can feel the latency in some platforms sufficiently to feel detached .
These things are lessening the fine nuances in your playing for good and bad. These are small differences but they matter to some people.
Most of this is only apparent to the player.

If this is true (and I don’t know) why was there a lot of people saying in the “dynamics” thread that there isn’t any difference?

This is the difference I was wondering about.

And no, for me it doesn’t really matter, I think. But it might be better for beginner - intermediate to experience all this so if you ever go over to “the real deal” you won’t have to come to the conclusion you have learned some techniques “wrong”.

This probably al doesn’t make any sense if that’s the case, let me ramble.

It won’t change my set up for now

 

[FuzzyAce]

To my ears, that's a bug, not a feature. If I'm looking for uncompressed ("peaky"), I want it to be there at any volume I need to play. Ditto more compressed ('smoother"). Tube amps have issues with both of those.

That's not at all a necessary result of using a modeler.

Then your modeler is dialed to match the sound of a louder amp, but you're playing it at a lower volume. If you really want your modeler to sound like the tube amp at low volume, try decreasing master volume and sag and increasing "damping" (i.e., negative feedback) in the modeler's amp block.

If you really want that but can't make your modeler do exactly the same thing, then there's a deficiency in your modeler, the preset you're using, and/or your monitoring solution.

It sounds like you are trying to say they can be equal. The pre amp, PI, output tubes/transformer/speaker relationship have a real -- in the moment energy. A modeler is just aiming to recreate the best qualities of that relationship. You can't tell me they will feel the same, it's not really possible. But that's completely OK. They don't have to be the same.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

It sounds like you are trying to say they can be equal. The pre amp, PI, output tubes/transformer/speaker relationship have a real -- in the moment energy. A modeler is just aiming to recreate the best qualities of that relationship. You can't tell me they will feel the same, it's not really possible. But that's completely OK. They don't have to be the same.

The relationship is super predictable though? Its not like trying to predict weather patterns, or even a projectile's path in a moderately windy environment.

If you are running the modeler through something other than the same speaker cabinet you are running the amp through, then of course you're always going to fail - though Jay might come very very close given the very unique IRs that he has captured of some of his cabinets. And of course you need a power amp that is up to the task.

If you are playing the amp and the modeler at different volumes, of course its going to feel and sound different.

Assuming you are doing the above, and the amp you are using is one that is modeled in your modeler, you still have two hurdles left: (1). how close to the amp that was modeled is the amp you are playing, really? (2). On a non-master volume amp you've got a volume knob. On a model of that amp you have a master volume knob and a volume knob and then an output level from the amp block (and likely at least one more master output knob for the modeler) -- so gain staging the "modeled amp" the same way the amp itself is gain staged so that its accurately modeling what the amp is doing while also volume matching is...hard.

All of this is to say: if the exercise is to get a modeler to sound exactly like an amp you own and enjoy playing...that is a whole lot of work. You SHOULD be able to get really, really close...close enough for plenty of people not to notice a difference, even when playing. But...what's the point? "Hey, I'm playing a different thing at the same volume as this other thing that I already own and they sound the same!!!"

However, someone making super broad blanket statements that every digital model of every amp is inherently more compressed than the amp even if you can't hear it when that same person somehow thinks that a modeler should be run through an "FRFR" speaker in an attempt to sound like a guitar amp that is playing in the same room through a guitar cab is equally dumb. And not because digital fanboys are butt hurt, but because it leads people like merciful who has little to no experience playing through amps to start endless threads gnashing teeth over whether their at-home playing experience is somehow compromised by anything other than monitor, volume and skill limitations.