The Digital Doubt

[Orvillain]

I still battle with this balance of convenience vs satisfaction. It’s SO EASY to load in with only a guitar and backpack, it’s just frequently not very inspiring to actually PLAY that way.

Yah agreed bigly.

You know what I actually think has a lot of potential - the TC Plethora. Because of its WYSIWYG nature, the fact that you don't need to fuck around saving presets or naming anything, and you get a very bog standard set of controls.... but it sounds pretty decent.

Modifying your 'board' on that thing is like.. switch to edit mode.. select the effect you want to edit... turn the 3 control knobs... switch to another effect... do the same... switch to play mode.

 

[mercifulfuzziness]

Oddly enough, people tend to hang out on gear forums to talk about gear. Jazz guitar online has some talk about gear, but a lot more about actual jazz guitar playing.

It's not weird, of course. But there is also a playing and technique sub forum. Less time is spend there.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Someone at the FAS forum the other day described carrying a gig bag and another bag with an FM3 in it torture. This is where we are with gear today. I have to tap out at that level of entitlement.

 

[EOengineer]

Someone at the FAS forum the other day described carrying a gig bag and another bag with an FM3 in it torture. This is where we are with gear today. I have to tap out at that level of entitlement.

“I suppose I have to fret my own notes now too, huh???”

Lame.

 

[JasonE]

I forgot to mention that I have a couple of other ideas that I bought gear to try at some point.

I bought a Two Notes CAB M+ a few years ago, a little while before the Opus came out. My thought there was to put this at the end of my pedalboard and try to use that as a direct solution. It tested well at home but I have not had the opportunity to try it in a live scenario.

The other solution is the Friedman IR-D. That replaces some of the pedals and makes things a good bit smaller for me. It has also tested very well at home but I haven't had the chance to try it live. This may be the best solution for me for a live silent rig. It replaces my drive and boost pedals. All I really need along with it are the reverb and delay pedals and a tuner. I may use one drive pedal ahead of it to push it for some tones.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

Someone at the FAS forum the other day described carrying a gig bag and another bag with an FM3 in it torture. This is where we are with gear today. I have to tap out at that level of entitlement.

We are only a couple years away from “NO BUILT-IN BATTERY?!?!?!? Pffffft” territory.

 

[EOengineer]

We are only a couple years away from “NO BUILT-IN BATTERY?!?!?!? Pffffft” territory.

At some point we’re going to be carrying around mini nuclear reactors for our pedalboards.

 

[mercifulfuzziness]

For the not recording folks, what keeps you from getting a tube amp, played on low volume?
Or is almost 99% of this forum gigging and recording artists?

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

For the not recording folks, what keeps you from getting a tube amp, played on low volume?
Or is almost 99% of this forum gigging and recording artists?

Because I have found the right modelers to sound better and to offer more flexibility.

 

[Enchilada Jones]

I'm curious how this works out for you in the long run though -- do you now have to buy a new profile pack as soon as this one gets "old" in order to get inspired? Do you need a new sound to spark creativity?

I get the bit about sound being inspiring, and that certain types of sounds can send our creativity in a particular direction -- picking up my tele does often lead to me creating something different than I would if I picked up my 335 and vice versa. And of course occasionally doing an amp model tone tasting in the AxeFx can inspire my playing into a different direction than my main preset would have taken me.

But on a Joe average day what I'm looking for is a base preset that I plug my guitar into that I find to be consistently inspiring every time I plug in to play. I have two of those for my tele (which could easily be combined into one with channels, but I'm lazy and don't need to do that) and I've got one that I use with my 335 (which is just a slightly tweaked version of one of my tele presets). These are the first three presets on my unit and amount to my version of "just plug into a couple of pedals and amp and go!" set up.

I don't 'need' a new sound to spark creativity, although they do usually provide, but when I feel like I'm without any inspiration I turn to foreign territory to get inspiration.
Considering how long I've been using digital devices for amp simulation (at least since the original POD) I'd say I've purchased very few.
I probably have 5 plugin apps and have bought maybe 10 to 15 total of capture/profile/preset/ir packs.

I find I can't live without the convenience of digital because. I want to have presets of the sounds I can call up quickly. Every modeler or Profile/capture device I've owned I end up with about 10 'go to' amp sounds largely based on Fender Deluxe and Twin Reverbs, Marshall Plexi and Vox Ac30. Then I have about 10 others like Supro, Morgan, Mesa that I have.

I found that if I go to Profiles and Captures I spend much less time curating and maintaining the list than If Im using a modeler. It isn't proof of one platform being superior over the other. It's proof to me that I benefit from the restriction. No time spent tweaking a 'go to' preset/amp only to not save it because in my heart I know the original saved version was the base version I want to preserve.

I got to this state by stumbling upon a process that I think every player who doesn't use it could benefit from.

Put on a backing track or loop a chord progression then start playing along using factory presets that suck, captures, profiles...whatever.
I found that what sucks in the vacuum of your room alone doesn't always suck in a mix. With no mix of instruments we (maybe just some of us) tend to try and fill the full frequency spectrum with an amp sound before we play. No room for anything left after that and we get to the point we have only one sound. That is building the characteristic of 'boring' into the sound. It is hard to be inspired when you subconsciously also think you are making a boring sound from the first note.

You can also do this with impulse responses, what sucks doesn't always suck.
As an example I used to wonder why people liked so many Silver Jubilee presets that I hated until I did this.

So a new path to inspiration was unlocked. Take a sound that is acceptable to someone else even though it doesn't sound like 'your base favorite' and put it to use. Most of the time the process of putting it use in a way that you can accept it also gets you playing something fresh and worthy.
For me the path to inspiration is found faster with the limitations of picking a capture/profile/etc and not have access to the minutiae.
With a selection from a couple good authors of profiles/captures I can get quickly into my base sounds and explore beyond as needed rarely reaching for the tone stack or gain knobs and never reaching for deeper parameters.

 

[mbenigni]

We are only a couple years away from “NO BUILT-IN BATTERY?!?!?!? Pffffft” territory.

I've seen the future and I've left it behind.

 

[mbenigni]

Haven't read most of this thread, but as far as the point in the OP re: not trusting one's own ears goes... my main issue with modeling has always been, "Is this too much gain?" It was true ~25 years ago and it remains true today: modeled amps offer the option (or sometimes it's not even optional LOL) of a shit ton of gain at relatively low volumes, and this can really confuse your approach to your guitar tone. Recently I've started intentionally cutting back on gain in hopes of sounding more "authentic"... probably overdoing it... and then wrestling with parts because I don't have enough sustain. (Note: I don't typically play at a zillion dB like they did back in the day.) And round and round.

 

[Shredder777]

And because my brain is just not capable of planning this all out and approaching it in a logical and methodical way, I end up sorta spinning my wheels and wasting time. It isn't the Axe FX's fault... it is entirely a me thing. But when I have a DD3, DD8, RV5, and MXR Reverb... right there on the floor in front of me... alongside the actual Mark V footswitch unit... there's just no fucking about, nothing goes wrong, and I get speed, I get reliability, and I get ease of use.

This is why I use a G11 as my mfx. And why I just bought a 5150 instead of a ToneX pedal.

The use case for a complicated hardware processor that relies on a PC editor is diminishing.

When you are producing on computer, use plugins. When you are playing live, use pedals.

Afaict, PC profiling apps and effects ecosystems like ToneX/Amplitube, Namm, Genome, etc sound just as credible and realistic as the Fractal, but they are ITB, so no worry about routing or reamping.

 

[JasonE]

Haven't read most of this thread, but as far as the point in the OP re: not trusting one's own ears goes... my main issue with modeling has always been, "Is this too much gain?" It was true ~25 years ago and it remains true today: modeled amps offer the option (or sometimes it's not even optional LOL) of a shit ton of gain at relatively low volumes, and this can really confuse your approach to your guitar tone. Recently I've started intentionally cutting back on gain in hopes of sounding more "authentic"... probably overdoing it... and then wrestling with parts because I don't have enough sustain. (Note: I don't typically play at a zillion dB like they did back in the day.) And round and round.

I agree with you on the too much gain. That has been my experience as well. I have to dial the gain way back. This was something I noticed when comparing models of the amp I use against the real amp. The models have a lot more gain on tap than the amp can actually do. The amount of gain in the models also negatively affects the dynamics of them when compared to the amp as well.

 

[jellodog]

There's something to be said about having a minimalist setup. Often times those limits force us to create rather than get distracted with tweaking. Back in the mid to late 90's all I used live was a clean amp and 2-3 pedals max, and was quite happy.

Funnily enough, that's why I've been enjoying the "crippled" NC

 

[Sascha Franck]

For the not recording folks, what keeps you from getting a tube amp, played on low volume?

Nothing is keeping me from getting a tube amp. I still own two of them, one working extremely well at low volumes. They're still collecting dust because I simply prefer the incredible comfort of dealing with the same set of sounds under any conditions. Which is simply impossible with a tube amp.

 

[laxu]

For the not recording folks, what keeps you from getting a tube amp, played on low volume?

The fact that it doesn't sound any better than a modeler, or pedals into a clean amp, when played at low volume.

My experience is that I need around 90 dB @ 1m volumes, preferably closer to 95 dB, before I'm happy with the sound I'm getting from a traditional tube amp through guitar speakers. The lower the volume needs to go, the bigger compromise it becomes.

A lot of the fun is in playing a bit louder, which for many goes against what they can get away with at home.

For me the BluGuitar Amp 1 ME serves the purpose of a tube amp. It sounds/feels like one, but it can travel in a backpack if needed and is very simple to work with. It has its quirks, but it's the one piece of gear that I've been very happy using.

 

[Jarick]

This is something I’ve been seeing pop up more often lately-

“I prefer IR’s to a moveable virtual mic because I don’t question my choices when I find an IR I like”

“Too many options leaves me feeling like I have to utilize them and cause me to doubt my choice when I didn’t”

“I prefer captures/real amps to models because it makes me question my choices less”

I had a hunch that would have been a hot take until I saw people flat out saying it, in regard to capture/profile users wanting a choice to be made for them due to being unsure if they were doing it “right” or not. Obviously that’s not ALL capture users, but there’s certainly a percentage of them.

This is such an odd thing to me as there’s a myriad of ways to make ANYTHING sound like ass, while also being a bit sad to me that people get that concerned if they’re doing it “right” that they don’t even trust their own ears. Especially once you drill down on some of the statements, like the moveable mic vs IR……they’re both IR’s at the end of the day, if you liked on position with a moveable mic, chances are the IR selected is similar, so what makes that a “better” choice?

Anyone else seeing stuff like this or can relate to it?

Always trips me out a bit how modeling opened the world up for tones and instead of diving into it and just doing your thing, there are some that want the opposite and the choice to be removed for them. I’m very curious how much of that plays into complaints about Fractal units being too deep, or modeling complaints in general, where people are projecting their concerns/inability to make a decision on the modeler itself.

Maybe one way to look at it is different types of users. I'd start with two broad categories:

• Musicians, who are primarily concerned with playing the instrument, and mostly want the gear to stay out of their way
• Engineers, who are primarily concerned with making sounds, and want to maximize the functionality of the gear

The musician types come from a much simpler place and typically aren't going to want to dive into the details. There's a ton of people who only play acoustic guitar and their entire focus is technique, tone (from the hands), theory, and songwriting. They may have no interest in even what kinds of mics are used when recording. You can take that to the electric world too, people that will have a couple guitars, an amp, maybe a couple pedals using 9 volt batteries or a daisy chain. They don't want to get into the details, they want to turn up and play.

Flip side, the engineer types may LOVE getting into the weeds. Think of someone who is proficient with a DAW and all the ins and outs of plugins to mix a song. It's their job to know all the details and what to adjust to make the sound different to fit the overall mix. In this case they want all the options they can get, because it's going to give them flexibility. They want to move a virtual mic by two inches because the know how that will change the sound.

So the challenge is, can you make a device that fits both? Can you give enough options to make the engineer types happy while keeping it stupid simple for the musician types?

Here's a great example...David Brewster from Late Night Lessons. He can play his ass off, has tremendous tone from the hands, extremely clean player. He's extremely thoughtful and has a great ear. And here he's moving from his Behringer V-Amp to a Kemper Player. Without making too may assumptions, he's flipping through the rigs and listening to the changes and knows if it sounds good or not, but I don't think he cares much about the details like where is the definition setting, or is it a liquid profile, or should I set the EQ pre or post, etc.

 

[dk_ace]

Hm...

The way I use it, the FM9 isn’t harder to use than the tools I would use instead if I didn’t have a modeling rig.

I use fairly complex things, and I’m too spoiled to go back to tap dancing live. That means I’ve got to have a switching rig that gets programmed. My board will probably have to consist of some midi gear too to keep the physical size down. Managing all of that is going to be at least as complex and time consuming as the Fm9, probably moreso.

D

 

[DrewJD82]

Haven't read most of this thread, but as far as the point in the OP re: not trusting one's own ears goes... my main issue with modeling has always been, "Is this too much gain?" It was true ~25 years ago and it remains true today: modeled amps offer the option (or sometimes it's not even optional LOL) of a shit ton of gain at relatively low volumes, and this can really confuse your approach to your guitar tone. Recently I've started intentionally cutting back on gain in hopes of sounding more "authentic"... probably overdoing it... and then wrestling with parts because I don't have enough sustain. (Note: I don't typically play at a zillion dB like they did back in the day.) And round and round.

Yeah, the not trusting of one’s own ears was my bigger point more than why options can be a detriment. This was a great reply to that specific thing and I can certainly see that. Especially where the ability to crank a Master Volume without blowing out ear drums is a thing and I think a lot of people using component based modeling don’t pick up on a cranked MV playing as big of a role as it does.