Tube amps without cabs vs modeler

If you have a head with fx loop or line out, so you can run it with the master off. Or a load box for that matter the best headphone solution I found is preamp into KMA Endgame (since it has power amp sim and headphone out).
 
So my question is; Is it better to get a digital device (i.e. modeler or profiler) if I can only play with headphones / computer speakers? With tube amps, I need an attenuator for that, which isn't a problem per say, but will the sound be better with a modeler? Or will a tube + attenuator still feel/sound better even if I don't have a cab?
I'd just use a modeler. Good attenuators are expensive, and IMO don't do any better job than just using a good modeler.
 
I’ve looked at those ACE pedals before but never tried one. I’ve just pivoted from my Quad Cortex to a Marshall SV20 loaded into a Suhr reactive load with a pedal board build. Right now using the UA Ox Stomp for cab sims and it sounds better to me than any modeler I’ve used. I may give the ACE a try at some point. I think analog cab sims when done right sound better than IR’s but not found one I liked in pedal form which is what I need for the current setup.

I like the Suhr ACE. Sounds and feels great to me. I do think it benefits from an EQ that lets you get surgical with whatever frequencies you want, but I think that about pretty much everything, there's basically nothing I don't post EQ at least a little bit.

Try one, can't hurt!
 
I’ve heard a lot of good things about the Mic No Mo. I thought of giving it a go on the current build but trying to limit cables and hook ups. Still may give this and the ACE and try at some point.

I’m partly tempted to try the ACE. I’d also like to try a Palmer at some point. But another part of me thinks I should just stick with what’s working for me and not go looking for rabbit holes
 
99% of the time I'm using my Axe III thru headphones, and I can crank my amps any time I want. I'm mostly playing high-gain Mesa amp presets with wonderful-sounding stereo delays, and it sounds great, and inspiring enough that I play every day, some days for hours on end.
 
I’m partly tempted to try the ACE. I’d also like to try a Palmer at some point. But another part of me thinks I should just stick with what’s working for me and not go looking for rabbit holes
Me too. I’m going to roll with the OX stomp for now because it does more than just cabs with post eq, effects etc. Those features are handy and I don’t have room on the board to add and eq and come compression when needed
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the replies! My main worry was that not having a cab would somehow make having an amp "useless" by losing the "mojo" of having a real amp. Sounds like that's not the case, provided you have a good reactive load and a good cab emulator, be it analog or digital.
 
Thanks for all the replies! My main worry was that not having a cab would somehow make having an amp "useless" by losing the "mojo" of having a real amp. Sounds like that's not the case, provided you have a good reactive load and a good cab emulator, be it analog or digital.
Definitely not useless! I will say it may lose some mojo if you are looking for that 4x12 cranked amp magic. At the end of the day, if it's coming out of 8in studio monitors, it's not going to sound like an amp and 4x12.....but that goes for both analog and digital.
 
Definitely not useless! I will say it may lose some mojo if you are looking for that 4x12 cranked amp magic. At the end of the day, if it's coming out of 8in studio monitors, it's not going to sound like an amp and 4x12.....but that goes for both analog and digital.

Oh for sure, I agree!
 
I haven't yet had an opportunity to try the reactive load and IRs that came with the Mark VII; I'm sure I will, but I'm still in the honeymoon phase with speaker cabs, etc.

However, I've had good luck in the past with real amps and load boxes for some of the ad work I do. There are a lot of reasons it's pointless to go into, because we're all different, but for me the real amp + reactive load + IRs works more to my taste than modelers. YMMV, etc etc
 
Sonically I think they are really close just like everything always sounds really close. Feel is hard to quantify especially without a blind test. I.e. if you know which is which, you may want one to be better than the other and it "feels better".

However with the tube amp you aren't second guessing anything and you aren't over complicating anything. It's the real deal. And usually your options are stripped way down which can be a great thing.

Of course a good load box is essential. Actually a used Torpedo which you can find for $100 all day should be fine. But running guitar to amp to load box into a modeler for cab sim and post effects, or even into the computer for that stuff is just fine for home use.

I'm really intrigued by a Helix 4 cable setup with my Friedman JJ Junior and Suhr Reactive Load. Helix handles effects before and after the amp, cab sim, amp channel switching, and all the patch/snapshot configurations. Amp makes the tone.
 
If there’s a specific amplifier circuit that is your one and only true love, just buy that amp and a Suhr reactive load. If you need tons of tones, grab the modeler.

Maybe even just get the modeler anyway. Helix, AxeFx, Tonex…hard to go wrong in today’s market.

I wouldn't say that I only have one particular sound. I'm not in a band and I don't play live, I just play at home as a hobby, covering the bands and songs I enjoy. So I'd say my range of sounds can probably be covered with 5-6 amps. That said, part of this hobby (for me) is looking at which amps to buy, which pedals to buy, etc. Not having infinite room in my shelf requires me to be deliberate in which amps to get. Again, this is part of the hobby for me.

A modeler would of course give me access to infinite amounts more choices for far cheaper, but that also takes away from the process for me, causing me to not really feel any emotional connection to the choices of amp models. Having a digital model on the screen makes it feel almost.. like it's not even real. I don't know how to explain it. Coupled with the fact that I'm not enjoying sitting in front of the computer when dialing in or just chill playing makes me gravitate towards real amps still. I'm sure this is different for people that just see amps as a tool for their jobs.

That said, I still haven't found any tech in my city in my country and that part is quite scary. Maintenance requirements of real amps is probably the only thing (right now) that could make me go with the modeler route.

Sonically I think they are really close just like everything always sounds really close. Feel is hard to quantify especially without a blind test. I.e. if you know which is which, you may want one to be better than the other and it "feels better".

However with the tube amp you aren't second guessing anything and you aren't over complicating anything. It's the real deal. And usually your options are stripped way down which can be a great thing.

Of course a good load box is essential. Actually a used Torpedo which you can find for $100 all day should be fine. But running guitar to amp to load box into a modeler for cab sim and post effects, or even into the computer for that stuff is just fine for home use.

I'm really intrigued by a Helix 4 cable setup with my Friedman JJ Junior and Suhr Reactive Load. Helix handles effects before and after the amp, cab sim, amp channel switching, and all the patch/snapshot configurations. Amp makes the tone.

That's very true. I feel like many modelers expose a very large part of sound engineering that I'm not familiar or comfortable with. I'm a simple hobby guitarist, not a professional. Simplifying everything with limited options is perfect for me!

I currently have the Fryette Power Load IR. Not sure what the general consensus of that one is, I haven't heard that much reviews or talks in forums because Fryette's other units are more popular. I'm really interested in the Two Notes Torpedo Reload II, but might be overkill for my use case.
 
However with the tube amp you aren't second guessing anything and you aren't over complicating anything. It's the real deal. And usually your options are stripped way down which can be a great thing.
Yet by plugging a loadbox in, even a good one, you are changing how the amp behaves compared to a real cab. So you are introducing a different compromise compared to a modeler.
 
Yet by plugging a loadbox in, even a good one, you are changing how the amp behaves compared to a real cab. So you are introducing a different compromise compared to a modeler.
That's true.

It's a question of detail, and what you're into. Pick your poison. All this stuff is intensely personal, there's no right way or wrong way. You're the artist, you decide. If all you're doing is copying someone else, it kind of defeats the purpose.

So my preferred techniques aren't a prescription for anyone else. Just a description of what I do.

I find the sound of digitally-generated amp distortion like nails on a chalkboard. I have no idea why, I just don't like it. Speaker IRs and clean digital sounds don't bother me nearly as much.

Is that weird? Sure. I don't mind being weird. I'd concede the possibility of psychological bias of some kind, but usually I can tell if someone's sending me a digital track or a tube amp. I've been fooled, but it's been unusual.

However, my favorite recording techniques are a cab recorded with the mic back about 18" - 36" to capture more of what I hear in the room, instead of putting a mic on the grille; or a stereo pair using the N.O.S. technique developed by Dutch radio in the early days of stereo recording.

The above techniques aren't popular for miking guitars these days, but I like what I like. :rofl
 
Last edited:
Back
Top