Updated with Clips: Why is everyone so down on using lots of amp models at gigs?

[DrewJD82]

Ah, I was wondering why this was in the Modeling sub but asking about amps...

I suppose the quickest/most logical answer would be time. To get all the amps/presets level matched AND sounding great out of the PA would definitely take some time. I know for me, usually the last thing I want to do once I already have a song under my fingers is playing that song more, outside of band practice.

And most guys doing the cover band thing have gotten by making a single amp with 2 channels work, I think just carries over into the digital world, especially when you see how much of an issue people have with tweaking/UI's and menu diving.

If I were in a cover band with a lot of variety in the set, I'd most likely spend some time dialing in amps more specific to the songs if they differed that much from one to the other. I wouldn't play "Enter Sandman" with the same amp I'd use to play "Hotel California", that's for sure.....though I've seen it done a few times and it's never really a thumbs-up experience.

 

[Tito83]

I never had any issues using multiple amp types.

Now, multiple cab types? That I could never make work.

 

[Alex Kenivel]

"FRFR", I bought a modeler because I like jarring incongruent music

 

[TSJMajesty]

I'm not against that approach. I've always been a covers player, and back when I gigged, one of the main things that attracted me to the ADA MP-1 was that it was programmable, so I could dial in different tones for different songs, and it was MIDI-capable, so it could also switch effects along with preset changes.

I mainly bought an Axe Fx for the multi-effects thing, but if I ever gig again, I plan to use it to cover songs' varying tone styles, and use several different amp models.

 

[TSJMajesty]

And for those who claim switching amp models is jarring, I'd have to be in the audience to decide if I felt that to be the case. To me, it's just like listening to a DJ play different songs: Why not cover the tones as authentically as possible?

 

[TSJMajesty]

And here's another thought: Touring guitarists bring all sorts of different gear (well, they used to; not sure how many still do, but it doesn't affect my point) in order to faithfully recreate the tones they used on album X vs. album Y.

 

[TSJMajesty]

I wouldn't play "Enter Sandman" with the same amp I'd use to play "Hotel California", that's for sure.....though I've seen it done a few times and it's never really a thumbs-up experience.

I think that's the point. Use that Eagles patch also for Tom Petty or Tommy Tutone, and use the Metallica patch for them, Dream Theater and Alice in Chains.

Or, get more specific if yer nerdy like that. Long as it works out front, and doesn't detract from the music. I mean, if you're always tweaking presets, and wasting the band's time, and not covering your parts, then that's going too far, imo.

 

[HotRats]

I wouldn't play "Enter Sandman" with the same amp I'd use to play "Hotel California", that's for sure.....though I've seen it done a few times and it's never really a thumbs-up experience.

Would you join a band that has enter sandman and hotel California in the same setlist? LOL
That's the real question here

If you were a drummer would you play enter sandman and hotel california on the same drumset?

Live music is always a compromise compared to the recorded counterpart.

And for those who claim switching amp models is jarring, I'd have to be in the audience to decide if I felt that to be the case. To me, it's just like listening to a DJ play different songs: Why not cover the tones as authentically as possible?

The dj analogy is not correct, imo, because the dj simply feeds the pa with already mixed music.

In a band the guitar is just one of the elements that has to be blended with others in realtime by the sound guy.

 

[Lopp]

Would you join a band that has enter sandman and hotel California in the same setlist? LOL
That's the real question here

If you were a drummer would you play enter sandman and hotel california on the same drumset?

Live music is always a compromise compared to the recorded counterpart.

I'd be happy to play in a band that plays both and sounds good doing it.

The dj analogy is not correct, imo, because the dj simply feeds the pa with already mixed music.

In a band the guitar is just one of the elements that has to be blended with others in realtime by the sound guy.

As you mentioned, it is an analogy. The analogy is correct because an analogy only requires partial similarity. It compares things that are comparable in significant respects.

In the present case the "comparable significant respect" is playing different songs using different amps. The DJ feeds the PA with pre-mixed music, but it is still different songs using different amps. While a band is not pre-mixed, it would still be different songs using different amps. The end result is the same in that respect.

After the advent of modelers, I have witnessed some performers who used different patches with different amps to match the songs being played and it sounded great. I was always impressed with that attention to detail, as I wouldn't have the patience to set up all those patches and match the levels.

 

[TSJMajesty]

Would you join a band that has enter sandman and hotel California in the same setlist? LOL
That's the real question here

If you were a drummer would you play enter sandman and hotel california on the same drumset?

Live music is always a compromise compared to the recorded counterpart.

But just because it's not practical for a drummer to have more than 1 kit (but it has been done- Mike Portnoy, eg.), should we should regress to the lowest common denominator? I don't think so.

The dj analogy is not correct, imo, because the dj simply feeds the pa with already mixed music.

In a band the guitar is just one of the elements that has to be blended with others in realtime by the sound guy.

Ok, fair enough. But then again, he has all those knobs and sliders available... Does he just 'set it and forget it?' Of course not. Every time you change your sound, the mix EQ changes. All guitarists do this, whether it's one the end of the spectrum at which they run 1 single tone the entire night and ride their volume knob, to the opposite end wherein they use different amp models, effects, & guitars. Everyone changes their sound.

I don't see a big difference from playing a song with a clean preset, that then switches to a crunch tone, then playing a heavily distorted tone in another song.

And what about bands that have 3 different singers, each singing lead on different songs? How would that be much different?

#makethesoundguyworkforhischeck

 

[HotRats]

I'd be happy to play in a band that plays both and sounds good doing it.

I'm gonna put you in my ignore list

But just because it's not practical for a drummer to have more than 1 kit (but it has been done- Mike Portnoy, eg.), should we should regress to the lowest common denominator? I don't think so.

What I meant is that compromises are part of the game and drummers, and their band mates, are really used to it.

 

[HotRats]

As you mentioned, it is an analogy. The analogy is correct because an analogy only requires partial similarity. It compares things that are comparable in significant respects.

In the present case the "comparable significant respect" is playing different songs using different amps. The DJ feeds the PA with pre-mixed music, but it is still different songs using different amps. While a band is not pre-mixed, it would still be different songs using different amps. The end result is the same in that respect.

After the advent of modelers, I have witnessed some performers who used different patches with different amps to match the songs being played and it sounded great. I was always impressed with that attention to detail, as I wouldn't have the patience to set up all those patches and match the levels.

I kindly disagree mate :)

But just because it's not practical for a drummer to have more than 1 kit (but it has been done- Mike Portnoy, eg.), should we should regress to the lowest common denominator? I don't think so.

Ok, fair enough. But then again, he has all those knobs and sliders available... Does he just 'set it and forget it?' Of course not. Every time you change your sound, the mix EQ changes. All guitarists do this, whether it's one the end of the spectrum at which they run 1 single tone the entire night and ride their volume knob, to the opposite end wherein they use different amp models, effects, & guitars. Everyone changes their sound.

I don't see a big difference from playing a song with a clean preset, that then switches to a crunch tone, then playing a heavily distorted tone in another song.

And what about bands that have 3 different singers, each singing lead on different songs? How would that be much different?

#makethesoundguyworkforhischeck

I'm not saying that is wrong having different amps/cabs for each song. You can do it successfully if you do it right.
All I'm saying is that I don't think is necessary for most of the gigs people hanging here usually do.

 

[TSJMajesty]

All I'm saying is that I don't think is necessary for most of the gigs people hanging here usually do.

Sure. But where's the fun in "not necessary?" Hell, I'd bet 95% of the tone-tweaking, buying-and-selling amps, re-wiring guitars, trying different strings, collecting overdrive pedals, and all that other nonsense that guitar players do, isn't 'necessary.'

If I ever do get back in a band, I know one of the first things I'll need to discuss to see if we're a good fit is, how close do you want to cover the songs? Because I'm one of those guys that likes to get pretty darn close. Tones included.

I'm not an "endless tweaker" kind of player, but I do love it when I can nail a tone. Sometimes it's purely accidental, but it is oh so inspiring. To me.

 

[HotRats]

Sure. But where's the fun in "not necessary?" Hell, I'd bet 95% of the tone-tweaking, buying-and-selling amps, re-wiring guitars, trying different strings, collecting overdrive pedals, and all that other nonsense that guitar players do, isn't 'necessary.'

If I ever do get back in a band, I know one of the first things I'll need to discuss to see if we're a good fit is, how close do you want to cover the songs? Because I'm one of those guys that likes to get pretty darn close. Tones included.

I'm not an "endless tweaker" kind of player, but I do love it when I can nail a tone. Sometimes it's purely accidental, but it is oh so inspiring. To me.

I agree on that. I'm one of those who build a preset per song in the setlist (using the same amp though) just for the fun of having tailored gain levels and effects choices for each song part.

 

[DrewJD82]

Would you join a band that has enter sandman and hotel California in the same setlist? LOL
That's the real question here

If you were a drummer would you play enter sandman and hotel california on the same drumset?

Live music is always a compromise compared to the recorded counterpart.




The dj analogy is not correct, imo, because the dj simply feeds the pa with already mixed music.

In a band the guitar is just one of the elements that has to be blended with others in realtime by the sound guy.

Hell yeah, I’d PREFER To play in a cover band that had that kind of variation in it. As for drums, sure, I’d definitely use the same kit, but I’d also definitely change the way I played. I mean, I don’t play Gilmour solos the same way I play a Zakk Wylde solo, I wouldn’t play “Hotel California” on drums with a heavy foot and beating the sh*t out of the snare. Drums, in general, are a hell of a lot more versatile than guitar tones. A nice DW or Tama Starclassic kit can do every genre of music, the only thing changing is the way it’s EQ’d and played.

 

[Bob Zaod]

One of the biggest reasons I use the 3 Mark IV amps in the Helix is because of their versatility. Can go from chimey cleans to nice breakup to liquid gain with just a small bump. It's the only amp in the Helix that can do that without stacking a bunch of overdrives in front of it. Don't get me wrong there are many other amps in the Helix I love but having all 3 channels of the Mark IV has been a blessing for playing covers. I can fit all 3 amps in one patch and still have DSP room for everything else I need.

 

[Baba]

I think the short answer for many people is, "nobody cares". There are people who watch me all night long, and think I play bass, (they hear with their eyes), so they certainly aren't listening to my tones.

My last band played everything from Elvis to current hits, and my preset only had a Fender Deluxe and the Friedman Placater as amps in my one preset with 4 snapshots. Clean for oldies, dance, and funk, lighter gain for classic rock and country, heavier gain for 80's/90's, and a solo snapshot.

Past that, I just don't care enough to come up with another different tone.

 

[ejecta]

Because it’s totally unnecessary and causes more issues than it solves.

 

[la szum]

I get that we've all seen someone who doesn't know what they're doing do it badly. But just because some people do it wrong doesn't mean we have to toss the whole concept.

I always look at amp models the exact same way I look at pedals. They're just tools I can use to achieve different textures and qualities of gain. Is using 4 amp models to get different gain textures any different from using 4 dirt/fuzz pedals to get different gain textures?

If you do it right there's no reason for it to be jarring, or incongruous, or any of the other problems we've all heard before. But also, sometimes you want a certain tone to be jarring or incongruous!

Use 1 amp model for a whole show or use 20. Both are totally legit/valid. All that matters is that you're getting the right sounds for the music you're performing

Yup. For me it is about the context of the band/situation I am in. Bigger bands mean I can blend/meld more
and would be more diverse in my choices.

If I am essentially naked, though, and one of the only melodic/harmonic instruments in the group, then those amp/
channel changes can be sonically abrupt and incongruous, in my experience. In that setting I am going to ride
one horse and make the most of it---mostly. :)

Being able to weave in and out of a larger musical group is a lot of fun, and really opens up a lot of pathways
for tone and texture that I don't always find work as well in a 3/4 piece band situation.

 

[JiveTurkey]

EDIT: because moron.

Changed my reaction because you aren't 100% moron