What does your “real” rig do that your modeler can’t do?

[MirrorProfiles]

Smells good

I sold my Triple XXX because it smelled like a kebab shop and I couldn’t get rid of it. Kind of miss the amp

Real amps don’t need to prove themselves against a reference - they just behave how they’re supposed to. No bugs, inaccuracies. They are what emulations try to sound like, without trying.

Real amps blow up. They drift, they evolve with servicing.

Real amps can be modded and customised however you like.

Real amps can be visually customised.

Real amps always interact in a natural way with the gear you combine them with.

Real amps look cool. When you own it, you have an association with something physical rather than something digital.

You sacrifice a lot to own and use them - cost, space, volume, effort, maintenance. It makes you treat it differently and you build a different association to something unique than you would when dealing with one of hundreds of models that you can flick through instantly.

Tactile controls. Just grab and go - no menus, paging/tabbing, saving, recalling.

“AITR sound” The sound wraps around you. The feedback and sonic interactions are as authentic as it gets. It can take your head off, fill a room with sound, demand attention.

Familiarity - a lot of guys get uppity when you move them onto something digital. Amps feel like home to a lot of guitarists.

Real amps just sound better. I love modelling and emulation but it can’t do what real amps do yet. We’re closer than ever and it’s always improving. I try my best constantly to get the most from models but amps just win.

 

[Hollowway]

I would actually much prefer a digital rig, but digital stuff changes so fast, I worry it won't be supported if I run into a problem. Analog stuff is super easy to repair, as everything is macroscopic.

What I WOULD like is a nice solid state amp, but it seems like very few makers focus on that. There are oodles of tube amps, oodles of digital amps, and only a handful of SS amps.

 

[sleewell]

Gets people to come to the show if they have boycotted bands who use modelers

 

[PBGas]

 

[KHAAAAAAANNNNNNN!!!!!!!!]

My Fractal rig never was able to replicate this.

 

[AlbertA]

Gets people to come to the show if they have boycotted bands who use modelers

 

[DrewJD82]

Considering I spent 6 months of 2025 picking which 4 dirt pedals were going to go on my pedalboard and when I make presets in an AxeFX I pick a dirt and move on in seconds, it's safe to say physical gear gives me FAR more option paralysis than modeling ever could. First the scrutinizing over what I'm going to buy, then committing it to a board where the wiring/layout has to work with everything else. Just way more long-term things to consider with physical gear as where you can just mouse-click a change in a modeler with no money lost.

 

[Stratzrus]

If by "real" you mean tube amp, I love the simplicity of them and the pure and basic tone gives me a mindset of tradition and history that I don't get when using my Fractal gear.

But recently I've been playing through my Tone King Imperial Preamp into a pair of V3 Archangel Fender FR cabs and I'm getting the same experience. The TKIP isn't really a modeler, it's a tube preamp so is that "real"?.

But I love my FM9 and will inevitably switch back to it when I want to venture beyond '60s Fender combo tones and would definitely use it when playing with others, but for now, and for the last month or so, it's all been about the TKIP.

 

[Tanax]

Considering I spent 6 months of 2025 picking which 4 dirt pedals were going to go on my pedalboard and when I make presets in an AxeFX I pick a dirt and move on in seconds, it's safe to say physical gear gives me FAR more option paralysis than modeling ever could. First the scrutinizing over what I'm going to buy, then committing it to a board where the wiring/layout has to work with everything else. Just way more long-term things to consider with physical gear as where you can just mouse-click a change in a modeler with no money lost.

I think this is where people differ. Some people like that it's more "definitive" with physical gear, it's not as easy, therefore you're more deliberate. In addition to that, you also make things work, even if you don't have that perfect reverb you "would have" wanted, making you think outside the box and might discover new sounds or ways of doing things.

With digital, it's absolutely more easy, but it also makes SOME people lazy, they just pick the first sound they had in mind and, like you said, move on in seconds, rather than spend time to fiddle with it.

Again, some people love the simplistic route with digital, others are motivated by the more deliberate process of physical.

 

[laxu]

I think this is where people differ. Some people like that it's more "definitive" with physical gear, it's not as easy, therefore you're more deliberate. In addition to that, you also make things work, even if you don't have that perfect reverb you "would have" wanted, making you think outside the box and might discover new sounds or ways of doing things.

With digital, it's absolutely more easy, but it also makes SOME people lazy, they just pick the first sound they had in mind and, like you said, move on in seconds, rather than spend time to fiddle with it.

Again, some people love the simplistic route with digital, others are motivated by the more deliberate process of physical.

I think there's also a difference in commitment. When you put your money down, you are going to try to make it work because selling something has a cost (if you bought new) and effort involved.

By comparison virtual models don't have much value. You don't get that attached even to your favorite virtual models. Captures get swapped like socks and unwanted ones discarded without a second thought.

Maybe the idea that you can just swap the model to something else later means you never put that much effort into it. There's also that little bit of extra effort involved in picking the right block, changing its parameters vs turning a knob on a pedal, so maybe you don't want to engage with it as much as with say the amp model.

Yesterday I had my pedalboard hooked up and I ended up messing with the knobs on all of the pedals because it takes very little effort to do so. Even though I find the Fractal AM4 fairly fast to use, even with its mere 4 blocks there's a bit of a chore to working it. It feels like programming rather than play and experimentation you get with real gear.

 

[Sascha Franck]

• Look down and see every setting of every effect without digging through menus
• Reach back and tweak the EQ on my amp while playing and not have to remember to save the preset before changing to the next

These are incredibly relevant for me and the things I miss the most all the time. Which is why I keep asking for a) more knobs (endless encoders with proper readouts), b) global blocks and - kinda related to (b) - c) an autosave feature (so I never forget to re-save in the heat of a soundcheck).

I can add and remove pedals from my analog gear and maintain 0 ms of latency.

Yet another very valid point (unless you can get away with an all-in-one unit or never use the FX loop).

No option paralysis.

In fact yet another relevant thing that has been driving me mad for quite a while (even if I was the only person in charge). But I seem to have kinda gotten over it, at least given the relevant rabbit holes (no more endless amp model searching, no more endless IR hunting - at least not unless I explicitely decide to waste some time on these).

And I'll add another one:
- As I've been using loop switcher based setups for - uhm - decades already, it got incredibly obvious that there's not *one* single modeling unit allowing me to recreate even a rather modest loop switcher setup.
For example: I always had some loops with programmable items in them (yeah, that's a bit deviating from a plain analog setup, but you'll catch my drift). I could then, say, pre-select a preset on a modulation box which would always stay the same, regardless of which loop switcher patch I was using. I could then have, say, switcher patch 3 to always bring on the modulation loop, but it could be a phaser, a flanger or whatever I decided to pre-select on the box.
Seriously, this is another of the things I miss a whole lot. And it's just impossible to do this on any modeler (even if it'd possibly be a piece of cake to add).

 

[Sascha Franck]

Considering I spent 6 months of 2025 picking which 4 dirt pedals were going to go on my pedalboard and when I make presets in an AxeFX I pick a dirt and move on in seconds, it's safe to say physical gear gives me FAR more option paralysis than modeling ever could.

I'd rather call that option "fear" than "paralysis". I agree, though.

 

[nightlight]

Considering I spent 6 months of 2025 picking which 4 dirt pedals were going to go on my pedalboard and when I make presets in an AxeFX I pick a dirt and move on in seconds, it's safe to say physical gear gives me FAR more option paralysis than modeling ever could. First the scrutinizing over what I'm going to buy, then committing it to a board where the wiring/layout has to work with everything else. Just way more long-term things to consider with physical gear as where you can just mouse-click a change in a modeler with no money lost.

I don't think you need to worry about that if the amp "sounds" exactly like you want it to. In my case, I'll have an OD or boost in front and that's about it, unless I want some delay and an EQ in the FX.

I also like the 4CM method to connect digital and analog gear. A small sacrifice in immediacy, but something like the Axe FXIII and a good tube amp being paired makes for the ultimate tweakable guitar platform.

 

[FuzzyAce]

Considering I spent 6 months of 2025 picking which 4 dirt pedals were going to go on my pedalboard and when I make presets in an AxeFX I pick a dirt and move on in seconds, it's safe to say physical gear gives me FAR more option paralysis than modeling ever could. First the scrutinizing over what I'm going to buy, then committing it to a board where the wiring/layout has to work with everything else. Just way more long-term things to consider with physical gear as where you can just mouse-click a change in a modeler with no money lost.

I get what you're saying. But I suppose it depends on what the end goals are in your playing situation. I always kept a stage setup a bit more straightforward with ideally 4 to 5 pedals, sometimes less -- and I'm assuming you did too. Not much more is really needed, unless you're trying to cover a ton of diverse music. More just means more chances for something to go wrong. Every time I plan on putting together a massive board it soon turns into a headache of cabling and choices about complex switching, but if I limit myself to picking minimal pedals the obvious and trusted choices present themselves. It's great having a large assortment of pedals for home recording because you can just grab one and go to it, but for live use there has to be certain level of compromise.

 

[metropolis_4]

I know this is probably weird, but when I used digital gear I think the lack of limitations bothered me. So I would try to force limitations in how I approached it.

If I was noodling around on some Metallica songs, instead of replicating the exact gear they used I would use a silverface Twin. Or play along with Dream Theater stuff using a Tonebender into a AC15.

When I built rigs for shows I would often try to think “what would a guitarist in a new wave post-punk band in 1983 have had in their rig?” And then limit myself to only that gear.

My last few years of digital rigs I only used one amp model. Mentally I started thinking of it like that one model was my real amp.

Going back to analog rigs was like - stop fighting it and just go with it

 

[Chocol8]

I only used one amp model. Mentally I started thinking of it like that one model was my real amp.

That's the way I use digital as well, which is why a Tonex One works so well for me. I dont limit myself to one amp model, but I do almost all of my playing with just a few and usually just one gets used at a time. I know I am not taking advantage of everything digital can do, but I find the simple workflow and limited rig helps me just focus on playing.

 

[metropolis_4]

That's the way I use digital as well, which is why a Tonex One works so well for me. I dont limit myself to one amp model, but I do almost all of my playing with just a few and usually just one gets used at a time. I know I am not taking advantage of everything digital can do, but I find the simple workflow and limited rig helps me just focus on playing.

Absolutely! I think some of it is visual as well. Even if I just had a single amp block in a Fractal preset, I’m still looking at my AxeFX in its rack case and a big footswitch with 12 glowing switches on it and multiple screens.

Just seeing a couple pedals on the floor in front of my /13 can be so nice in comparison and make me feel more focused on playing.

 

[DrewJD82]

I get what you're saying. But I suppose it depends on what the end goals are in your playing situation. I always kept a stage setup a bit more straightforward with ideally 4 to 5 pedals, sometimes less -- and I'm assuming you did too. Not much more is really needed, unless you're trying to cover a ton of diverse music. More just means more chances for something to go wrong. Every time I plan on putting together a massive board it soon turns into a headache of cabling and choices about complex switching, but if I limit myself to picking minimal pedals the obvious and trusted choices present themselves. It's great having a large assortment of pedals for home recording because you can just grab one and go to it, but for live use there has to be certain level of compromise.

Hahah I just wanted to be able to step up through dirt from clean to modded Marshall, while having an EJ and a Gilmour option on the board. The Fuzz Face threw a hitch into the hole thing that I'm still sorting out. But there's so many variations of edge of breakup and dirt pedals that all worked really well for what I wanted to do that it was hard to figure out what areas they didn't do well and most of that was in how they stacked with other pedals.

 

[DrewJD82]

I don't think you need to worry about that if the amp "sounds" exactly like you want it to. In my case, I'll have an OD or boost in front and that's about it, unless I want some delay and an EQ in the FX.

I also like the 4CM method to connect digital and analog gear. A small sacrifice in immediacy, but something like the Axe FXIII and a good tube amp being paired makes for the ultimate tweakable guitar platform.

The amp did sound exactly how I wanted it to; clean!

I wanted to use pedals for all the dirt.

 

[maddnotez]

In 2026 this is literally the only true advantage, in my opinion of course.

I have not played many digital devices however. Had a Kemper and an AX8. All the same BUT I hear tonex and QC are getting there.

Sad to say but there may be a day where digital is advanced enough to feel and sound exactly like a tube amp. Plus you can still use tube power with them, that defeats the purpose for me but for arguments sake.

I am definitely watching the QC mini. Trying to hold out for the $999 sale lol