Guitar Gear Forum

valtyr wrote:I have my Helix connected to my computer for recording but that’s pretty much the only time I use it. I stick with mostly tube amps the rest of the time.

Digital sounds thinner, even with synthesizers. Just 3 voltage controlled oscillators in a Moog will destroy any virtual analog or software synth in a mix every time.

Right???? That's exactly what I was getting at. Moogs are the perfect example. There's just no comparison how heavy they sound vs digital synths. Hammond organs too. Jon Lord carried his massive B3/Leslie rig to gigs until the end of his life because he said there was no way he could get his synthesizers to compete with the guitar like the Hammond did.

It's not modeling per se, it's digital as whole. It applies to pretty much every analog vs digital comparison.

Obviously, it's nearly impossible to have an 100% analog signal chain these days. Most modern PAs are digital, most records are done with DAWs etc. And the vast majority of people listen to music on digital devices.

But still, even if it gets converted to digital at some point, the longer you can keep your chain analog the better.

For example, using the amp through a cab with a mic is the best possible solution, but if you can't do that, using the amp with a load and a good sounding analog DI is still a very good option.
If you can't do that either, running the amp through IRs is still better than going full digital.

That notion that "if you're going DI you might as well just go full digital" ... no no I don't agree with that. The real amp with the load/IR will still sound better than the modeling, especially in a live mix.
If you need to replace the cab/mic with DI, do that, but keep the rest of your chain intact, no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater IMHO.

Dave wrote:Metallica uses modelers live?

That’s… something




Anyway I got bored of the helix itself real fast. It was fun for a minute when I was in a throwaway band but as soon as that was over I didn’t have it much longer.

I picked up an hxfx a bit ago and love it with my mesa 50 cal rig in 4cm. The boosts, modulation, time stuff, etc are all pretty sick, and it controls the amp switching. I much prefer it to the full-size helix.

I think this is the best use for this kind of stuff. I had an MS3 that was great for switching FX and channels all at once.

NinjaRaf wrote:

Dave wrote:Metallica uses modelers live?

That’s… something




Anyway I got bored of the helix itself real fast. It was fun for a minute when I was in a throwaway band but as soon as that was over I didn’t have it much longer.

I picked up an hxfx a bit ago and love it with my mesa 50 cal rig in 4cm. The boosts, modulation, time stuff, etc are all pretty sick, and it controls the amp switching. I much prefer it to the full-size helix.

I think this is the best use for this kind of stuff. I had an MS3 that was great for switching FX and channels all at once.

100%. The boosts, modulations, delays, etc are great. The pitch shifting and whammy are great. I have zero issue with their effects. I think even in 4CM with the Metro it would be fine for effects but at the same time I also have some great pedals that already play nice with the Metro.

Yeah digital effects are a fully developed technology. You can buy a digital delay from the 1980s and it will still sound great by today standards.
These days the effects units are smaller, cheaper and with more features, but sound wise, it's been completely figured out decades ago.

Amp modelling is not really there yet,

Amp modeling never really appealed to me at least for live work, I'll use it for recordings since, lets be honest, once it's in a mix you really can't tell the difference any more... but live.... it never holds up or doesn't quite hit the mark..... but I totally get why some touring acts use them though, I don't get why bands like Metallica with the mega tour budgets and ticket sales that allow for using real amps would use them

I've had the HXFX since they released it and its pretty much been a central part of my pedalboard ever since. The effects sound and feel great, the ability to use it in 4CM, move effects around easily in the signal chain, the snapshots and MIDI control just make it a killer unit IMO. If I had to get the same features using a switcher and normal pedals my pedalboard would be three times the size easily.

Amps are for modeling, and modelings' not for me.

Amps are for modeling, and modelings' not for me.

Oh! Modeling modeling modeling not for me.

Modeling modeling modeling not for me!

Yeah in the studio modeling is more convincing. I think it's because most people listen to records in a close environment like headphones, car speakers, computer monitors etc
And in that type of environment modeling works well.
But if you take an album recorded with modeling and crank it in large hall through a PA you start to notice the guitars are not hitting as hard as they should.

Digital doesn't "travel" well. It gets loud but it doesn't get heavy. But in close environments it's less of an issue.

That goes for live sound too. You can practice in a small room with monitors close by or with IEMs with modeling without any issues. But once you have to fill any type of room, it's best to use an analog source if you want your guitar to heavy any weight in the mix.

I think IEMs is a big reason why some of the bigger bands don't notice that their sound impact has declined. They're listening to these modeling in the IEMs and thinking "wow it sounds like the record". While the guitar on the FOH is paper thin.

GuitarBilly wrote:I think IEMs is a big reason why some of the bigger bands don't notice that their sound impact has declined. They're listening to these modeling in the IEMs and thinking "wow it sounds like the record". While the guitar on the FOH is paper thin.

yeah and that and the whole "quiet stage" thing sound guys always want to do to make their lives easier lol... no cabs, no problems..

greatmutah wrote:

NinjaRaf wrote:

Dave wrote:Metallica uses modelers live?

That’s… something




Anyway I got bored of the helix itself real fast. It was fun for a minute when I was in a throwaway band but as soon as that was over I didn’t have it much longer.

I picked up an hxfx a bit ago and love it with my mesa 50 cal rig in 4cm. The boosts, modulation, time stuff, etc are all pretty sick, and it controls the amp switching. I much prefer it to the full-size helix.

I think this is the best use for this kind of stuff. I had an MS3 that was great for switching FX and channels all at once.

100%. The boosts, modulations, delays, etc are great. The pitch shifting and whammy are great. I have zero issue with their effects. I think even in 4CM with the Metro it would be fine for effects but at the same time I also have some great pedals that already play nice with the Metro.

I'm probably just imagining things, but I think the HXFX sounds better than my old LT did. It definitely doesn't replace my analog pedal board but it's cool on the Mesa rig. I can flip that rig on and play most any style.

Dave wrote:

greatmutah wrote:

NinjaRaf wrote:

Dave wrote:Metallica uses modelers live?

That’s… something




Anyway I got bored of the helix itself real fast. It was fun for a minute when I was in a throwaway band but as soon as that was over I didn’t have it much longer.

I picked up an hxfx a bit ago and love it with my mesa 50 cal rig in 4cm. The boosts, modulation, time stuff, etc are all pretty sick, and it controls the amp switching. I much prefer it to the full-size helix.

I think this is the best use for this kind of stuff. I had an MS3 that was great for switching FX and channels all at once.

100%. The boosts, modulations, delays, etc are great. The pitch shifting and whammy are great. I have zero issue with their effects. I think even in 4CM with the Metro it would be fine for effects but at the same time I also have some great pedals that already play nice with the Metro.

I'm probably just imagining things, but I think the HXFX sounds better than my old LT did. It definitely doesn't replace my analog pedal board but it's cool on the Mesa rig. I can flip that rig on and play most any style.

You’re not imagining things. In the last year or two Line 6 did a big firmware update that increased the resolution of all their models from effects all the way up to amps and cabs. Shit is clearer than its ever been and it works better. They were able to do it in a way that didn’t negatively impact memory usage either.

I like them for recording shitty clips or for straight FX use

Using them as a main tone generator for live performance is almost always a fail IMO


The one situation where it worked for me was when I was using my Yamaha THR as a preamp when I was playing bass - but then again I was running that in to a tube poweramp and a real cabinet so...

I don't know that it's the modeling...I think the rise of modeling coincides with the rise of sound guys privileging low end over every thing else. Coupled with a trend towards lower tunings and double kick acrobatics in metal, and guitars just get eaten. I saw the Death to All tour a few weeks ago and Suffocation was using the 6505+ into Vader cabs and getting lost in the mix bc the kicks were just goosed. Death to All had the best guitar sound and they were running Kempers into full stacks. Of all the metal shows I've been to over the years, the majority of bands used amps, and the guitars more often than not get buried in the mix.

I love my Axe FX2 rig, but I run it as a preamp/poweramp into Mesa cabs I tried direct once and hated it, and I tried FRFR for a bit and also hated it. For recording I love the ease and consistency of going direct, but I also suck at getting a good mic'd sound.

somata wrote:I don't know that it's the modeling...I think the rise of modeling coincides with the rise of sound guys privileging low end over every thing else. Coupled with a trend towards lower tunings and double kick acrobatics in metal, and guitars just get eaten. I saw the Death to All tour a few weeks ago and Suffocation was using the 6505+ into Vader cabs and getting lost in the mix bc the kicks were just goosed. Death to All had the best guitar sound and they were running Kempers into full stacks. Of all the metal shows I've been to over the years, the majority of bands used amps, and the guitars more often than not get buried in the mix.

I love my Axe FX2 rig, but I run it as a preamp/poweramp into Mesa cabs I tried direct once and hated it, and I tried FRFR for a bit and also hated it. For recording I love the ease and consistency of going direct, but I also suck at getting a good mic'd sound.

Not saying people can’t dial in their shit to not be buried. As far as direct stuff but as far as Suffo, that’s on the venue, the sound guy and that particular night. They’ve almost always had a great live tone. Literally all the way back to the 1995 Pierced tour their live tones have always crushed when I’ve seen them. So not sure what was up the night you saw em, but that honestly is the last thing I’ve ever heard with Suffo is buried guitars. But some venues DO run ridiculous loud kicks. I’m sure it sounds good Somehwere in the venue. Lol: Altho I swore they stopped using the Vader cabs. So maybe they were borrowing some,,?

In my band right now, the other guitarist DOeS use a Line 6 head, against my wishes. But he doesn’t want to use my gear. And his solos cut all right. But every single show, any of my tubes amps, as I switch em up from my 6505, XXx to Evh 5153, I bury him on the rhythms every single time. At this point I think it works great cause while he’s a solid player, I’m definitely the stronger rhythm player so I think simply for the band sound it’s better I’m a little more out front. and we are at the mercy of random sound guys, and for me to be “winning” that battle 100% of the time kinda points to the tubes just cutting thru live. And it’s not like I dial some super cutting tone. I like a little swampy-ness in my tone and it still is clearly the one that comes Thru the FOH. But I knew that going in. Yeah he’s not playing a Kemper or sumthin more modern but it’s always sorta been known live, that shit isnt the one coming thru against a tube amp.

But again, of course this stuff can “work”. I know bands do it far more than not. But as Metallica was mentioned I came across a 1999 video where apparently they were on the Triaxis and compared to their tone today, they went from Men to Boys… and I’d be surprised if anyone felt different cause they sounded crushing in 1999 video. Think it was Australia if someone wants to look it up.

Anyway, this is just Internet forum bickering, but more often than not, local bands with good modeling, from my experience, don’t have the sound and aggression as the real amps. Even when at times I DO hear the real amps get muddy mix. But that could be a number of factors. Dudes who don’t understand live tones and what translate, so they have dumb settings, to simply shitty sound guys. To below par PAs.

But for myself, who has pretty good knowledge of my gear and how to use it, I’m not getting buried in my band mix against the modeling amp.

.

IMO...

For the size stages that I think most of us are performing on, I think some players underestimate how much sound is washing off the stage. That the PA is sound reinforcement and not sound production. I think it's in these situations, when you're standing in front of the stage and under the PA, getting blasted by the acoustic drum kit that the missing guitars become obvious.

I also think that people underestimate the value of mic bleed. I know the trend is that bleed is bad and isolation is good, and to make the stage more like the studio environment with everything compartmentalized and easy to mix... but, in the studio some really great albums were recorded live with no/minimal isolation. We also double and quad track guitars for a reason, and it's to thicken the guitars. We obviously can't double track a guitar live, but we can let it bleed around a bit so it gets picked up by multiple sources with a slight time delay due to distance. While this can contribute to the mud and make it more difficult to mix, its also contributing to the density of the overall sound.

Again, IMO.

EndTime wrote:It’s only good for practice tools. Or low volume jamming and working on demos.

I used to say, others can make it work for em, but I think I retract that statement. I can always tell suMthin is off. Even pro recordings. Cause there are plenty of pro albums with fucking Kempers or AXE or whatver. And I can tell.

But of course their argument would be this is just the NEW direction etc. but that direction isn’t necessarily responsible for the devalue of music these days, but it surely hasn’t helped build music up. I sincerely believe the use of Modeling and profilers etc, has homogenized the sound of music. Especially metal and other guitar focused music. It’s created one big bland soup of sound. So much so people expect that sound even. And when it doesn’t sound the same, it gets dismissed quicker it seems.

And yes, the use of modelers doesn’t mean You HAVe to do that. In theory it should be MORE freedom. But it’s not. And we can see this type of behavior and tendencies across many walks of life. And the rise of technology hasn’t increased creativity, it’s dampened it and afforded those with maybe little to offer, a chance to ape and copy the original shit to a degree that it devalues the true greats…

Basically what I’m saying is Unabomber warned us all… hahah. Joking. But not kidding.

Snax - magic box that can sound like anything, yet used to make everything sound the same.

Yeah obviously bad mixes didn't start with modeling and modeling is not the sole cause of guitars not sounding heavy in a mix.

At Metallica, Rammstein etc level that's definitely the problem though.

At the local level it could be a number of reasons, but bringing a good side amp does help in most cases.

GuitarBilly wrote:Yeah obviously bad mixes didn't start with modeling and modeling is not the sole cause of guitars not sounding heavy in a mix.

At Metallica, Rammstein etc level that's definitely the problem though.

At the local level it could be a number of reasons, but bringing a good side amp does help in most cases.

I think that once you're up to the level where you isolate your cabs backstage the rules are different. I also think that's why so many bands at that level run two (or more) amps as a thickener.

I don't really like comparing to Metallica because they're on a whole 'nother level. Both in terms of size and in terms of how much money they can throw at a problem. If I had their money I could pay someone to make an Axe sound good too. But, for someone at my level I like a good tube amp. Put an SM57 on it and done.

It's why I've avoided modelling... seems like a lot of effort to try to get something to sound like a tube amp when you can just get a tube amp.

i dont mind the newer modelers, but i need them to go through a real poweramp and cab ... and also the option to use the real amp's preamp with 4CM.

tried a powered FRFR speaker and IR's once and hated it. sold with the quickness ...

Modelers never really did much for me.... its aiight for somethings but pales next to a good tube amp. I need to sell my Kemper, it just sits. Tonex aint bad and has supposedly gotten better at capturing high gain in the last update. Doesn't matter, at the end of the day tube amps just do it for me.

I got on Fractal's FM3 waiting list a couple of weeks ago.

The only modeller I've owned in my life is the POD 2.0 I bought when they came out decades ago and I hated it. I didn't expect to ever buy a modeler again. I don't play out ever or even get together with other players to jam in person. My job is super demanding and I mostly work from home but all I have time for is swapping tracks with other players via jam websites. I do that between 4 & 6 a.m. so I need to do it silently. Micing cabs is out of the question.

I've got a stupid amount of tube amps that I intend to keep and continue using but I use them with an attenuator so I can run the line out to my interface. I also use tube preamps a lot. Getting an amp all plugged in and ready to use then dialing in the tone with IR's & plugins eats up a lot of my playing time. I figure the FM3 will give me immediate access to a wide range of usable amp tones and effects so I can spend my time playing instead of preparing to play.

Riffraff wrote:I got on Fractal's FM3 waiting list a couple of weeks ago.

The only modeller I've owned in my life is the POD 2.0 I bought when they came out decades ago and I hated it. I didn't expect to ever buy a modeler again. I don't play out ever or even get together with other players to jam in person. My job is super demanding and I mostly work from home but all I have time for is swapping tracks with other players via jam websites. I do that between 4 & 6 a.m. so I need to do it silently. Micing cabs is out of the question.

I've got a stupid amount of tube amps that I intend to keep and continue using but I use them with an attenuator so I can run the line out to my interface. I also use tube preamps a lot. Getting an amp all plugged in and ready to use then dialing in the tone with IR's & plugins eats up a lot of my playing time. I figure the FM3 will give me immediate access to a wide range of usable amp tones and effects so I can spend my time playing instead of preparing to play.

Modeling does sound like the ideal solution in this scenario.

Riffraff wrote:I got on Fractal's FM3 waiting list a couple of weeks ago.

The only modeller I've owned in my life is the POD 2.0 I bought when they came out decades ago and I hated it. I didn't expect to ever buy a modeler again. I don't play out ever or even get together with other players to jam in person. My job is super demanding and I mostly work from home but all I have time for is swapping tracks with other players via jam websites. I do that between 4 & 6 a.m. so I need to do it silently. Micing cabs is out of the question.

I've got a stupid amount of tube amps that I intend to keep and continue using but I use them with an attenuator so I can run the line out to my interface. I also use tube preamps a lot. Getting an amp all plugged in and ready to use then dialing in the tone with IR's & plugins eats up a lot of my playing time. I figure the FM3 will give me immediate access to a wide range of usable amp tones and effects so I can spend my time playing instead of preparing to play.

Modeling does sound like the ideal solution in this scenario.

FAKA! wrote:Tonex aint bad and has supposedly gotten better at capturing high gain in the last update. Doesn't matter, at the end of the day tube amps just do it for me.

Tonex, into Digitech GSP1101 effects loop (for effects), into EVH head effects return (poweramp) and cab.

this is just temporary while i mess around with the Tonex ... eventually i need to figure out a scheme where i get the EVH preamp involved, if that's possible.

Landshark wrote:

Is that a Randall V2? I remember really liking that amp back in the day.

Dig that setup, Landshark! How are you digging the Tone-X?