Has modelling "topped out"?

Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

I tell you, my current driving reasons to switch to all tube are feel, simplicity and reliability. I can get great sounds out of my Johnson JM150(I agree with Artie on Johnson modeling), but it gets to be too many menus, buttons and switches to manipulate on the fly. And there's something one dimensional about the attack feel. And it keeps glitching, like any piece of digital gear I've used. Sometimes the encoders work backwards, sometimes the controller doesn't talk to it properly, and hanging over everything is the off chance that I could meet a power blip that loses me all my presets.

So I get to longing for a nice tube amp that I can plug in, turn on, and rock away.
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

firebirdV said:
I think I understand this. A speaker can't move in the chunks that digital approximates with, it has to move smoothly meaning that the air will be pushed. There are no instantaneous pressure changes like the digital approximations would demand, it's not possible.
Click to expand...

Yes, but even before this . . . amplifiers don't reproduce a digital signal. All digital processing happens in the early stages of an audio signal. The signal that comes out of a CD player is exactly the same as what comes out of cassette deck, which is the same that comes out of an FM tuner. Its also the same as what comes out of a computer sound card.

"Digital" happens in the transmission stage of audio. The hi-fi portion is exactly the same as what happened in your grandpa's days. Nothing has been improved on, or changed since then. Component tolerances, yes. Technology, no. ;)
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

What would be good is a combination of the 2. An amp tube driven, but with lots of tone shaping controls so everyone could have the same amp and sound different and you still get all the advantages of tube sound.
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

Man, Im dam happy with my 12 watt kustom tube 12 and my korg MODLer but what the hell. I mean the hell with what happens. If you like your tone then you'll hold on to it despite the tube or 24 bit chip in it. Some people like thier Power blocks with their roland synths and parker fly's, while others like their all tube music man with their 50's strats. To hell whith it, someone out there is still going to think we sound like ass, while others will go ga-ga over the tone. So, yeah, there is still a long way's to go in tone modlers.
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

Beer$ said:
What would be good is a combination of the 2. An amp tube driven, but with lots of tone shaping controls so everyone could have the same amp and sound different and you still get all the advantages of tube sound.
Click to expand...

There are, but you have to run either a floor board like a GT8 into a power amp. One thing ive done is use my korg amp modler in to a kustom tube 12. not really it, but close since i don't have much dough. My freind used a duncan tube amp with a gt hate procesor, close too. you can do it too. It's sorta simple. many high end amps have the inputs in the back for just that reason.
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

I don't have the patience to read 7+ pages of

"Modelling sux."

"No it doesn't"

"Yes, it does."

*rinse & repeat*

Modelling is still in it's infancy. Many of you are too young to remember the evolution of tube amps (and much of it was before MY time). They weren't always "GREAT," despite the contentions of Tube Snobs everywhere.

Consider the advances in modelling in the few short years since its inception. The differences between the original L6 technology and the xt are phenomenal.

Tube Amps haven't peaked yet, either. Play a Celtic.:D
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

Well i never liked the POD ,i hated the GT 6 amp models ,i still hate the amp models on my Korg pandora ,but i bought the Vox ad50 after 15 minutes of testing!
There are many important points.The most important one is the Cabinet.If you ever play a Valvetronix head with a good cabinet ,you will be really pleased with what you're hearing!And if you play MArshall models with a Marshall 1960 cab ,you can swear it is a Marshall!
Many people play modellers with their computer jacked to the Hi-Fi ,and tell that the sound is not "amp" like.Ofcourse it is not.Play it thru some real cabinets ,and you will know what i mean.
BTW ,the price of the Vox Tonelab series are at the bottom point now.This means "new stuff on NAMM"!At least i hope so!
I am certain that No Modeller is exact the same thing that is modelled from ,but a Vox AD is a strong equipment wich delivers many different sounds and effects.I can jump from a Soldano Lead with some delay and reverb on it to a Bassman sound with some phaser with one switch.And it is really great if you need more of that kind of sounds.

Still i am Jonesing for a Diezel Herbert wich has MIDI and a TC Electronic G-System ,wich give me all the tonal possibilities and relieability.But only over 40 watts of power!
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

I can't believe people really can say stuff like, "Stuff from the 60's is fine. Why try to do any better?" with a straight face.

Especially people with high gain amplifiers, equipped with more knobs than "volume, bass, treble" :D
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

Let it die already, and lets all laugh at the Mac comercial where PC has to go listen to EMO!!!! LOLZ 11111
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

Not by a long shot. Has digital technology topped out? Hell no. Just as digital video, audio and photography have improved to the point where tape players and film cameras are becoming obsolete, digital technology will improve in the amp modeling business. I don't think will see the end of tube amps but I do think that technology will always improve in the amp modeling business. Not as much in the feature area but in the quality of the modeling. That's just my opinion.

Thanks,
CoachC
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

Here's another question relating to modelling. Who's to say when they build the perfect tube amp models for you that they haven't also figured out how to get rid of needing the guitarist as well?

For example, keyboards have guitar voices. If modelling means we don't need tube amps, won't keyboards (synthesizers / computers / MIDI) eventually replace the need to even have a guitarist?

I know it sounds sort of odd, but to me it's along the same illogical lines: if modelling will eliminate the need for tube amps, I feel that by the same token, keyboards, MIDI, and the like, will replace the need for a guitarist. As it is, a keyboard can almost eliminate the need for a string section.
 
Last edited:
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

TwinReverb said:
Here's another question relating to modelling. Who's to say when they build the perfect tube amp models for you that they haven't also figured out how to get rid of needing the guitarist as well?

For example, keyboards have guitar voices. If modelling means we don't need tube amps, won't keyboards (synthesizers / computers / MIDI) eventually replace the need to even have a guitarist?

I know it sounds sort of odd, but to me it's along the same illogical lines: if modelling will eliminate the need for tube amps, I feel that by the same token, keyboards, MIDI, and the like, will replace the need for a guitarist. As it is, a keyboard can almost eliminate the need for a string section.
Click to expand...

Ask the 80s :D

By the same token, wouldn't the keyboard ultimately replace EVERY instrument, including a separate vocalist? And after that, wouldn't a laptop computer replace the keyboard?

There's relatively little chance of any of this happening. Why? The cool factor. Playing a guitar looks cool, and as long as there are dudes chasing tail, anything else could happen and you'll still have said dudes buying and playing guitars.
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

TwinReverb said:
Here's another question relating to modelling. Who's to say when they build the perfect tube amp models for you that they haven't also figured out how to get rid of needing the guitarist as well?

For example, keyboards have guitar voices. If modelling means we don't need tube amps, won't keyboards (synthesizers / computers / MIDI) eventually replace the need to even have a guitarist?

I know it sounds sort of odd, but to me it's along the same illogical lines: if modelling will eliminate the need for tube amps, I feel that by the same token, keyboards, MIDI, and the like, will replace the need for a guitarist. As it is, a keyboard can almost eliminate the need for a string section.
Click to expand...

Keyboard players lack the "coolness" factor of a guitar player,plus the guitar is a solo instrument.I don't see the guitar being ever put to the backround..
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

Well my opinion is that it just lacks the organic factor. I would never (unless budget forces me) replace any instrument, whatsoever, with a keyboard, whether on a CD or live. It lacks, to me, the "street cred" factor as well (anyone, given enough time, can MIDI an entire CD).
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

LesStrat said:
I don't have the patience to read 7+ pages of

"Modelling sux."

"No it doesn't"

"Yes, it does."

*rinse & repeat*
Click to expand...
Neither do I so here's my $0.02 on the original topic without reading about half the posts so far.

I think that the limiting factor on how good modeling can get is more a matter of our acceptance than of technology. It seems to me that there's little or no demand for a "high end" modeling amp. I'd throw out the price crash on the HK Zentera as an indicator. What modeling devices have sold well with a street price of > 5-600 bucks? Line 6 can sell Spiders all day long but how many folks do you know that own Vettas, Zenteras, or other such beasts?

I bring this up because, if the market isn't interested in high end modeling, who's gonna be silly enough to invest a wad of dough in developing significantly better modelers?

The ugly truth is that people can (and do) make SS guitar amps that are as harmonically complex and touch sensitive as tube amps. I know of some folks with "golden ears" who were convinced of this. The problem is that the SS amp I'm thinking of costs well over $1500. At this point, you're probably asking yourself "Who'd pay close to two grand for a SS amp?" And that's why there are only a couple examples of high-end SS guitar amps.

I think the same goes for modelers. Until there are many players who believe that a modeler is worth more than a Hot Rod Deluxe, nobody in his right mind is going to invest the kind of R&D money that it would take to make a significantly better version. This creates a somewhat vicious cycle since the longer it takes for a high-end modeling amp to become known, the more DMA technology becomes entrenched in people's minds as a technology that does not provide high-end tone.
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

JB_From_Hell said:
Ask the 80s :D

By the same token, wouldn't the keyboard ultimately replace EVERY instrument, including a separate vocalist? And after that, wouldn't a laptop computer replace the keyboard?

There's relatively little chance of any of this happening. Why? The cool factor. Playing a guitar looks cool, and as long as there are dudes chasing tail, anything else could happen and you'll still have said dudes buying and playing guitars.
Click to expand...

And having a amp filled with a controlled fire to power your sound isn't as cool?

firebottleswo4.jpg
 
Re: Has modelling "topped out"?

JB_From_Hell said:
I can't believe people really can say stuff like, "Stuff from the 60's is fine. Why try to do any better?" with a straight face.

Especially people with high gain amplifiers, equipped with more knobs than "volume, bass, treble" :D
Click to expand...

I think alot of that depends on how active a listener you are and how evolved as a player you have or have not become.

In my travels looking for a new band I've seen a shocking number of set lists with nothing any later than 1968 on them. These are guys that have chosen to stop evolving musically. They've chosen to do this and they're putting what they have betting that this is something they can do and make money. And sure, some of them do. But that's the appeal of retro in that sense.

Now, with high gain....I would think anyone playing that sort of stuff would need to be addicted to tweaking knobs. It's so easy to get really terrible sound out of a high-gain amp. And this relates to something I touched on earlier; overwhelmingly I hear really terrible sounds from digital amps when it's folks using patches for high-gain. Now, having tweaked Flextones and Pod's and J-Stations and V-Amps I can tell you, the patches aren't what's bad there. If I can get a good sound out of it then I KNOW anyone else can. But what I think happens alot of times is that the modeler is equipped to add a little "more" which may very well result in making that patch sound terrible.

There was a thread that criticized the "Insane" model on the Line 6 Spider series amps. I used the "Insane" model pretty frequently and got good results when I had my Spider. However, I make no bones about the fact that I had to be very conscious of cranking up the gain and turning it into a soup of fizzy mush. I used to use that model for a "Steve Vai" rip-off tone which, and if you listen to Steve with his Carvin's, he's really not very high-gain at all! Alot of that tone he gets is the result of playing and NOT cranking the Gain. The more I turned down, the closer I got and it was one of those things that just counfounded me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
6 Month Strymon Iridium Review
Replies
3
Views
2K
NegativeEase
NegativeEase
schecterplayer
A Frustrating NPD: Zoom MS70-CDR Noise Issues
Replies
11
Views
4K
vegetablejoe
vegetablejoe
K
Yamaha DG60
Replies
5
Views
2K
Condemnedsoul
Condemnedsoul
Z
Modelling Amp v. Normal Solid-state
Replies
6
Views
1K
beaubrummels
beaubrummels
T
  • Locked
duped on wattage...
Replies
17
Views
2K
the toad
T
Back
Top