How long before amp modellers replace amps ?
- Thread starter six20aus
- Start date
Help Support The Boogie Board:
yettoblaster
Well-known member
It's doubtful to me, even though they're getting better sounds all the time.
It's one thing to use technology to make a better car: one that's easier to live with, is more efficient, lasts longer, etc. But something is truly missing if you grew up on cast iron pushrod V8's you could tinker with without a laptop.
Since there's no DOT mandating my Mark I Boogie must pass a smog test or anything that would limit me from using it, I can't see (since vacume tubes are still cheap enough and readily available) that I should buy into all the future ad copy that will claim they finally replicated to sound of my tube amp, since the past ad copy claimed the same thing and has never delivered it yet.
I've already bought an amp that conceivably will outlast ME. Why should I spend more money on something that claims to model its sound?
A new Viper will beat about anything old, but costs a lot.
I'm not convinced the smart money is with with amp companies trying to use voltage to model what is born of current.
It's like turbo-charging an aluminum four-banger, winding the bejesus out of it and claiming it offers the same performance as an old V8.
Maybe as THEY measure performance it will, but it ain't gonna SOUND the same! And I'm betting it will not respond the same either, especially in the midrange. :wink:
They should do like Randall if they like transistors, and just go for it on its own thing.
I don't so much mind Sansamp or PODS for their uses, and even have gotten lots of use out of Tech 21 amps now and then. But they aren't really modelers, they're analog sorta doin' their own thing.
That would be smarter money IMHO, but I still prefer my Boogie because to me there's never a question that it will sno'nuff deliver what I expect whether I'm indoors, outdoors, or in a hanger, barn, or club.
With a modeler, I'd need another lifetime (once convinced it was user friendly, which is a whole 'nuther can o' worms) to learn which way not to point it in case I need to constantly adjust it on the fly, which I never seem have to do with any decent tube amp. I can do it all from the guitar, because I know how it will respond.
I don't think I'm patient enough anymore to believe it if they should start claiming (as they have in the past) that they have captured that too.
It's one thing to use technology to make a better car: one that's easier to live with, is more efficient, lasts longer, etc. But something is truly missing if you grew up on cast iron pushrod V8's you could tinker with without a laptop.
Since there's no DOT mandating my Mark I Boogie must pass a smog test or anything that would limit me from using it, I can't see (since vacume tubes are still cheap enough and readily available) that I should buy into all the future ad copy that will claim they finally replicated to sound of my tube amp, since the past ad copy claimed the same thing and has never delivered it yet.
I've already bought an amp that conceivably will outlast ME. Why should I spend more money on something that claims to model its sound?
A new Viper will beat about anything old, but costs a lot.
I'm not convinced the smart money is with with amp companies trying to use voltage to model what is born of current.
It's like turbo-charging an aluminum four-banger, winding the bejesus out of it and claiming it offers the same performance as an old V8.
Maybe as THEY measure performance it will, but it ain't gonna SOUND the same! And I'm betting it will not respond the same either, especially in the midrange. :wink:
They should do like Randall if they like transistors, and just go for it on its own thing.
I don't so much mind Sansamp or PODS for their uses, and even have gotten lots of use out of Tech 21 amps now and then. But they aren't really modelers, they're analog sorta doin' their own thing.
That would be smarter money IMHO, but I still prefer my Boogie because to me there's never a question that it will sno'nuff deliver what I expect whether I'm indoors, outdoors, or in a hanger, barn, or club.
With a modeler, I'd need another lifetime (once convinced it was user friendly, which is a whole 'nuther can o' worms) to learn which way not to point it in case I need to constantly adjust it on the fly, which I never seem have to do with any decent tube amp. I can do it all from the guitar, because I know how it will respond.
I don't think I'm patient enough anymore to believe it if they should start claiming (as they have in the past) that they have captured that too.
Why model when you can sample? The technology already exists. Once you have sampled all the great guitar sounds, why not let a computer choose the notes based on the matrix presented at the moment? It will never be late or get drunk or try to pick up on your girlfriend. Then you can just sit there with your headphones on and stare into space. It will be just as good only better, trust me! 
:shock:
To model you need analog to digital conversion. An open note on your sixth string could be an E or even a C but for reference the E will be about 80 cycles per second. Digital conversion needs at least one full swing to catch the note or 1/80th of a second. That is longer than you think, you can feel it. A tube amp does not wait, it plays the note, there is no conversion. You can feel that too. Feel is EVERYTHING when you are expressing yourself. I don't see any way around this obstacle of the inability of all modeling systems to capture the attack correctly. My opinion is that it will never be as good as a tube amp. That does not mean that it will not take over and dominate the marketplace. Look at (or rather listen to) the changes in "popular" music in the last 40 years. Considering that, modeling will make no real difference anyway. :roll: None of this will stop people from playing real music though, you can beat on things in the kitchen and hoot and holler for that!
:shock: To model you need analog to digital conversion. An open note on your sixth string could be an E or even a C but for reference the E will be about 80 cycles per second. Digital conversion needs at least one full swing to catch the note or 1/80th of a second. That is longer than you think, you can feel it. A tube amp does not wait, it plays the note, there is no conversion. You can feel that too. Feel is EVERYTHING when you are expressing yourself. I don't see any way around this obstacle of the inability of all modeling systems to capture the attack correctly. My opinion is that it will never be as good as a tube amp. That does not mean that it will not take over and dominate the marketplace. Look at (or rather listen to) the changes in "popular" music in the last 40 years. Considering that, modeling will make no real difference anyway. :roll: None of this will stop people from playing real music though, you can beat on things in the kitchen and hoot and holler for that!
Amp Modeling is what it is. A model of, or representation of the real thing.
As stated earlier, a model of anything will never be the same as the original. It will be close (some are really great as you listen to them), but none will ever be exactly the same as the original.
I don't think transistors alone will ever have the character or personality that tubes and tube amps have.
And this is all coming from a guy who owns a GT-6, POD, and Behringer V-Amp Pro. I like them all, there is a big "fun" factor with all the built in goodies, and they are great to record "scratch tracks" with to get your drummer on tape. When played live IMO they sound best with a (you guessed it) Tube Power Amp.
But when it comes time to really "Boogie", .............
Dom
As stated earlier, a model of anything will never be the same as the original. It will be close (some are really great as you listen to them), but none will ever be exactly the same as the original.
I don't think transistors alone will ever have the character or personality that tubes and tube amps have.
And this is all coming from a guy who owns a GT-6, POD, and Behringer V-Amp Pro. I like them all, there is a big "fun" factor with all the built in goodies, and they are great to record "scratch tracks" with to get your drummer on tape. When played live IMO they sound best with a (you guessed it) Tube Power Amp.
But when it comes time to really "Boogie", .............
Dom
tobytheplatypus
Well-known member
i used a line6 HD147 halfstack for about 2 years...32 clean/distortion models, 16 cabinet models...dont get me wrong, i got awesome tone out of it.
but nothing compares to my boogie. in the line6 i was using the triple rectifier model mainly...and it is nothing compared the triple rectifier sitting across the room from me
they have their place, i will admit - some ppl need 36 channels and a super variety of tones, but after playing both, i will never use anything but mesa again
but nothing compares to my boogie. in the line6 i was using the triple rectifier model mainly...and it is nothing compared the triple rectifier sitting across the room from me
they have their place, i will admit - some ppl need 36 channels and a super variety of tones, but after playing both, i will never use anything but mesa again
clutch71
Well-known member
I remember this same argument years ago for Digital cameras. It was film vs. digital. I was a die hard hold out for film and shutter speed. Now I have all digital, even my camcorder that I post those amatuerish youtube clips with. Digital now rivals film. Even Mamiya has a digital medium format now. Canon is offering the 5d with a true 35mm sensor so you no longer have the 1.5 magnification feature for lenses. Which has always been an asset for long lenses but a draw back on wide angle lenses.
Point is I think sampling technology will improve. It may take a while but I think it's all a matter of time. Am I happy about it? Not really. There's just something nastalgic about owning a tube amp.
Point is I think sampling technology will improve. It may take a while but I think it's all a matter of time. Am I happy about it? Not really. There's just something nastalgic about owning a tube amp.
I'm sure that day will come and likely it's closer tan we want to believe. Modelling right now is pretty awsome... 10 years ago it sucked IMHO.
I'm sure it will meet and exceed valve technolgy but no matter what I'll always play all tube amps and modelleing amps will always be second banana.
Khing
I'm sure it will meet and exceed valve technolgy but no matter what I'll always play all tube amps and modelleing amps will always be second banana.
Khing
Never.
If you want a warm, dynamic, natural, harmonically rich sound, you need tubes.
They can sample all they want, there will always be a difference to the sound.
I can see the average guitar amateur going the modelling way when he starts out, but the more he improves the more he will evolve towards a real amp.
Especially for clean and mild overdrive, tubes are second to none.
MetalMatt
Well-known member
What about that Randall amp...the MTS. With all those different preamps. Isn't that a modeller but with tubes, that got close. Right? I don't know... :roll:
A few responses first:
To Rocky (LOL BTW): I disagree; I just can't believe that the time period between now and modellers ruling will be a prime number; just doesn't make sense.
Re: Nostalgia of owning a tube amp: Nostalgia is 'a wistful desire to return ... to a former time'; nostalgia with regard to owning a tube amp would seem to imply that in a former time owning a tube amp was the best thing to do. This is clearly not the case; tube amps remain the best way to get guitar tone for almost all applications; jazz guitar being a possible exception (I use an Evans JE150 and love it; it also happens to be the best transistor amp I've ever found for getting an overdriven sound; not hi-gain, rather, furry). The most expensive, acknowledged best guitar amps today are tube.
I agree with the comments about 'not in our lifetime' (to paraphrase). The reasons tubes are great for guitar tone are inherently tied to the reasons that tubes have been eclipsed by transistors, digital, etc. for other applications: it's the doggedly analog, electronic characteristics of tubes that give tube amps the edge over modelling, transistors, etc.
Touch is a big part: I have a Pod 2.0 that I use with headphones for practicing; I haven't used it through amplification so this isn't an entirely fair comparison, but...there is now way I would think I was playing a guitar through a tube amp when I play the Pod (not to mention that the sound doesn't come close but, again, I should take it out and put it through an amp to see how different that is); the touch is just nowhere near what a tube amp provides IMO. Could somebody come up with modelling that captures the touch of tubes? I guess it's possible: a $100 chess program (Fritz) can hold it's own against just about any player in the world. I'm not holding my breath and don't think it will happen any time soon.
To Rocky (LOL BTW): I disagree; I just can't believe that the time period between now and modellers ruling will be a prime number; just doesn't make sense.
Re: Nostalgia of owning a tube amp: Nostalgia is 'a wistful desire to return ... to a former time'; nostalgia with regard to owning a tube amp would seem to imply that in a former time owning a tube amp was the best thing to do. This is clearly not the case; tube amps remain the best way to get guitar tone for almost all applications; jazz guitar being a possible exception (I use an Evans JE150 and love it; it also happens to be the best transistor amp I've ever found for getting an overdriven sound; not hi-gain, rather, furry). The most expensive, acknowledged best guitar amps today are tube.
I agree with the comments about 'not in our lifetime' (to paraphrase). The reasons tubes are great for guitar tone are inherently tied to the reasons that tubes have been eclipsed by transistors, digital, etc. for other applications: it's the doggedly analog, electronic characteristics of tubes that give tube amps the edge over modelling, transistors, etc.
Touch is a big part: I have a Pod 2.0 that I use with headphones for practicing; I haven't used it through amplification so this isn't an entirely fair comparison, but...there is now way I would think I was playing a guitar through a tube amp when I play the Pod (not to mention that the sound doesn't come close but, again, I should take it out and put it through an amp to see how different that is); the touch is just nowhere near what a tube amp provides IMO. Could somebody come up with modelling that captures the touch of tubes? I guess it's possible: a $100 chess program (Fritz) can hold it's own against just about any player in the world. I'm not holding my breath and don't think it will happen any time soon.
jdurso
Well-known member
it could happen but not until the quantum computer chip is realized and then is made cost effective to be used in modellers...... quantum chips for those who dont know will use a 3rd dimension in a programming lanuage.... right now binary is used which is 1 or zero, on or off, 5 volts or 0..... with a quantum chip you know use 0,1, or 2...... if you look at the math the degree at which the chip goes through algorithms will be mind blowingly fast because instead of doing 2 to the power of x your doing 3 to the power of x...... if anyone can follow that you can see how fast the power of a quantum chip can grow...... with that said the algorithms that emulate the sound, better known as modelling can become more complicated without having to use ridiculously expensive chips ...... with more complex algorithms you can then nail down the reactions and natural characteristics of a tube amp...... it would be like going from a high school science lab microscope to the hubble in terms of the differences between the chips used today and a quantum chip..... whether this happens in our lifetimes i dont know
wicked1
Well-known member
I think it for the most part it already has. If you don't believe me check this out for yourself http://forum.midiaddict.com/viewtopic.php?t=88703 .I bet I could post ten of these and you would be wrong more often than not. Even Mike Soldono has said he couldn't pick his own amp from a modeled one in a recording why do you think that is ? But he also said which I agree with he could tell the difference in playing them. So the question isn't sound so much as feel. I think that's just a matter of time. The vox tonelab has a great feel to it ( but I guess it has a tube ':wink:') I think a modeler is a great option if your in a cover band that covers a lot of ground no one in your audience will know the difference
You mean one of these... see photo below of my Lynch Box Full Stack...
This is to me what represents the best modelling amp type to own... all tube... with well over a dozen preamp modules to choose from and more to come. Designed by Bruce Egnater input from George Lynch... built and sold by Randall Amplification.
I just bought a small Vox AD30VT for ease of portability for rehersal... it's a respectable amp but don't be confused it's no where near the Randall Lynch Box I own or for that matter the Soldano and koch I own. It is however very respectable and adequate for rehersals away from home... I chose it becaue of all the small modelling amps I tried it had the best tone and feel for my needs. I also tried the larger Vox modelling head... AD100VTX with matching 2x12 closed back cab... very cool but again not even close.
Modelling still has a ways to go and I feel when it gets there the designers are going to realize there is more going on in that glass envelope then they could have imagined.
Craig
Thats right... but I'm not splittin hairs... if someone calls it modelling thats good by me... though I usually assoicate that term with a digital amp... and I do agree that Amp cloning is an accurate description however the Lynch mods are designed with GL's input and as far as I know the Brahma is the only one cloning an amp... George's old Marshall Plexi.
The Lynch Box speaker cab is based on George's old Hiwatt cab and the Eminance Super V speakers are clones of the Fanes that are in that old Hiwatt cab.
IMHO Randall has a great product with the MTS line.
Craig
MesallicA
Well-known member
digital will eventually take over, its inevitable.
Similar threads
