You trying to get even more people to hate me? I honestly couldn’t care less…bring it on John I will say it’s hardly surprising to me that even through a shitty load box and not even using a microphone, the pro still kicks the shit outta the other stuff…if you put a mic on that amp and then ran that mic through a nice Telefunken V76 or a nice API the way God Intended, the difference would even be waaaay more noticeable
I’ve read through the comments, the line from the pro Digital crowd seems to be “who cares I don’t hear a difference and if there is? Who gives a shit!” pretty much in line with what I would expect from that kind of talent level…a 16 to 30 year old demographic with that practised cynicism so common in this age range. Would you prefer sugar with your coffee or saccharine? Olive oil and balsamic on greens or corn oil and white vinegar? A Rolls-Royce and a Jaguar and a Ford Fiesta all do 75 mph on the way to Vegas. Which is the superior ride? Obviously the real amp and dedicated pedals are going to be better than any modler, if you’re happy with a Ford Fiesta ?…good for you, but don’t try to say that it’s as good as as a Rolls-Royce.
I can think of very few people who can really judge how right Tom is about what he says. I mean, come on guys, Mr. Tom Bukovac is not an idiot and if he says so, then he has his good reasons for it. I honestly don't understand how anyone can get upset about this. He just tells his opinion, tells it like it is and he gets a lot of backlash in return. It's a crazy world... ps: "....the way God Intended..." = The Almighty in his infinite wisdom surely intended for an amp to be miked and the signal then run through a V76 or API... This is great, Tom! I mean, after all, he is God, right? Love it...and love you, man 🤣
Thanks Tom for stating the FACTS! I’ve said the same thing for years - some people simply either don’t play in bands or record guitars in real pro studios. I’m sure modelers sound fine to a bedroom player. To each their own, but we know there is NO substitute for glowing power tubes & saturated transformers!
@@501chorusecho You are an example of why I, and others, still use producers for recordings, even if I have to wait. If I hired you to produce/engineer a record, I don’t have to worry about quality or getting the sound I want. That’s your job and why I or anyone would hire you. I’m too wrapped up in the playing and arranging, where I need to be, to think about it. I know I’m stepping in it here but: for anyone to argue in bad faith or be combative with/about Tom Bukovac (given his experience, musicality, and love for music) about recording or playing guitar is really not the way to go. Yes, there will be differences in opinion and experiences but taking jabs at him is unbelievably ignorant. It shows to me someone who has really lost their way musically and the joy of playing guitar.
Exactly. Also, it is hard enough to even tell a difference between the two when a/b'd, but put it in a mix and you won't be able to tell, nevermind non-guitar people being able to tell the difference or even care. Supposedly there is a feel difference with the sag of a real amp vs a modeler. but I feel that you get used to what you play.
@@JDStone20 You are 100% correct. The difference is in the "feel" of a tube amp and how it reacts to your playing, especially for edge-of-breakup stuff. Problem is that many tube amps have to be run at loud volumes before you really experience that. You can learn to make a modeler work for you and you can replicate much of those subtle nuances with volume and a good speaker (headphones don't really work for that).
If it’s the tone you’re chasing, you’d play through a vintage or boutique tube amp. Hell, even a tweed pro junior will get you there. Modelling is a representation of tone
@@los_rubosIt’s a lot easier than figuring out how to touch the strings to make the amp react to create the desired sound. Studying manuals to find something is easier than spending time to find a way to physically touch the strings coordinating with the amp.
I both agree and disagree with Tom. Yes, real amps still reign supreme, and while digital gets close, it’s not identical. That said, even two amps of the same brand and model can sound different. For most of us, getting close is more than good enough. Plus, I don’t have access to a closet full of amps, cabinets, mics, or some of the studio gear that’s included with digital options. And let’s be real-I can’t crank a Plexi to the volume it needs to truly shine.
Well there is no true amp tone unless you sit directly in front of it. It’s gets processed through boards and pro tools in mix then reprocessed again in mix down then through a pa with pa speaker! So the amp is only good to a purist in front of you ! And we all know live show or radio that tone is not the same in may car or at a show through a pa
Nowadays good digital amp solutions are 90+% of the real deal in terms of sound, maybe 70/80% in terms of feel but for many people a 100% worth compromise for weight, flexibility and budget.
I think the real trap is believing your gear HAS to sound like a vintage amp. How about focusing on getting a GREAT tone, period, which is totally possible with good modelers and speaker combos. This obsession with thinking that ONLY tube amps can sound good is ridiculous. Many recorded tones throughout rock history were guitars direct into consoles, no amp involved at all. A great tone is a great tone whether you've made it with a deluxe reverb or a Toyota Camry.
To be fair, direct into a vintage board would have meant going through tube-powered preamps and, in most cases, tube-powered compressors. At least until the solid-state amp came along.
What is even more ridiculous is to believe that vintage amp components are not degrading over time and still sound exactly like 50-60 years ago, when they were brand new and all the epic records had been made :)
@@johnsmith-bk4ps there has been nothing new in the music for a long time, people are just mixing what has been written many times already. Why do the components always drift for the better? It's like with guitar pickups, I've never heard that someone said their guitar started to sound worse after installing a new set. The sound is always better :)
Rhett Shull, Tim Pierce and a 3rd guitarist(maybe Pete Thorne) in a studio testing a UA(I think) plugin(s) that simulate a fender and Marshall amp and the studio had real Marshall and fender amps to compare. The console operator switched between the real and plugin with one of the guitarist playing and they would try to guess which was the plugin versus the real amp. It was pretty much a 50/50 chance of getting it right. It was an eye opener.
But at least Tim and Pete have real credentials. Only Uncle Larry can press any buttons for me. Rhett makes prettier looking videos and vastly superior click bait but…….
Sorry, but I think this is kind of a silly video. It was probably just your recording technique, but they all sounded bad (with headphones on). There was too much distortion and not the good kind. Comparing amps and modelers is a waste of time. They are different animals best suited for alternative applications, depending mostly on the player's standards and priorities. I use both but never compare analog and digital audio products. It's not necessary. They generally require different treatment in terms of playback or recording. I like your guitar playing, but why drag Tom into this mess?
I’d like someone to do a video with Tom where in the room he’s got his Princeton and an ODR-1, he’s in the control room, only hearing it through monitors, and someone plays a capture of his rig on a tonex, and have him try and identify which ones which by the feel alone only hearing it through the control room monitors.
Yep! That's the thing... people talk about feel, but what person is listening to music through amps? NO ONE, music is done in a mix, it is mastered it is done through monitors, it is rendered and released digitally.
@@areallyboredguy5825but the inspiration is in the players hands, if he doesnt feel inspired its not gonna be the right feel etc. Also, when playing live or in a band setting there is a big difference. Crank up a real amp next to a monitor and choose which one sounds the best at the same dB
@@ludvanlazarz live okay but I’m talking in a mix. And not that you made this argument but I feel like asking which is it? They don’t sound different in a mix to listeners so therefore they don’t sound different enough to warrant chasing. Or they do sound different but to the player and the player “may” play differently because of in room feel, a feeling that can’t exactly be captured, mastered, and released to the listeners.
When my guitar heroes were on the stage or in the studio, they didn't worry about whether anything they were using accurately reproduced the sound or feel of something else. They used what they had to get a sound and feel that inspired them. Even if that was just running directly into the desk. The important question has never been if X sounds like or feels like Y. You can get two Xs that came out of the factory one-after-another and they will sound and feel different. It is just finding something that sounds and feels good to you and then doing something with it.
But the bottom line is that your 'guitar heroes' didn't use digital simulations-the sound of a real amp is a big component of what makes them your guitar heroes.
@@lightningstrikes7314 The sound really doesn't change much IN A MIX, for the end user and the person listening unless you listen to guitar parts through guitar amps, bass guitar through bass amps, have speakers for the drums, keyboards, and vocals... you are never listening to what the artist is "feeling" so it is all a moot point.
@@lightningstrikes7314 That's not even true for a big portion of the younger guitarist community - a lot of people grew up listening to the sounds of Modern Metal / Djent / Progressive Metal, which the majority of players in that style had already ditched tube amps. So for many Metal guys, the sound of their Guitar Heroes IS digital! \m/
I think the part I struggle with is I never feel inspired by digital gear. I want to like it, I keep buying them and I keep trying but I just can’t seem to connect
Before his death Dumble said, para phrasing here, digital is getting close to capturing the tone and feel of an actual amp and it's only a matter of time before it does, and it will eventually happen. This being said, if you can't achieve beautiful tones and create beautiful music from a simple set up like a Fender Princeton/Deluxe, Marshall or Vox with 2 or 3 classic pedals, all the digital gear and tone chasing will never make you sound great.
I played digital for decades (Kemper, Line6, Vox Tonelab) and switched back to tube amps a couple of years ago. I can totally live with playing digital and I liked it for years but I found out that I play very different on a tube amp. The response is totally different from a digital amp and it also forces me to play in a different way that I seemed to like over the digital amps. So Tom is right in that aspect. Listening at FOH you won't hear the difference between a tube amp and let's say a Kemper but playing wise you will.
Totally agree a generation of guitar players are missing out on the feel of non digital (valve particularly) amps. I've seen some of the greats who have tried digital and their playing is always diminished by the clinical response of modellers. The audience might not notice a difference in sound, however as a player I have to enjoy my show.
Same experience here. 10 years of modeller gigging and went back to amps. I’ll happily play both but prefer that “touch” of a tube amp. Not chased the next game changer since.
I asked Tom once how he usually would set his amp. He wrote, dude I set it to where I like the tone. Play with the knobs. If you don’t like any of the choices sell it and buy something that you do like the tone.
Honestly, I’m getting tired of everyone getting hung up on the “sound” of digital. It’s kind of like the argument with the audiophiles about vinyl over everything else. Sure: a well mastered and carefully pressed high quality LP through a Macintosh tube amp and amazing speakers IS going to sound better than Spotify through Bluetooth headphones… But you have to listen to that one album right there in that space, and you can’t do anything else. And it’s going to cost you. And you have to be prepared to live with the quirks and compromises and glitches that come with the format. Noise, scratches, cleaning… And how much space it takes. You can’t shuffle a bunch of tracks from other artists in. And you will never get that quality in your car or when you’re jogging… so how do you live? You make the small sacrifice of slightly lower quality for a LOT more convenience is what you do. Guitar modeling and capturing is the same thing. Sure a pristine Blackface anything is always going to sound better in the room. But you have that one sound. In an amp that might give you a hernia if you aren’t careful. And you’ll have to maintain it. And you have to be aware of the quality of the wall power. And you have to have spare fuses and tubes. If you suddenly find you need the sound of a different amp, a Vox or a Marshall or a Dumble… well… you need to also get your hands on one of them. OR… for the price of a mid range tube amp, you can have a very close approximation of several hundred different amps, cabs, and an entire warehouse of effects and processing, that you can instantly put in any order you want, and swap out instantaneously if you change your mind. There will always be a place for a great tube amp and analog pedals… but as long as most of us are making music under less than ideal conditions, the modeling thing will have a reason to exist. How many folks today even know how to maintain and service tube gear? Size, price, convenience, and options should never be discounted.
And, for the record: this is coming from someone with 2 original Princetons (a Black and a Silverface) an original drip-edge Vibrolux, a Music Man 65 212, and a vintage Supro. But I also now own a Yamaha THR 30II. Which one sees the most use? The Yamaha. It’s not even close.
A guy here in NYC who’s mixed & mastered my recordings, got into an argument w/ another mastering engineer about a Nine Inch Nails remastered album released on vinyl. The guy was arguing that the vinyl re-release is soooo much than the original CD version in quality from his perspective. My friend said that it was by NO means better sound quality than the original CD version. The other engineer insisted he was wrong because he was a vinyl purist. Because that guy didn’t know, my friend said “I am the one who remastered it for the release on vinyl and I know what went into it”. Point is, digital and analogue have been side by side for decades and it’s a personal choice, not a collective agreement.
My amp modeler is amazing live. Recording wise it does have high sizzle that always needs tweaking. Also being in front of a real amp affects my playing and the sound. But at the end of the day, I use both.
The highest percentage of player experience is always in the fingers. This is where digital always falls flat. Listening to them like this alone is always difficult
I’ve got tube amps both new and vintage and I’ve had a Kemper for years and have a Fractal and for recordings, I’m more than happy with using either and I’ve often recorded both on the same songs and when I listen back now, I can’t tell which was which. You’ve got to spend some time dialing in both and working through their strengths and weaknesses. The one issue I’ve noticed with all digital gear is that they’re not quite as sensitive to (or at least it’s just plain different) with how it responds to rolling back my guitars volume. Now for in the room sound, I’m a full stack guy all the way and a modeler into a PA just doesn’t have the live feel of real amps in the room but being able to tweak and “mod” amps on the fractal in ways I don’t have the skills to do with a real amp.
This is the amp in the room versus mic'ed amp argument again. No one can reliably tell the difference when A/B'ing recorded sounds that are well dialed in. This has been shown over and over again. But they can definitely tell the difference standing in front of a real amp vs a modeler through a monitor/FRFR. Especially if they're the ones playing the guitar.
@ Right on. That's what I meant regarding mic'ed amp. But you're right in that if it's live the player hears the amp and generally isn't aware of what the audience hears through the PA. Though in small clubs the audience will hear either all stage guitar or hear a mix of stage and PA.
@@angrybuzzy Which depending will be worse for the audience, especially if the player's ears dull as the evening wears on and either turns up or increases high end and the guy on the floor is directly in line with that. Also been on the bass side of the stage and heard no guitar before too.
John, I think we can all agree that you are the Tom Bukovac of dialing in a tone. I haven't seen anyone who can get a modeler/profiler to sound exactly like the original gear like you can. Thank you for the excellent content, the entertainment, and the knowledge!
@@poulwinther probably not, but that's because he is setting his amp to sound like his modeler. I can also make any tube amp sound like the modeler at its best, but can't make the modeler sound like the amp at its best. TH-camrs always do A/B comparisons that fool you into thinking 2 pieces of gear are the same because there is always a setting where they sound the same. The real difference comes when you start dialing them to the best they can offer.
What Tom is saying is true, but you gotta be in the room with the amp to experience that difference, and most of it is the cab and 12-inch speaker interacting with the amp-though tube saturation, compression, and “sag” are also perceptible. Beyond that, amps are quirky. They are inconsistent from day to day. They make funny noises, generate heat, and have electricity that is audible when amplified. Funny that sound engineers spent years trying to eliminate these sounds, but they are what make the amp “real.” It's a physical thing, and you need to live with an amp in your room that you use regularly to appreciate those nuances. Once it’s recorded, all of these points are (mostly) useless and people can’t hear an appreciable difference. No matter what, some people are gonna get religious about this stuff. It’s all relative and contextual and the application is what matters most. For Tom, in his garage, on a stage, in a professional sound studio, I have no doubt those differences are real and important. If it makes you feel and play better then it matters. Does the audience care? Yeah, probably not so much.
Exactly! I have played with a custom made high powered tweed for hundreds of gigs and it was amazing at the best of times. But sometimes it sounded completely different from gig to gig and overall I just found tube amps inconsistent for what I needed. In recent years I have valued a smaller form factor and a unit that is consistent from gig to gig that I still enjoy the sound of once I have dialled it in. Especially now that silent stages are more and more common, having a tube amp behind me becomes kinda redundant when I had the sound coloured from a sm57 hung down over the speaker going into my IEMs. Never mind the whole weight factor, setting up, packing down ect...
That's true, but at the same time, in a lot of studios the cab is in a different room and for dubs, the guitarist may just be in the control room, so you're not in the room.
By the time it’s filtered through the mic or the speakers or the DAW or the PA or your cell phone, it doesn’t matter. An amplifier might be a better experience for the player in the room, but from the listener standpoint, it couldn’t matter any less.
Not exactly true. In a recording scenario the amp is going to be under a microscope and the differences will be much more noticeable. Especially if recorded or listening in a treated room compared to a bar or rehearsal space.
It's from an older Home Skoolin video. Who cares if you care, he cares about his craft and work and he knows what works for him. Maybe if you would work in his environment you would care as well.
People care because they look up to him, and for good reason, he’s a top session player. Not that his opinion is gospel, but he’s no average guitar player.
Buk and crew came to nyc, played on gear that could be found at your local guitar center.(working man’s gear)The nashville 3 all played travel-friendly partscasters, a few carefully chosen pedals, a deluxe reverb + sm57/E906. Sonically speaking, it was a tone junkie’s paradise. By far the best sounding guitar show ive seen since 1986. My hair stood up on my neck and never went down. If you ever have the opportunity, its a bucketlist guitar experience. I.m.o. Todays digital modelers are not even the pimple on the asscheeks of what was sonically available since the late 1950’s
I've had some time recently to get back into recording, and my opinions are as follows: I definitely like the "feel" and "sound in the room" of my real tube amp better than anything else, and I think that's what Uncle Larry is talking about more than recording - that and playing live, of course. I had the Dream '65 for about a day (someone got a hella good deal on Reverb) and I hated it. For recording various tones, and the variety, it's hard to beat the HX Stomp (or in my case, the Stomp XL). John's HX Stomp presets (so cheap and what a Christmas present!) are the best way to get started in getting great recorded tones and then being able to tweak them to make them your own. However, when I am playing through my studio monitors, it sounds/feels nothing like my real amp does, but I don't care - the recorded tone in the track is what matters to me, and my HX Stomp XL does the trick (and then some). Plus, being able to SAVE the exact settings in a preset and then come back the next day to do overdubs and not worry if knobs had been bumped makes it so easy. So, to summarize, when playing live or in my studio, I prefer the real tube amp for inspiration. For recording, the convenience and sounds of the HX Stomp XL are my way to go. Thanks for a great video, John, and Merry (Happy) Christmas to you!
It's all about what gear tools work for you. A lot of session players are like Tom with regard to real amps versus models. Both can do the job live or in the studio. You can't argue with Tom's success as a session player. Dan Huff would also be in that same category.
It’s not about comparing the tone against each other which many of you seem to be missing that point. It’s about feel. Something that a video cannot capture. I’ve heard Tom say this.
I’ve got two of the big dog Modelers. Both sound great in a mix, which is the most important thing. But-anyone that tries to sell you that they FEEL like a real amp is lying, have terrible sensory perception in their fingers, or they have no frame of reference. They get close (I find it is depending on the model), but they aren’t quite there. There’s a certain “steely” quality about the touch of them, across all platforms I’ve tried/bought. There’s a certain response that a tube amp has that you can’t replicate fully without those glowing tubes in the signal path. You can’t take one of the primary components out of what makes a tube amp and expect it to sound like a tube amp. It’s a simple concept that people’s egos can’t handle. That said, modelers are my favorite thing. They’re (generally) more cost effective, and VASTLY more valuable as far as form factor. But the next generation of them need to cut the crap and go tube front-end.
If you really want that now, get a Friedman IR-X/D/J and an HX Stomp and go with it. I have no problem with the feel. I still have a couple of tube amps I play now and again. The problem I have is reproducing a sound. I'll leave the amp as is, play it today and the sound is great, then in a couple of weeks play it again, same guitar and cable, same settings and it's different.
@ I pair my Helix with a VHT tube buffer before the guitar hits the input and it works great. I think this type of thing is where modeling needs to go next. Get a tube front end and pretty much any of the modelers out will play right.
@@UseTheSupeRsonic I have no problem with either method. But, for me, adding a bunch of other stuff defeats the purpose of an all in one unit. That's why I bought it.
The feel under the fingers is different, especially at higher volumes - sound and tone wise there may not be much difference but feel wise they will feel different especially when play loud.
I have to agree with Tom. I love digital amps and modelers. It's convenient, light weight, easy to use and sounds good enough. But when you sit next to a real Fender, Vox or Marshall, and run a modeler of the same amp. Always feels like something is missing from the modeler. I love my Catalyst CX, and all the other modelers I use for playing live and recording on the fly. But if I can, I am picking a real Fender Black Panel, Vox or Marshall.
The whole thing boils down to the Amp in the room vs. a miced amp in another room coming out the monitors. Having the Amp with you physically, so the guitar and the Amp could react to each other and the player is something digital modeling sorely lacks. It is exceptionally convenient and convincingly accurate with the proper source.
I have been gigging for 51 years, I have used Plexis, Twin Reverbs, Ac30s and many more (I currently have a Bogner Shiva 20th anniversary ,a Friedman Plex, PRS HDRX20, an ENGL Steve MOrse mini and an early 70s Champ. I would love to use these live but where I am quiet stages are the norm, even a cranked Champ is pretty loud. I currently favor the Fractal FM3 for my live work with one band and the Nano Cortex for the other, I am 68 and am still gigging twice a week and am currently rehearsing with 2 bands. I don't want to carry heavy amps to small gigs but would have no problem with using real amps in outdoor shows if they are practical. I have been using digital solutions for many years, are they as good as amps well that is a hard question to answer, they are designed to emulate a recorded amp and cab so it is not a realistic comparison. A real amp through a cabinet is not going to sound like the modeler through an FRFR OR PA when they are in the same room. In a recording on the other hand after all the processing, mixing and mastering et al are completed it would be virtually impossible to tell which guitar had used the real amp and which had used the modeler. I have recorded tracks that were done years ago and I know I used a Fender Supersonic on one track and my AXEFX 3 on another, I can't tell which are which. Realistically what it comes down to is what works for the individual, Tom works with real amps all the time and he is fortunate that he can do that, not everyone can.
As a longtime Helix user, I’ve recently made the jump to Fractal. I noticed a huge improvement in the modeling in the Fractal world. When I got my FM9, I created the same rig in my Helix rack and the FM9, the difference was beyond noticeable. Could I dial in the Helix to sound like the Fractal? Possibly, but the feel and warmth of the new modeling technology in the Fractal was something I found more pleasing. As for tubes vs modeling, tubes will always have that random nature and harmonics that modeling doesn’t have, yet. Can you tell the difference when listening to a recording? We’ve all seen the shootouts and the overwhelming majority cannot tell. In the end, do what makes you happy and don’t be bothered by what others think.
I've tried most of them since a zoom 3030 in the late 90s. Fact is, they all sound good now, it's just a matter of picking what you like and going with it. The real problem is people assigning subjective, not totally descriptive terms to sound instead of saying there's not enough in the 100Hz range or whatever.
@ As someone who was the IT manager for Line 6, I couldn’t disagree more. As with anything tech wise, the years only bring improvement on the code. Faster processors and new ways to model the whole of the amplifier circuits will only make the end product more like the original one. I won’t deny in the least that they are all very close to each other, but there are definitely huge improvements that have been made and others are standing apart from the rest. I have used and owned Line 6 products since the AxSys 212. I’m very familiar with how Line 6 operates and how to get the tone I need at the moment. That said, Fractal has made more improvements in the modeling and dyna cabs area and they seem to live their product. Whereas Line 6 has not updated their hardware in the flagship products in a decade. The physical chips are better now. That alone gives the competition a leg up. We will see what NAMM brings, but I’m not holding my breath.
@@BillBensen I understand that but the other piece of that is that the Helix has longevity. There's less of the it'll stop being supported vibe. Yes, new processors come out and all, but how much is that improvement really? I've had most of the products out there and to me they all sound good, it's more a matter of the ease of setting it up and the UI. Certain things on Fractal are annoying. Having to tell the device to have signal in and out is kind of odd. To me, that's time wasted having to tell it I want to plug my guitar in and have signal out of it every time I build a patch.
@ I will say that the UI in the Helix is far easier to use. Keep in mind, I’ve been using Helix products since their launch (even before that) and their architecture is showing its age. More detail in the modeling process needs more CPU, the new quad core processors will have a longer life, due in part to the power of the CPU. IF Line 6 comes out with a new HX platform at NAMM, that will be a defining moment. If another year goes by and the older CPU is still the flagship unit; they will have lost the market share. The fractions of a second that it takes to tell the unit what I/O to use, isn’t really a deal breaker. That’s a first world problem. To be fair, if you want to have the Helix output to another one, you have to tell it, as well. Keep in mind that I do understand the inner workings at the company and I’ve been neck deep in the modeling process, I know a thing or two about what has improved under the hood.
It's really going to come down to use case and budget. I can hear differences but with modellers getting you like 90-95% there, the space and budget savings make sense especially if I am just chilling and playing for myself.
I think to each his own preference . One thing to realize is when something is new in the gear world it takes time to improve the product . Just one example is comparing electronic drums in their infancy to the present . But for me personally vintage gear wins an overwhelming % of the time .
Biggest difference (one I seldom hear discussed) is that modelling necessarily includes the microphone. What is modelled is a recorded sound, not the sound of an amp/cab in a room. I have played a Fender Junior on a session, had it break down and replaced with a Helix model. As I was playing in the control room but recording the Junior, loud, in the main studio, the replacement made virtually no difference. But modelling can never replicate the feeling of standing in front of and interacting with an amp in a live situation.
What's the point in defending digital stuff? Profilers try to make a copy of analog stuff and modelers try to recreate the sound. In both cases, the digital devices are not the originals. And while they do indeed SOUND more and more similar, they never FEEL 100% the same - and if you're playing the stuff yourself, you should care about that aspect. I can feel whether my sound is being processed by a tube or a pair of chips. And if you can really play, then you should care. The advantages of Kemper, QC & Co. will never be in the sound, but only in aspects such as transportability or miking in live situations. Pros don't really like working with them in the studio because you always have to go through x menus to make adjustments.
@@homemaintenance1234 owning antique and vintage gear is just a status symbol now. Prove me wrong. Nobody is making any hit records with that shit, and everyone and their brother play guitar nowadays.
There are stores I visit where I can try out $10-15K vintage guitars and $3-6K vintage amps; they most definitely sound different. But I can't afford those, and the pedal models and IRs are LOGARITHMICALLY improving over time. Also, most listeners (including experienced/renowned musicians) can NOT tell the difference when they are hearing recordings(thanks to improved studio tech) or even live performances(thanks to improved live reinforcement tech). It is more about the feel/feedback loop of the performing musician and how successfully the new tech can reproduce it; that is improving daily. While I appreciate Uncle Larry's perspective, it is all simply a matter of time.
I appreciate the time you spent to do this, very interesting. When Tom said that, it got me thinking about the unique sound & feel of tube amps, and this video really helped me to hear what Tom has been saying. The difference in the sound was actually quite shocking to me.
To me it's a feel thing. Playing through a cranked tube amp has a totally different response in the room, it makes you play different. For the ease of recording in a home studio or bedroom playing at night, modelers are the way to go.
IN A MIX or live at volume - particularly for metal tones - cabs, speakers and mics are at least an order of magnitude more important - if not TWO - than an amp, digital or analogue.
Some times when I’m playing amp sims my guitar feels like a midi controller and using it to trigger pre recorded samples sounds from the amp plugin. There’s a real liveliness to real tube amps sounds most of my tone shaping takes seconds usually just turning the gain knob i can get many tones from tube amp versus a amp plugin it can take an hour of tweaking to get something usable tone from a plugin.
I'm a veteran tube guy who has been hardcore with Kemper for the past 5 years (LOVE it) and dabbled with HX Stomp (interesting but not loving as much) - if we are talking about recording, at this stage I think almost anyone would be hard-pressed to consistently win a blind listening test of the modelers/profilers vs. a real amp. The in-the-room live experience is a different thing, but I find the Kemper gear in particular comes close enough for me at the moment. No experience with QC or Tonex, but would not be surprised if people on those platforms have similar feedback to mine. But for me, perhaps more important than the sounds, is the play feel, and interaction with the guitar/player. The immediacy of a guitar into real amp is hard to beat, but again, I think Kemper comes pretty darn close. HX, not as much - I find that with HX, the guitar responsiveness is a little softer, and I have to push a bit harder to get the amp models to react the way I want them to. Would be interesting to hear how these other platforms like Dream, QC, Tonex deliver on this point. But I disagree with Tom's general argument that cheap digital technology won't ultimately do what the old stuff does - it's getting closer every day. Tubes will always have an allure, but today's tech is finally getting closer to replicating the magic - eventually they will close the gap IMO. I also think it's funny that people championing those vintage amps typically drive them with crappy, solid state OD boxes in front - so much for the tube mystique ;) John - I really enjoy checking out your videos - keep'em coming :) Very insightful and appreciated.
I agree, the whole "tubes rule" but then a giant pedalboard of solid state is funny, especially when there are digital pedals there too apparently not robbing tone.
The main component missing from all this Tom bashing is this: how does it sound in a BAND context & in a deep recording mix? That’s where the rubber meets the road. Modeling amps disappear to my ears in a live band setting. I used to do testing for a BIG company known in the modeling world. Once I compared the modeling rigs to my tube amps in my band, there was no contest. Even my bandmates were complaining about not being able to hear the modeling rig through the drums, bass, keys, and 2nd guitar rig. Facts.
Regarding mixing: Another point that people miss is the workflow aspect of real amps vs modeling. Having used both, I prefer physical amps because they do much less. I just want a Marshall to sound like a Marshall when tracking a basic part. I like turning an amp up and it sounds good. There’s also a case for presets but I found personally I never used them. So sometimes it’s the workflow of getting a usable sound. See Gibson Skylark for simplicity example. Best of luck 👌
The part and your playing - 100% that's what matters. I've heard people with great gear who didn't play well enough for anyone who was only using their ears to know it was great gear. A better player plugs into the same rig with the same settings and suddenly it sounds amazing.
It's just the difference between playing into the amp and riding the wave of its response and triggering a pre-engineered sound to produce a sound envelope to which you're only partially connected, and hearing sound from a guitar speaker, is different from a simulation of a speaker at line level, and many find it unsatisfying being used to amps, and the feeling of playing them as part of the instrument, to use a digital simulation in a dituation where they care about being inspired. It's much easier if you begin with more of the modern models and spend time recording or gigging with them , than if you depend on that instant feedback ( no, not that kind of feedback!) or response from the compression and swelling of the tube amp. It's not really easy to get all that amount of responsiveness, some of which is subconscious, from a skillfully programmed and edited preset on a modelling platform. You have to do so much tweaking with speaker location and direction , and mic'ing, to get a good sound in the air, that all those factors are ignored or glossed over superficially in line level non tube amp sounds. Sometimes it's easier and simpler to learn from experience or trial and error, how to get a good live sound in most different situations, than try to be a producer/architect/engineer with the "eye of God" point of view of the sound field based on mathematical vectors of structure. While the skills of hand shaping car body panels on an english wheel are disappearing due to CNC programming, the art and craft of matching guitar amp and effects with speaker on live stages is becoming a lost skill that is left to expert presets in line level modelling, and the ears ( or lack of them) of whoever the hell is paid to mix on and offstage PA. Musicians should learn to listen to each other snd develope a good onstage balance before relying on foldback mixes sent to their ears. Making TH-cam videos, or recording sometimes could be easier with modelling than with amps, but even then you have to be satisfied with only the sound, and not even the feel or the sense of reality. It seems to be harder to go from tubes to digital than the other way around.
I feel that the biggest difference between analog an digital is the dynamic response. So finding similar sound on a nondynamic sample, soft like You did in the start, or hard like the ToneX capture sample seems a bit flawed
Whenever I watch this kind of discussion, I always think please don't take away the opportunities for young guitar players to play real thing. I know the digital products are great these days and I can get why influencers like discussing this because everyone likes this types of discussion. But playing loud guitar amps and controlling them is completely different thing. And simply, it’s fun. Armature players don't need to think so much about anything like versatility or portability where professional musicians need to consider. I feel everything is commercialized too much these days.
There’s a hell of a lot of cope going on in this comments section-much of it no doubt from bedroom players and wedding/cabaret guitarists. When Tom started his Corona Lesson/Homeskoolin Series in 2020 he essentially pushed the reset button on TH-cam guitarists and kicked the table over. He raised the bar a thousand percent for guitarists surfing TH-cam on tone, instruments, setup, intonation, technique and tasteful/creative/roots rock guitar playing. He made all the shredders, jazzers and neo-soul purveyors look lame and generic. His opinion matters because he’s basically Nashville’s number 1 and he’s on the top of Mount Olympus with Derek Trucks, Michael Landau, Eric Johnson and Robben Ford et al. His friends are Dan Huff, Guthrie Trapp, Vince Gill and Joe Walsh amongst others. He hands out guitar wisdom for free-ignore it at your peril.
I love tube amps, I generally haven’t gotten as good of a tone out of digital in some instances, but I still appreciate the option and it can be fine for a lot of applications. I like the Strymon iridium pedal for some amp modeling. I also have some UAD stuff I’ve used. It can work. I think playing through a nice cranked amp, whether clean or gained up, there’s nothing like it from a performance perspective. It’s a feel thing. But that doesn’t mean it’s always going to be the best or easiest way to get great tone for a recording. The bigger question of whether the end listener really notices or cares, because that is what matter a whole lot. Also, I’d be curious to put someone like Tom in a blind test scenario and see if he can pick out modeled vs real amp. Some people with his strong opinions might be surprised, I’m not sure. Ultimately, it’s whatever gets the job done for you and works with your budget and application.
Lol no you dont. People use the AxeFx in arenas. I suggest you look at your setup. I also own nearly 10 tube amps and 5 solid state. I have no problem with any of them. Almost all high watt power amps are class D solid state.
@@imnotfishing You’re not Jeff Beck. If the reason you ‘need’ (your word) tubes is that Jeff Beck used them then that right there explains an awful lot about the state of guitar playing, and the guitar industry, today. I’m sorry to say it because I do like Beck, and he has some legendary albums, but towards the end he was just a parody of himself. To be fair, you can probably say that about most artists granted a sufficiently long career. Anyway, you didn’t answer the question. I suspect you don’t need tubes, you need a louder power amp for your Helix, whether it’s solid state, digital, or tubes. Your presets will sound different at volume - you can usually fix that with EQ.
A friend of mine once convinced me to order a glass of scotch from a $200 bottle. Did it taste great? Yes, but what made the night special was the conversation. Another time, a friend insisted that I ride his $8,000 carbon fiber road bike. Was it smooth? Yes, but what made the ride amazing was the scenery. Another friend gave me a ride in his new Mercedes, showing off how quiet the ride was and how solidly the doors closed. To him, it was amazing. To me, it was no better than a Honda Accord. Another friend is into super high end stereos. Another insists on only flying first class. Another can’t imagine someone putting hardwood floors in their house that aren’t rift and quartered. And some guitar players insist on only using the finest tube amps. For me, what makes a night of playing music special is not the gear, but rather the joy of creating beautiful sounds with friends. Choose the gear that serves your needs and fits your budget.
And I always cite Brian May using the solid state "Deacy" John Deacon built on things and no one knowing for decades. Everyone thought it was all Vox amps.
Not for the lack of trying I buy the new model each time quad cortex fractal line 6 but I have never felt the same way on stage or in my bedroom as I do when I plug into a real amp. The other thing I have noticed is every time I try to test this theory on others in the room with a/b boxes they always know even when the modeler is going through the power section of my tube amp.
Digital enables young and broke people to create awesome music on a budget. How could someone be against that. The music comes from the artist playing the instrument and not from the tubes. Of course they sound better but not everyone can afford them. In every artform tools change over time and enable artists in different ways. i think this is something we should cherish. Think of all the movies we would have never seen without digital cameras.
You can get a great sound through digital no question.... The biggest difference i've noticed is feel. A cooking tube amp just feels and responds "right" in a way that is inspiring to play and record. A good amp becomes an extension of the instrument.
To be honest, if you are an artist creating your own sound and music… IT DOESN’T MATTER. I’m absolutely sure that if the Beatles or Jimi Hendrix were in their prime today… they would be using EVERYTHING available to make their music stand out 🎸 These are only tools. Merry Christmas to all of you
That is not the issue. Steve Vai has used digital recreations, but his sound is abrasive and he often looks to find jarring sounds. I think it highly unlikely that your heroes would use a Tonex for instance. They were indeed great precisely because they were driven by sound. Emulations of a thing are just that emulations. Sad wannabes have bought into the hype that we have seen many times now about emulations being as good as. With a few exceptions I do analogue only. There is an enormous difference. If you want to play 80s hair metal by all means, but then the sounds they produced were often rubbish. As it was very few were digital.
John found what we’re REALLY missing in the first couple minutes…The “Bukovac’s hands y brain” plugin! Soooo… My CV includes: couple decades in vans and clubs, the occasional opening spot for a national act, a jazz degree, which qualifies me to work in any fast food restaurant on the planet and a quarter century of being a television and film composer. Thus, take anything that follows with at least a pound of salt. I’ve also served as a test pilot twanger to develop cabinet models for one of the big modeler companies. (was that obscure enough to not violate my nondisclosure?) My first experience with the tone master deluxe model was one morning at guitar Center. The store was virtually empty. It was sitting right next to a deluxe with the big metal ingot (transformer) inside it and the glass bottles (tubes). I was able to get them to sound as close to identical as “my“ ears could get them within a minute or two. The only reason I didn’t buy it then was due to the fact the taper on the Reverb was impossible to adjust. (it was either too much or not enough. There was no way to find sweet spot!) A a few months later, I saw Keith on 5 W world during a review of ALL of the deluxe models. (He had vintage, custom shop, and at that point the “upgraded“ version of the tone master version - the unit with the blonde cabinet and oxblood speaker cloth and celestion neodyminun speaker. Most of my attention went toward the upgraded tone master. I basically sat there watching the upgrades that they had made to the previous model go by. I was kind of bummed because I knew where there was a brand new one for merely $800 US. Then Keith mentioned: “if you’ve bought the earlier one and want these upgrades, there’s a USB jack in the bottom of the amp chassis!“ I immediately ditched my jammies and got in the truck to go buy the cheap one. To me, the tone master series is a unicorn of sorts in the sense that it was truly designed to function in an analog realm. (Read: clubs with a mic or not. These days I play in rooms that the PA is only for the vocals) For my work in TV/filmland I generally used a mixture of mic’d amps and “models” (mostly stock Logic stuff) using the proprietary cabinet models I had access to. I dearly love Tom and hang on every note and bit of wisdom he imparts but, once that little black tube is placed SOMEWHERE in the circumference of that speaker, that audio is about to be converted into a binary supposition. It’s the way of the world now… So… here’s something I did long ago. One of the guitars is an amp with a 58 on it, the other is a model with cab model… I no longer remember which was which… (yammering at the front is Larry Mullins (Swans etc) being interrogated by Mike Watt (Minutemen , MSSV) in Portugal when they were the rhythm section for Iggy and the Stooges. Hope it at least amuses… John, you’re one of the brighter spots in the twang phylum! Thanks for all you do! th-cam.com/video/BOIMgYd_F5k/w-d-xo.html
Firstly, Tom and John are both sublime musicians with an excellent ear for tone and musicality, Namaste to you both. In my humble opinion, modeling wins in our modern world. I worked. as a demo guitar player for a boutique amp company. In the booth we had a tube amp and cab, a cable and a telecaster. A hundred guys played through that rig and they all sounded different. So to say, an amp sounds like a Fender Blackface to me is ridiculous, because it'll sound different depending on who's playing through it. Anyone who travels for gigs, sessions, trade shows and clinics etc. and is on a budget isn't flying with a tube amp. so if you have your modeler with your settings, it's much better than risking what a rental amp might sound like. Plus you have your rig in your hotel, for rehearsal, and anywhere else you may go. I've been using the Line 6 Helix for 7 years and it sounds amazing for everything ... providing you know how to program a signal chain, and integrate your favorite pedals (for me a compressor). I don't want to lift amps, or mic them up ... and I like how a true stereo rig sounds in a mix... and I don't think anyone can tell if it's a tube amp or modeling in a dense mix these days. I've demo'd guitars at NAMM for Yamaha 10 or so times, and the videographers, magazines and TH-camrs love it when you hand them two XLRs for their camera audio. Most people are listening to mastered music that's been reduced to 8 bit and played through phone audio or headphones...or their computer. So, if the amp inspires, I say go for it. But I don't think digital these days lacks the feel of a tube amp...in fact I think it sounds better for what I use it for.
Well the only thing I'll say is that in the room. There's a difference. You can feel it in your chest when you're playing through a tube amp. A solid state or modeler there's just the sound. The sound is the same. It's just the feel.
No, some solid state work e.g. JC120. Very much depends the sound you want. Plenty of good ss amps. However, what we are talking about here is emulations I.e. imitations.
John, my videos on my YT channel are currently (most recently) using the ME-90 Twin and a Headrush FRFR speaker all into an iPhone 13 microphone (live). I have a couple videos of using the UA Enigmatic into Logic. And they probably sound best. I have a Tone Master Twin and have had a real one in the past. The Tone Master is pretty sweet. But, I currently really like my ME-90 Twin choice and the Headrush speaker. Tom (Uncle Larry) is full of it. I've used it all because I've played for 58 years. And, I think the digital is very nice and I'm currently trying to work out my optimum gear for both live and recording. I'm really leaning on the ME-90 and my UA Dumble pedal. It's tricky and I've had weird issues with my interface but I really want the sound quality of my guitar into the Headrush.
Tom may be describing the feel of the gear under his fingers in real time. No way he can hear a difference of the recording and probably not through a mixer/PA
The feel under the fingers can be crucial to connect with your instrument on a higher level, and inspire you to create better music, with a more nuanced and dynamic technique. Especially for an elite improvisational guitarist, in real time.
Its what the audience hears what counts, an amp with mic in front, probably going to digital mixing desk controlled by other person, is more likely to get messed up and ends up digital anyway. Most modern bands now have inear monitors so not even hearing their amp on stage either.
When I play with my band where we use wedges and amps sitting on stage, I can absolutely tell the difference between a modeler and real amp cranked and sitting 6 ft behind me. When I play at church with no speakers or monitors on stage and everything running thru IEMs, I absolutely cannot tell the difference between a modeler and mic’d amp under the stage in an iso cab.
I've been playing on my FM9 for 2 years now through what would be, i think, considered a great powered monitor (EV PXM-12MP), and I've gotten some great tones out of it, and in a mix you'd probably never notice.... but IN ROOM as a bedroom guitar player, non-recorder, I've definitely missed the "warmth" of tube amps. I'm now waiting on a JCM800 and 1960AHW cab (as well as a Powerstation PS100 to attenuate) to get some air moving again. I like to think I'm going to keep the FM9, because it is great for low volumes and variety, and the effects are GREAT... but time will tell
I LOVE my Fender Drluxe Tonemaster. I had gotten sick of modeling with my Axe-Fx II and my Axe-Fx Ii. Menus menus menus, IRs, twiddling etc. I went back to two amps, which is where I started because I’m older than God (65 Y/O). And then my back got really bad and a 50 pound amp just wasn’t going to cut it anymore. So I bought a deluxe tonemaster. Contrary to what some people say, it does not sound exactly the same as a vintage deluxe. These people are either paid shells or have no ears. It definitely has a more precise sort of hi-fi sound. But since I like clean edging to break, and I love the glassy tones that some Fender amps can make, I love this amp! Once again, I am back in the camp of modeling. But this amp has a very analog, user interface, which I appreciate, after going through sub sub sub menus on my previous modelers. But it’s still a modeler. And that’s OK with me. Does it sound as good? All a matter of opinion. I think it does the glassy sounds that I like better than a vintage deluxe. Were I doing ZZ Top music, no, it probably wouldn’t be as good, even with some really good pedals in front of it. Although, I will say that with my golden boy, and my sparkle drive, and my Timmy, it really seems to do the job just fine!
They all sounded similar. The modeling amps sounded more distorted on the front end and less defined. The pro rev had more clarity and the distortion was lighter and it came almost after the note( on the back end)
Luckily for me, I'm not a tone chaser. I'm not looking to get the (insert amp) sound. I have several amps that do different things but I gig with a Karana. So, I took the Katana and built sounds that sound good to me. It doesn't have to sound like another amp for me. I just dial in tones that work for me and work in the band that I play with. I can dial in a sound I like with all of the amps I have. Are they different? Sure. But they're all sounds that work for me. That is all that matters to me. Recently most of the recording I've done has been with plugins. I'm fine with it. It sounds good and that's all that matters to me. Not being a tone chaser or having a sound in my head that I'm doing for helps a lot. If I can dial in something I can work with, that's all that matters to me.
If we all were searching for the most natural sounds from the instruments, wouldn't we all just play acoustic and not electric guitars? Electric are all mod'd via boosting the signal and so on. My advice, play what you like, through what you like as often as you like and, enjoy.
These boomers want to gatekeep good tone by saying you need the “real vintage stuff” I’ve met professional touring musicians and session guys that told me in a room behind a recording desk through the speakers they couldn’t tell the difference and most of the time they liked the digital stuff better. Obviously the magic of amps is in the room with you. But through a sound system or inears there’s no real difference.
I'd be willing to bet most didn't say that until they could get and afford the "vintage" stuff. The other thing is there's a misconception that just because something is old that it's great. The "vintage" guitars you get now will have had decades of people correcting whatever problems they came with.
I mean, Tom uses a Line 6 M9 on his board. Granted, that's not an amp modeler, but that's still modeling and using tech that is far older than modern DSP stuff.
I’m 59 yrs old. Been around the amp/guitar block for 45 years. It’s all about laziness. There is a visceral difference and a purity of the beginning of the Fender/Gibson/Marshall era. Nothing will ever sound as good or as warm and real as those early amps/guitars. Just like the 50’s and 60’s muscle cars. Tell me an original Shelby Cobra isn’t the most pure form of driving experience? Everyone sits in front of iPhones, computers, digital and E-everything. There’s NO argument. These modern modelers, Tesla cars, Social Media….they are efficient and time-saving and small. But ALL of it is disposable and artificial as is most popular music today. Ask Tom, he has to play the same 2-3 chord progressions every day and make them sound ‘different’ or exciting in each new arrangement. Human beings are not digital creatures. That Golden Era of design in automotive, music gear And architecture for that matter…will never be topped for longevity. Tom is 100% right. Keep convincing yourselves that today’s watered down junk is something you’ll cherish for 70 years? It’s a shallow artificial and meaningless world of watered down junk spoon fed to the masses by corporate shrinkflation giants. The one issue that is tricky is that much of that vintage gear is unattainable due to the sentimental value placed on on these things. Most new guitars from Fender are junk…as are modern Amps. Kids can’t afford the older stuff and new stuff is not built to last. Last good vintage style fender guitars(AVRI)were made in 2016. Gibson on the other hand makes killer new Les Paul R8,R9 and R0 guitars that rival the originals. But $10,000? Not realistic for a young guitarist.
It would have been good to do this exercise as an A/B/C blind test and see what people thought was what gear in each case (as well as which they preferred).
Yeah, I hear what he's saying, but I have never played so much in the past 25 years, as I have with my digital gear. Starting with the boss IR-200 and ending on the Ampero 2 stomp. It's just so easy to flick the switch and not have to deal with the warm up of my tube amps or the crazy minimum volume to get a great tone. I'm honestly playing 3 times as much as I have in 20+ years with my digital gear recently.
My bottom line is: “Does it sound good? Am I able to get the type of sound that I’m looking for to get the job done?” I’m not so much into nailing a specific amp tone perfectly. However, I’m just one guy playing in a top 40 cover/party band. Cheers!
Amps will always be better however, when your playing live nobody in the audience can tell the difference unless their a guitar player and sometimes they can’t even tell. I use QC FOH then use a power amp with cab on stage and it sounds huge! I do love taking my Friedman BE100 deluxe out though.
The sounds are similar enough for me not to care. But it depends how it feels when you're playing. Which could also be psychosomatic. I think it "feels" different when I play my valve amp than my solid state. But it on depends on my mood to a large extent.
Front end analog back end digital…that’s my approach. When I use analog pedals for compression, drives, gain stages, and amp sims and digital modulation, delays, reverbs, cabinet sims. It maintains the FEEL of playing guitar and reacts properly with my pickups / volume pot.
I have a Bugera T5 tube amp head, Fender Princeton Chorus, Blackstar Fly3. Like them in different ways. The T5 even though it has an attenuator its still almost too loud for home use with close neighbors if your trying to make it breakup. Its easy for a professional musician to have an opinion but most of us are just bedroom rockstars and we cant annoy the neighbors all day and night.
I wish Tom would do some blindfolded tests, with some people who really know how to dial things in. I'm recently back into tube amps big time... but I've recorded a ton of music with all types of simulations over the past 15 years too. I too love the feel of the amp in the room and how it makes you play, but Tom listens as he plays ...on headphones... to the cab/amp in "another room" so he doesn't have that sensation that everyone points to. So if they could get a bunch of different digital stuff and a few amps coming back in the headphones... is it possible he might be able to play the same stuff with all of them? I have some wicked total sound presets in NDSP's Tone King amp and others that can make you really creative. Even Guitar Rig has some great presets. I use the Kemper a lot also. He should experience the best of those.
Merry Christmas to you and your family. I think the nano cortex came a little closer to the Pro Reverb than the Dream. As much as I understand where uncle Larry is coming from, but is it really a big enough difference. All the dynamics are there.
I think if more people experience/hear all the options, and depending on the situation: (live/studio, etc) and especially the TYPE(S) of music they play, most would pick the tube amps. Also, what volume level, what guitar. Also, are you playing arpeggiated chords, solos, funk rhythm parts, chuggy barre chords, etc?? You'll drive yourself and everyone around you nuts chasing the tone. Players need to concentrate on the notes they play.
Isn't how it feels important ? A good tube amp feels different when your playing than something digital to me , some things just feel more lively when your playing, just as some overdrive feel more lively in your hands when playing , but yes they are extremely close in sound , but how it feels is the question
Tom is right, amps and pedals started when rock was born and will continue to rule the world, modelers sound thin and uninspiring, pro players use them for touring since there are no more arenas to fill, only clubs is understandable they do not want to carry tons of gear, but modelers are crap.
The real differences become clear when you play a bunch of different guitars through a tube amp and a then a modeling amp. The tube amp will highlight the differences between the guitars much more than the modeler.
You trying to get even more people to hate me?
I honestly couldn’t care less…bring it on John
I will say it’s hardly surprising to me that even through a shitty load box and not even using a microphone, the pro still kicks the shit outta the other stuff…if you put a mic on that amp and then ran that mic through a nice Telefunken V76 or a nice API the way God Intended, the difference would even be waaaay more noticeable
I’ve read through the comments, the line from the pro Digital crowd seems to be “who cares I don’t hear a difference and if there is? Who gives a shit!” pretty much in line with what I would expect from that kind of talent level…a 16 to 30 year old demographic with that practised cynicism so common in this age range. Would you prefer sugar with your coffee or saccharine? Olive oil and balsamic on greens or corn oil and white vinegar? A Rolls-Royce and a Jaguar and a Ford Fiesta all do 75 mph on the way to Vegas. Which is the superior ride? Obviously the real amp and dedicated pedals are going to be better than any modler, if you’re happy with a Ford Fiesta ?…good for you, but don’t try to say that it’s as good as as a Rolls-Royce.
We will always love you, Uncle Larry. Thank you for speaking the truth.
I can think of very few people who can really judge how right Tom is about what he says. I mean, come on guys, Mr. Tom Bukovac is not an idiot and if he says so, then he has his good reasons for it. I honestly don't understand how anyone can get upset about this. He just tells his opinion, tells it like it is and he gets a lot of backlash in return. It's a crazy world... ps: "....the way God Intended..." = The Almighty in his infinite wisdom surely intended for an amp to be miked and the signal then run through a V76 or API... This is great, Tom! I mean, after all, he is God, right? Love it...and love you, man 🤣
Thanks Tom for stating the FACTS! I’ve said the same thing for years - some people simply either don’t play in bands or record guitars in real pro studios. I’m sure modelers sound fine to a bedroom player. To each their own, but we know there is NO substitute for glowing power tubes & saturated transformers!
@@501chorusecho You are an example of why I, and others, still use producers for recordings, even if I have to wait. If I hired you to produce/engineer a record, I don’t have to worry about quality or getting the sound I want. That’s your job and why I or anyone would hire you. I’m too wrapped up in the playing and arranging, where I need to be, to think about it.
I know I’m stepping in it here but: for anyone to argue in bad faith or be combative with/about Tom Bukovac (given his experience, musicality, and love for music) about recording or playing guitar is really not the way to go. Yes, there will be differences in opinion and experiences but taking jabs at him is unbelievably ignorant. It shows to me someone who has really lost their way musically and the joy of playing guitar.
My budget says I can’t afford to care what Tom says.
I like Tom as a player, but his opinion means NOTHING to me. Sound is sound .
Exactly. Also, it is hard enough to even tell a difference between the two when a/b'd, but put it in a mix and you won't be able to tell, nevermind non-guitar people being able to tell the difference or even care. Supposedly there is a feel difference with the sag of a real amp vs a modeler. but I feel that you get used to what you play.
I don't give a shit what Tom says period haha
@@JDStone20 You are 100% correct. The difference is in the "feel" of a tube amp and how it reacts to your playing, especially for edge-of-breakup stuff. Problem is that many tube amps have to be run at loud volumes before you really experience that. You can learn to make a modeler work for you and you can replicate much of those subtle nuances with volume and a good speaker (headphones don't really work for that).
My budget sympathises!
For me, it’s the tone I’m chasing. I couldn’t care less if it’s a physical amp or a digital replica, as long as it delivers the sound I want.
If it’s the tone you’re chasing, you’d play through a vintage or boutique tube amp. Hell, even a tweed pro junior will get you there.
Modelling is a representation of tone
A 1992 Ford Escort and new Porsche both drive 55 mph. If that’s all you want.
@@los_rubosIt’s like the difference between automatic and stick. The automatic is easier to use but less responsive to detail.
@@Ten2More Modelling is easier to use?
@@los_rubosIt’s a lot easier than figuring out how to touch the strings to make the amp react to create the desired sound. Studying manuals to find something is easier than spending time to find a way to physically touch the strings coordinating with the amp.
Different doesn’t mean worse. If it sounds good, it is good.
Exactly!
That's a nice cope you got there
So says Eddie Van Halen. \m/
@aviator_bryan yea well he's dead so how smart could he be
I both agree and disagree with Tom. Yes, real amps still reign supreme, and while digital gets close, it’s not identical. That said, even two amps of the same brand and model can sound different. For most of us, getting close is more than good enough. Plus, I don’t have access to a closet full of amps, cabinets, mics, or some of the studio gear that’s included with digital options. And let’s be real-I can’t crank a Plexi to the volume it needs to truly shine.
Yes with tubes it can be all over the place.
You basically said what I did, in less than half the words. Good job!
Just run an attenuator on your plexi ,
Just sounds like cope tbh
Well there is no true amp tone unless you sit directly in front of it. It’s gets processed through boards and pro tools in mix then reprocessed again in mix down then through a pa with pa speaker! So the amp is only good to a purist in front of you ! And we all know live show or radio that tone is not the same in may car or at a show through a pa
Nowadays good digital amp solutions are 90+% of the real deal in terms of sound, maybe 70/80% in terms of feel but for many people a 100% worth compromise for weight, flexibility and budget.
@@quartaltrio747 Careful! Don’t say the word “feel” around here because people get upset ;)
I think the real trap is believing your gear HAS to sound like a vintage amp. How about focusing on getting a GREAT tone, period, which is totally possible with good modelers and speaker combos. This obsession with thinking that ONLY tube amps can sound good is ridiculous. Many recorded tones throughout rock history were guitars direct into consoles, no amp involved at all. A great tone is a great tone whether you've made it with a deluxe reverb or a Toyota Camry.
To be fair, direct into a vintage board would have meant going through tube-powered preamps and, in most cases, tube-powered compressors. At least until the solid-state amp came along.
What is even more ridiculous is to believe that vintage amp components are not degrading over time and still sound exactly like 50-60 years ago, when they were brand new and all the epic records had been made :)
@vitalistep the components dont degrade they drift, making a tube amp better as it ages. Why are you trying to copy somebody elses records?
@@johnsmith-bk4ps there has been nothing new in the music for a long time, people are just mixing what has been written many times already. Why do the components always drift for the better? It's like with guitar pickups, I've never heard that someone said their guitar started to sound worse after installing a new set. The sound is always better :)
Depends how good your ears are some people hear things. If you haven't lived for years with tube amps then you will not know.
Rhett Shull, Tim Pierce and a 3rd guitarist(maybe Pete Thorne) in a studio testing a UA(I think) plugin(s) that simulate a fender and Marshall amp and the studio had real Marshall and fender amps to compare. The console operator switched between the real and plugin with one of the guitarist playing and they would try to guess which was the plugin versus the real amp. It was pretty much a 50/50 chance of getting it right. It was an eye opener.
I agree the pedals sound good, but that video was sponsored by Universal Audio, so...
Rhett Shull is not remotely in the same league as Uncle Larry.
@@davidyelland908 or Tim Pierce or Pete Thorn.
But at least Tim and Pete have real credentials. Only Uncle Larry can press any buttons for me.
Rhett makes prettier looking videos and vastly superior click bait but…….
@maverick_trail Tim peirce one of the best session players ever! And I highly dought bukavac could do what pete does with van Halen etc!
Sorry, but I think this is kind of a silly video. It was probably just your recording technique, but they all sounded bad (with headphones on). There was too much distortion and not the good kind. Comparing amps and modelers is a waste of time. They are different animals best suited for alternative applications, depending mostly on the player's standards and priorities. I use both but never compare analog and digital audio products. It's not necessary. They generally require different treatment in terms of playback or recording. I like your guitar playing, but why drag Tom into this mess?
I’d like someone to do a video with Tom where in the room he’s got his Princeton and an ODR-1, he’s in the control room, only hearing it through monitors, and someone plays a capture of his rig on a tonex, and have him try and identify which ones which by the feel alone only hearing it through the control room monitors.
Yep! That's the thing... people talk about feel, but what person is listening to music through amps? NO ONE, music is done in a mix, it is mastered it is done through monitors, it is rendered and released digitally.
@@areallyboredguy5825but the inspiration is in the players hands, if he doesnt feel inspired its not gonna be the right feel etc. Also, when playing live or in a band setting there is a big difference. Crank up a real amp next to a monitor and choose which one sounds the best at the same dB
@@ludvanlazarz live okay but I’m talking in a mix. And not that you made this argument but I feel like asking which is it? They don’t sound different in a mix to listeners so therefore they don’t sound different enough to warrant chasing. Or they do sound different but to the player and the player “may” play differently because of in room feel, a feeling that can’t exactly be captured, mastered, and released to the listeners.
Music is also performed live. That’s where it’s different.
He will definitely know when he plays the amp or the sim.
If you enjoy digital amp modelers and it makes you happy that’s all that matters in my opinion
When my guitar heroes were on the stage or in the studio, they didn't worry about whether anything they were using accurately reproduced the sound or feel of something else. They used what they had to get a sound and feel that inspired them. Even if that was just running directly into the desk. The important question has never been if X sounds like or feels like Y. You can get two Xs that came out of the factory one-after-another and they will sound and feel different. It is just finding something that sounds and feels good to you and then doing something with it.
But the bottom line is that your 'guitar heroes' didn't use digital simulations-the sound of a real amp is a big component of what makes them your guitar heroes.
@@lightningstrikes7314 The sound really doesn't change much IN A MIX, for the end user and the person listening unless you listen to guitar parts through guitar amps, bass guitar through bass amps, have speakers for the drums, keyboards, and vocals... you are never listening to what the artist is "feeling" so it is all a moot point.
Not even close!
Best comment
@@lightningstrikes7314 That's not even true for a big portion of the younger guitarist community - a lot of people grew up listening to the sounds of Modern Metal / Djent / Progressive Metal, which the majority of players in that style had already ditched tube amps. So for many Metal guys, the sound of their Guitar Heroes IS digital! \m/
I think the part I struggle with is I never feel inspired by digital gear. I want to like it, I keep buying them and I keep trying but I just can’t seem to connect
Before his death Dumble said, para phrasing here, digital is getting close to capturing the tone and feel of an actual amp and it's only a matter of time before it does, and it will eventually happen. This being said, if you can't achieve beautiful tones and create beautiful music from a simple set up like a Fender Princeton/Deluxe, Marshall or Vox with 2 or 3 classic pedals, all the digital gear and tone chasing will never make you sound great.
Tom is exactly right.
I played digital for decades (Kemper, Line6, Vox Tonelab) and switched back to tube amps a couple of years ago. I can totally live with playing digital and I liked it for years but I found out that I play very different on a tube amp. The response is totally different from a digital amp and it also forces me to play in a different way that I seemed to like over the digital amps. So Tom is right in that aspect. Listening at FOH you won't hear the difference between a tube amp and let's say a Kemper but playing wise you will.
Totally agree a generation of guitar players are missing out on the feel of non digital (valve particularly) amps. I've seen some of the greats who have tried digital and their playing is always diminished by the clinical response of modellers. The audience might not notice a difference in sound, however as a player I have to enjoy my show.
Same experience here. 10 years of modeller gigging and went back to amps. I’ll happily play both but prefer that “touch” of a tube amp. Not chased the next game changer since.
I asked Tom once how he usually would set his amp. He wrote, dude I set it to where I like the tone. Play with the knobs. If you don’t like any of the choices sell it and buy something that you do like the tone.
I love Tom, and this was a pretty fun vid! Nice!
Honestly, I’m getting tired of everyone getting hung up on the “sound” of digital.
It’s kind of like the argument with the audiophiles about vinyl over everything else.
Sure: a well mastered and carefully pressed high quality LP through a Macintosh tube amp and amazing speakers IS going to sound better than Spotify through Bluetooth headphones…
But you have to listen to that one album right there in that space, and you can’t do anything else.
And it’s going to cost you. And you have to be prepared to live with the quirks and compromises and glitches that come with the format. Noise, scratches, cleaning… And how much space it takes.
You can’t shuffle a bunch of tracks from other artists in. And you will never get that quality in your car or when you’re jogging… so how do you live?
You make the small sacrifice of slightly lower quality for a LOT more convenience is what you do.
Guitar modeling and capturing is the same thing.
Sure a pristine Blackface anything is always going to sound better in the room.
But you have that one sound. In an amp that might give you a hernia if you aren’t careful. And you’ll have to maintain it. And you have to be aware of the quality of the wall power. And you have to have spare fuses and tubes.
If you suddenly find you need the sound of a different amp, a Vox or a Marshall or a Dumble… well… you need to also get your hands on one of them.
OR… for the price of a mid range tube amp, you can have a very close approximation of several hundred different amps, cabs, and an entire warehouse of effects and processing, that you can instantly put in any order you want, and swap out instantaneously if you change your mind.
There will always be a place for a great tube amp and analog pedals… but as long as most of us are making music under less than ideal conditions, the modeling thing will have a reason to exist.
How many folks today even know how to maintain and service tube gear?
Size, price, convenience, and options should never be discounted.
And, for the record: this is coming from someone with 2 original Princetons (a Black and a Silverface) an original drip-edge Vibrolux, a Music Man 65 212, and a vintage Supro.
But I also now own a Yamaha THR 30II.
Which one sees the most use?
The Yamaha. It’s not even close.
A guy here in NYC who’s mixed & mastered my recordings, got into an argument w/ another mastering engineer about a Nine Inch Nails remastered album released on vinyl. The guy was arguing that the vinyl re-release is soooo much than the original CD version in quality from his perspective.
My friend said that it was by NO means better sound quality than the original CD version. The other engineer insisted he was wrong because he was a vinyl purist. Because that guy didn’t know, my friend said “I am the one who remastered it for the release on vinyl and I know what went into it”. Point is, digital and analogue have been side by side for decades and it’s a personal choice, not a collective agreement.
Ding. Ding. Ding!!
@@edlib02169but are you are musician?
@@raygehringyes, it’s your choice or not to go with something inferior and then justify it. They are not the same, period. Cope.
My amp modeler is amazing live. Recording wise it does have high sizzle that always needs tweaking. Also being in front of a real amp affects my playing and the sound. But at the end of the day, I use both.
The highest percentage of player experience is always in the fingers. This is where digital always falls flat. Listening to them like this alone is always difficult
I’ve got tube amps both new and vintage and I’ve had a Kemper for years and have a Fractal and for recordings, I’m more than happy with using either and I’ve often recorded both on the same songs and when I listen back now, I can’t tell which was which. You’ve got to spend some time dialing in both and working through their strengths and weaknesses. The one issue I’ve noticed with all digital gear is that they’re not quite as sensitive to (or at least it’s just plain different) with how it responds to rolling back my guitars volume. Now for in the room sound, I’m a full stack guy all the way and a modeler into a PA just doesn’t have the live feel of real amps in the room but being able to tweak and “mod” amps on the fractal in ways I don’t have the skills to do with a real amp.
This is the amp in the room versus mic'ed amp argument again. No one can reliably tell the difference when A/B'ing recorded sounds that are well dialed in. This has been shown over and over again. But they can definitely tell the difference standing in front of a real amp vs a modeler through a monitor/FRFR. Especially if they're the ones playing the guitar.
And if the cabinet is somewhere else and isolated, you're not getting the amp in the room anyway.
@ Right on. That's what I meant regarding mic'ed amp. But you're right in that if it's live the player hears the amp and generally isn't aware of what the audience hears through the PA. Though in small clubs the audience will hear either all stage guitar or hear a mix of stage and PA.
@@angrybuzzy Which depending will be worse for the audience, especially if the player's ears dull as the evening wears on and either turns up or increases high end and the guy on the floor is directly in line with that. Also been on the bass side of the stage and heard no guitar before too.
John, I think we can all agree that you are the Tom Bukovac of dialing in a tone. I haven't seen anyone who can get a modeler/profiler to sound exactly like the original gear like you can. Thank you for the excellent content, the entertainment, and the knowledge!
My budget says modelers are just fine for my needs, thanks.
The amp sounds noticeably nicer and more real
Except you'd never pick it out in a blind test.
@@poulwinther probably not, but that's because he is setting his amp to sound like his modeler. I can also make any tube amp sound like the modeler at its best, but can't make the modeler sound like the amp at its best. TH-camrs always do A/B comparisons that fool you into thinking 2 pieces of gear are the same because there is always a setting where they sound the same. The real difference comes when you start dialing them to the best they can offer.
What Tom is saying is true, but you gotta be in the room with the amp to experience that difference, and most of it is the cab and 12-inch speaker interacting with the amp-though tube saturation, compression, and “sag” are also perceptible. Beyond that, amps are quirky. They are inconsistent from day to day. They make funny noises, generate heat, and have electricity that is audible when amplified. Funny that sound engineers spent years trying to eliminate these sounds, but they are what make the amp “real.” It's a physical thing, and you need to live with an amp in your room that you use regularly to appreciate those nuances. Once it’s recorded, all of these points are (mostly) useless and people can’t hear an appreciable difference. No matter what, some people are gonna get religious about this stuff. It’s all relative and contextual and the application is what matters most. For Tom, in his garage, on a stage, in a professional sound studio, I have no doubt those differences are real and important. If it makes you feel and play better then it matters. Does the audience care? Yeah, probably not so much.
Exactly! I have played with a custom made high powered tweed for hundreds of gigs and it was amazing at the best of times. But sometimes it sounded completely different from gig to gig and overall I just found tube amps inconsistent for what I needed. In recent years I have valued a smaller form factor and a unit that is consistent from gig to gig that I still enjoy the sound of once I have dialled it in.
Especially now that silent stages are more and more common, having a tube amp behind me becomes kinda redundant when I had the sound coloured from a sm57 hung down over the speaker going into my IEMs. Never mind the whole weight factor, setting up, packing down ect...
That's true, but at the same time, in a lot of studios the cab is in a different room and for dubs, the guitarist may just be in the control room, so you're not in the room.
By the time it’s filtered through the mic or the speakers or the DAW or the PA or your cell phone, it doesn’t matter. An amplifier might be a better experience for the player in the room, but from the listener standpoint, it couldn’t matter any less.
Not exactly true. In a recording scenario the amp is going to be under a microscope and the differences will be much more noticeable. Especially if recorded or listening in a treated room compared to a bar or rehearsal space.
I don't know why anyone would care what he thinks. We all have functioning ears, we all know what we like, that's all that should matter.
It's from an older Home Skoolin video. Who cares if you care, he cares about his craft and work and he knows what works for him. Maybe if you would work in his environment you would care as well.
@roberteismann1929 I'm not saying that if it works for him that's fine.
My point is why should anyone else care?
Whatever works for you isn't it?
Ah... The individual liberty nonsense that pretends what someone likes can't be c**p.
I dont even know him. If he doesn't write, record and release music or tour he doesn't count.
People care because they look up to him, and for good reason, he’s a top session player.
Not that his opinion is gospel, but he’s no average guitar player.
Buk and crew came to nyc, played on gear that could be found at your local guitar center.(working man’s gear)The nashville 3 all played travel-friendly partscasters, a few carefully chosen pedals, a deluxe reverb + sm57/E906. Sonically speaking, it was a tone junkie’s paradise. By far the best sounding guitar show ive seen since 1986. My hair stood up on my neck and never went down. If you ever have the opportunity, its a bucketlist guitar experience. I.m.o. Todays digital modelers are not even the pimple on the asscheeks of what was sonically available since the late 1950’s
I've had some time recently to get back into recording, and my opinions are as follows: I definitely like the "feel" and "sound in the room" of my real tube amp better than anything else, and I think that's what Uncle Larry is talking about more than recording - that and playing live, of course. I had the Dream '65 for about a day (someone got a hella good deal on Reverb) and I hated it. For recording various tones, and the variety, it's hard to beat the HX Stomp (or in my case, the Stomp XL). John's HX Stomp presets (so cheap and what a Christmas present!) are the best way to get started in getting great recorded tones and then being able to tweak them to make them your own. However, when I am playing through my studio monitors, it sounds/feels nothing like my real amp does, but I don't care - the recorded tone in the track is what matters to me, and my HX Stomp XL does the trick (and then some). Plus, being able to SAVE the exact settings in a preset and then come back the next day to do overdubs and not worry if knobs had been bumped makes it so easy. So, to summarize, when playing live or in my studio, I prefer the real tube amp for inspiration. For recording, the convenience and sounds of the HX Stomp XL are my way to go. Thanks for a great video, John, and Merry (Happy) Christmas to you!
It's all about what gear tools work for you. A lot of session players are like Tom with regard to real amps versus models. Both can do the job live or in the studio. You can't argue with Tom's success as a session player. Dan Huff would also be in that same category.
It’s not about comparing the tone against each other which many of you seem to be missing that point.
It’s about feel. Something that a video cannot capture.
I’ve heard Tom say this.
I think the difference is that modeling doesn't sound like the amp, it sounds like the amp when it's recorded.
I’ve got two of the big dog Modelers. Both sound great in a mix, which is the most important thing. But-anyone that tries to sell you that they FEEL like a real amp is lying, have terrible sensory perception in their fingers, or they have no frame of reference.
They get close (I find it is depending on the model), but they aren’t quite there. There’s a certain “steely” quality about the touch of them, across all platforms I’ve tried/bought. There’s a certain response that a tube amp has that you can’t replicate fully without those glowing tubes in the signal path. You can’t take one of the primary components out of what makes a tube amp and expect it to sound like a tube amp. It’s a simple concept that people’s egos can’t handle.
That said, modelers are my favorite thing. They’re (generally) more cost effective, and VASTLY more valuable as far as form factor. But the next generation of them need to cut the crap and go tube front-end.
Thank you some common sense. The level of cope in these comments is sad.
If you really want that now, get a Friedman IR-X/D/J and an HX Stomp and go with it. I have no problem with the feel. I still have a couple of tube amps I play now and again. The problem I have is reproducing a sound. I'll leave the amp as is, play it today and the sound is great, then in a couple of weeks play it again, same guitar and cable, same settings and it's different.
@ I pair my Helix with a VHT tube buffer before the guitar hits the input and it works great. I think this type of thing is where modeling needs to go next. Get a tube front end and pretty much any of the modelers out will play right.
@@UseTheSupeRsonic I have no problem with either method. But, for me, adding a bunch of other stuff defeats the purpose of an all in one unit. That's why I bought it.
The feel under the fingers is different, especially at higher volumes - sound and tone wise there may not be much difference but feel wise they will feel different especially when play loud.
I have to agree with Tom. I love digital amps and modelers. It's convenient, light weight, easy to use and sounds good enough. But when you sit next to a real Fender, Vox or Marshall, and run a modeler of the same amp. Always feels like something is missing from the modeler. I love my Catalyst CX, and all the other modelers I use for playing live and recording on the fly. But if I can, I am picking a real Fender Black Panel, Vox or Marshall.
The whole thing boils down to the Amp in the room vs. a miced amp in another room coming out the monitors. Having the Amp with you physically, so the guitar and the Amp could react to each other and the player is something digital modeling sorely lacks. It is exceptionally convenient and convincingly accurate with the proper source.
I have been gigging for 51 years, I have used Plexis, Twin Reverbs, Ac30s and many more (I currently have a Bogner Shiva 20th anniversary ,a Friedman Plex, PRS HDRX20, an ENGL Steve MOrse mini and an early 70s Champ. I would love to use these live but where I am quiet stages are the norm, even a cranked Champ is pretty loud. I currently favor the Fractal FM3 for my live work with one band and the Nano Cortex for the other, I am 68 and am still gigging twice a week and am currently rehearsing with 2 bands. I don't want to carry heavy amps to small gigs but would have no problem with using real amps in outdoor shows if they are practical. I have been using digital solutions for many years, are they as good as amps well that is a hard question to answer, they are designed to emulate a recorded amp and cab so it is not a realistic comparison. A real amp through a cabinet is not going to sound like the modeler through an FRFR OR PA when they are in the same room. In a recording on the other hand after all the processing, mixing and mastering et al are completed it would be virtually impossible to tell which guitar had used the real amp and which had used the modeler. I have recorded tracks that were done years ago and I know I used a Fender Supersonic on one track and my AXEFX 3 on another, I can't tell which are which. Realistically what it comes down to is what works for the individual, Tom works with real amps all the time and he is fortunate that he can do that, not everyone can.
As a longtime Helix user, I’ve recently made the jump to Fractal. I noticed a huge improvement in the modeling in the Fractal world.
When I got my FM9, I created the same rig in my Helix rack and the FM9, the difference was beyond noticeable.
Could I dial in the Helix to sound like the Fractal? Possibly, but the feel and warmth of the new modeling technology in the Fractal was something I found more pleasing.
As for tubes vs modeling, tubes will always have that random nature and harmonics that modeling doesn’t have, yet.
Can you tell the difference when listening to a recording? We’ve all seen the shootouts and the overwhelming majority cannot tell.
In the end, do what makes you happy and don’t be bothered by what others think.
I've tried most of them since a zoom 3030 in the late 90s. Fact is, they all sound good now, it's just a matter of picking what you like and going with it. The real problem is people assigning subjective, not totally descriptive terms to sound instead of saying there's not enough in the 100Hz range or whatever.
@ As someone who was the IT manager for Line 6, I couldn’t disagree more.
As with anything tech wise, the years only bring improvement on the code. Faster processors and new ways to model the whole of the amplifier circuits will only make the end product more like the original one.
I won’t deny in the least that they are all very close to each other, but there are definitely huge improvements that have been made and others are standing apart from the rest.
I have used and owned Line 6 products since the AxSys 212. I’m very familiar with how Line 6 operates and how to get the tone I need at the moment.
That said, Fractal has made more improvements in the modeling and dyna cabs area and they seem to live their product. Whereas Line 6 has not updated their hardware in the flagship products in a decade. The physical chips are better now. That alone gives the competition a leg up.
We will see what NAMM brings, but I’m not holding my breath.
@@BillBensen I understand that but the other piece of that is that the Helix has longevity. There's less of the it'll stop being supported vibe. Yes, new processors come out and all, but how much is that improvement really? I've had most of the products out there and to me they all sound good, it's more a matter of the ease of setting it up and the UI. Certain things on Fractal are annoying. Having to tell the device to have signal in and out is kind of odd. To me, that's time wasted having to tell it I want to plug my guitar in and have signal out of it every time I build a patch.
@ I will say that the UI in the Helix is far easier to use. Keep in mind, I’ve been using Helix products since their launch (even before that) and their architecture is showing its age. More detail in the modeling process needs more CPU, the new quad core processors will have a longer life, due in part to the power of the CPU. IF Line 6 comes out with a new HX platform at NAMM, that will be a defining moment. If another year goes by and the older CPU is still the flagship unit; they will have lost the market share.
The fractions of a second that it takes to tell the unit what I/O to use, isn’t really a deal breaker. That’s a first world problem. To be fair, if you want to have the Helix output to another one, you have to tell it, as well.
Keep in mind that I do understand the inner workings at the company and I’ve been neck deep in the modeling process, I know a thing or two about what has improved under the hood.
It's really going to come down to use case and budget. I can hear differences but with modellers getting you like 90-95% there, the space and budget savings make sense especially if I am just chilling and playing for myself.
I think to each his own preference . One thing to realize is when something is new in the gear world it takes time to improve the product . Just one example is comparing electronic drums in their infancy to the present . But for me personally vintage gear wins an overwhelming % of the time .
Biggest difference (one I seldom hear discussed) is that modelling necessarily includes the microphone. What is modelled is a recorded sound, not the sound of an amp/cab in a room. I have played a Fender Junior on a session, had it break down and replaced with a Helix model. As I was playing in the control room but recording the Junior, loud, in the main studio, the replacement made virtually no difference. But modelling can never replicate the feeling of standing in front of and interacting with an amp in a live situation.
What's the point in defending digital stuff? Profilers try to make a copy of analog stuff and modelers try to recreate the sound. In both cases, the digital devices are not the originals.
And while they do indeed SOUND more and more similar, they never FEEL 100% the same - and if you're playing the stuff yourself, you should care about that aspect. I can feel whether my sound is being processed by a tube or a pair of chips. And if you can really play, then you should care.
The advantages of Kemper, QC & Co. will never be in the sound, but only in aspects such as transportability or miking in live situations. Pros don't really like working with them in the studio because you always have to go through x menus to make adjustments.
Used Fender Twin - $750
Brand new Tonex ONE - $180
Yeah I’m good
Get the tonex now & the twin later! Best amp I've owned. It's what the 1000s of dollar amps aspire to be.
@ oh I was just using the Twin as an example, I have 0 interest in ever purchasing one😂
Tonex One can fit in your pocket. The Fender Twin could break your back.
If you were serious you would buy the Twin. Those who love guitar would do anything to get the right gear.
@@homemaintenance1234 owning antique and vintage gear is just a status symbol now. Prove me wrong. Nobody is making any hit records with that shit, and everyone and their brother play guitar nowadays.
There are stores I visit where I can try out $10-15K vintage guitars and $3-6K vintage amps; they most definitely sound different. But I can't afford those, and the pedal models and IRs are LOGARITHMICALLY improving over time. Also, most listeners (including experienced/renowned musicians) can NOT tell the difference when they are hearing recordings(thanks to improved studio tech) or even live performances(thanks to improved live reinforcement tech). It is more about the feel/feedback loop of the performing musician and how successfully the new tech can reproduce it; that is improving daily. While I appreciate Uncle Larry's perspective, it is all simply a matter of time.
I appreciate the time you spent to do this, very interesting. When Tom said that, it got me thinking about the unique sound & feel of tube amps, and this video really helped me to hear what Tom has been saying. The difference in the sound was actually quite shocking to me.
To me it's a feel thing. Playing through a cranked tube amp has a totally different response in the room, it makes you play different. For the ease of recording in a home studio or bedroom playing at night, modelers are the way to go.
IN A MIX or live at volume - particularly for metal tones - cabs, speakers and mics are at least an order of magnitude more important - if not TWO - than an amp, digital or analogue.
Some times when I’m playing amp sims my guitar feels like a midi controller and using it to trigger pre recorded samples sounds from the amp plugin. There’s a real liveliness to real tube amps sounds most of my tone shaping takes seconds usually just turning the gain knob i can get many tones from tube amp versus a amp plugin it can take an hour of tweaking to get something usable tone from a plugin.
I'm a veteran tube guy who has been hardcore with Kemper for the past 5 years (LOVE it) and dabbled with HX Stomp (interesting but not loving as much) - if we are talking about recording, at this stage I think almost anyone would be hard-pressed to consistently win a blind listening test of the modelers/profilers vs. a real amp. The in-the-room live experience is a different thing, but I find the Kemper gear in particular comes close enough for me at the moment. No experience with QC or Tonex, but would not be surprised if people on those platforms have similar feedback to mine.
But for me, perhaps more important than the sounds, is the play feel, and interaction with the guitar/player. The immediacy of a guitar into real amp is hard to beat, but again, I think Kemper comes pretty darn close. HX, not as much - I find that with HX, the guitar responsiveness is a little softer, and I have to push a bit harder to get the amp models to react the way I want them to. Would be interesting to hear how these other platforms like Dream, QC, Tonex deliver on this point.
But I disagree with Tom's general argument that cheap digital technology won't ultimately do what the old stuff does - it's getting closer every day. Tubes will always have an allure, but today's tech is finally getting closer to replicating the magic - eventually they will close the gap IMO. I also think it's funny that people championing those vintage amps typically drive them with crappy, solid state OD boxes in front - so much for the tube mystique ;)
John - I really enjoy checking out your videos - keep'em coming :) Very insightful and appreciated.
I agree, the whole "tubes rule" but then a giant pedalboard of solid state is funny, especially when there are digital pedals there too apparently not robbing tone.
The main component missing from all this Tom bashing is this: how does it sound in a BAND context & in a deep recording mix? That’s where the rubber meets the road. Modeling amps disappear to my ears in a live band setting. I used to do testing for a BIG company known in the modeling world. Once I compared the modeling rigs to my tube amps in my band, there was no contest. Even my bandmates were complaining about not being able to hear the modeling rig through the drums, bass, keys, and 2nd guitar rig. Facts.
Regarding mixing: Another point that people miss is the workflow aspect of real amps vs modeling. Having used both, I prefer physical
amps because they do much less. I just want a Marshall to sound like a Marshall when tracking a basic part. I like turning an amp up and it sounds good. There’s also a case for presets but I found personally I never used them. So sometimes it’s the workflow of getting a usable sound. See Gibson Skylark for simplicity example.
Best of luck 👌
Hi, do you have any of these presets from Jhon Petrucci? and what name is he identified on his pack?
The part and your playing - 100% that's what matters. I've heard people with great gear who didn't play well enough for anyone who was only using their ears to know it was great gear. A better player plugs into the same rig with the same settings and suddenly it sounds amazing.
It's just the difference between playing into the amp and riding the wave of its response and triggering a pre-engineered sound to produce a sound envelope to which you're only partially connected, and hearing sound from a guitar speaker, is different from a simulation of a speaker at line level, and many find it unsatisfying being used to amps, and the feeling of playing them as part of the instrument, to use a digital simulation in a dituation where they care about being inspired. It's much easier if you begin with more of the modern models and spend time recording or gigging with them , than if you depend on that instant feedback ( no, not that kind of feedback!) or response from the compression and swelling of the tube amp. It's not really easy to get all that amount of responsiveness, some of which is subconscious, from a skillfully programmed and edited preset on a modelling platform. You have to do so much tweaking with speaker location and direction , and mic'ing, to get a good sound in the air, that all those factors are ignored or glossed over superficially in line level non tube amp sounds. Sometimes it's easier and simpler to learn from experience or trial and error, how to get a good live sound in most different situations, than try to be a producer/architect/engineer with the "eye of God" point of view of the sound field based on mathematical vectors of structure. While the skills of hand shaping car body panels on an english wheel are disappearing due to CNC programming, the art and craft of matching guitar amp and effects with speaker on live stages is becoming a lost skill that is left to expert presets in line level modelling, and the ears ( or lack of them) of whoever the hell is paid to mix on and offstage PA. Musicians should learn to listen to each other snd develope a good onstage balance before relying on foldback mixes sent to their ears. Making TH-cam videos, or recording sometimes could be easier with modelling than with amps, but even then you have to be satisfied with only the sound, and not even the feel or the sense of reality. It seems to be harder to go from tubes to digital than the other way around.
The UA Dream sounded closest to your Pro. All 3 sounded really good.
I feel that the biggest difference between analog an digital is the dynamic response. So finding similar sound on a nondynamic sample, soft like You did in the start, or hard like the ToneX capture sample seems a bit flawed
Whenever I watch this kind of discussion, I always think please don't take away the opportunities for young guitar players to play real thing. I know the digital products are great these days and I can get why influencers like
discussing this because everyone likes this types of discussion. But playing loud guitar amps and controlling them is completely different thing. And simply, it’s fun.
Armature players don't need to think so much about anything like versatility or portability where professional musicians need to consider. I feel everything is commercialized too much these days.
There’s a hell of a lot of cope going on in this comments section-much of it no doubt from bedroom players and wedding/cabaret guitarists. When Tom started his Corona Lesson/Homeskoolin Series in 2020 he essentially pushed the reset button on TH-cam guitarists and kicked the table over. He raised the bar a thousand percent for guitarists surfing TH-cam on tone, instruments, setup, intonation, technique and tasteful/creative/roots rock guitar playing. He made all the shredders, jazzers and neo-soul purveyors look lame and generic. His opinion matters because he’s basically Nashville’s number 1 and he’s on the top of Mount Olympus with Derek Trucks, Michael Landau, Eric Johnson and Robben Ford et al. His friends are Dan Huff, Guthrie Trapp, Vince Gill and Joe Walsh amongst others. He hands out guitar wisdom for free-ignore it at your peril.
I love tube amps, I generally haven’t gotten as good of a tone out of digital in some instances, but I still appreciate the option and it can be fine for a lot of applications. I like the Strymon iridium pedal for some amp modeling. I also have some UAD stuff I’ve used. It can work. I think playing through a nice cranked amp, whether clean or gained up, there’s nothing like it from a performance perspective. It’s a feel thing. But that doesn’t mean it’s always going to be the best or easiest way to get great tone for a recording.
The bigger question of whether the end listener really notices or cares, because that is what matter a whole lot. Also, I’d be curious to put someone like Tom in a blind test scenario and see if he can pick out modeled vs real amp. Some people with his strong opinions might be surprised, I’m not sure.
Ultimately, it’s whatever gets the job done for you and works with your budget and application.
Tom is right. Digital really starts to suck when things get loud. I use my Helix on quiet gigs but if I’m rocking out with a drummer I need tubes.
Why do you need tubes?
Lol no you dont. People use the AxeFx in arenas. I suggest you look at your setup. I also own nearly 10 tube amps and 5 solid state. I have no problem with any of them. Almost all high watt power amps are class D solid state.
@@matthewearl9824 Not Jimmy Vaughn.
@@FL-by9xz Did Jeff Beck ever use a Helix ? 🤣
@@imnotfishing You’re not Jeff Beck. If the reason you ‘need’ (your word) tubes is that Jeff Beck used them then that right there explains an awful lot about the state of guitar playing, and the guitar industry, today.
I’m sorry to say it because I do like Beck, and he has some legendary albums, but towards the end he was just a parody of himself. To be fair, you can probably say that about most artists granted a sufficiently long career.
Anyway, you didn’t answer the question. I suspect you don’t need tubes, you need a louder power amp for your Helix, whether it’s solid state, digital, or tubes. Your presets will sound different at volume - you can usually fix that with EQ.
A friend of mine once convinced me to order a glass of scotch from a $200 bottle. Did it taste great? Yes, but what made the night special was the conversation.
Another time, a friend insisted that I ride his $8,000 carbon fiber road bike. Was it smooth? Yes, but what made the ride amazing was the scenery.
Another friend gave me a ride in his new Mercedes, showing off how quiet the ride was and how solidly the doors closed. To him, it was amazing. To me, it was no better than a Honda Accord.
Another friend is into super high end stereos. Another insists on only flying first class. Another can’t imagine someone putting hardwood floors in their house that aren’t rift and quartered.
And some guitar players insist on only using the finest tube amps.
For me, what makes a night of playing music special is not the gear, but rather the joy of creating beautiful sounds with friends. Choose the gear that serves your needs and fits your budget.
And I always cite Brian May using the solid state "Deacy" John Deacon built on things and no one knowing for decades. Everyone thought it was all Vox amps.
Now that being said I love your playing brother!! You sound amazing on it!! I guess at the end of the day that is all that matters!
Not for the lack of trying I buy the new model each time quad cortex fractal line 6 but I have never felt the same way on stage or in my bedroom as I do when I plug into a real amp.
The other thing I have noticed is every time I try to test this theory on others in the room with a/b boxes they always know even when the modeler is going through the power section of my tube amp.
Hi John, maybe i missed the part of the recording chain of the Pro Reverb. Amp to a load box... what´s next? thx ✌🏻
Digital enables young and broke people to create awesome music on a budget. How could someone be against that. The music comes from the artist playing the instrument and not from the tubes. Of course they sound better but not everyone can afford them.
In every artform tools change over time and enable artists in different ways.
i think this is something we should cherish.
Think of all the movies we would have never seen without digital cameras.
You can get a great sound through digital no question....
The biggest difference i've noticed is feel. A cooking tube amp just feels and responds "right" in a way that is inspiring to play and record. A good amp becomes an extension of the instrument.
UA plugins are great! I just got a bundle for $99 and I’m loving it.
To be honest, if you are an artist creating your own sound and music… IT DOESN’T MATTER. I’m absolutely sure that if the Beatles or Jimi Hendrix were in their prime today… they would be using EVERYTHING available to make their music stand out 🎸 These are only tools. Merry Christmas to all of you
That is not the issue. Steve Vai has used digital recreations, but his sound is abrasive and he often looks to find jarring sounds. I think it highly unlikely that your heroes would use a Tonex for instance. They were indeed great precisely because they were driven by sound. Emulations of a thing are just that emulations. Sad wannabes have bought into the hype that we have seen many times now about emulations being as good as. With a few exceptions I do analogue only. There is an enormous difference. If you want to play 80s hair metal by all means, but then the sounds they produced were often rubbish. As it was very few were digital.
John found what we’re REALLY missing in the first couple minutes…The “Bukovac’s hands y brain” plugin!
Soooo… My CV includes: couple decades in vans and clubs, the occasional opening spot for a national act, a jazz degree, which qualifies me to work in any fast food restaurant on the planet and a quarter century of being a television and film composer. Thus, take anything that follows with at least a pound of salt. I’ve also served as a test pilot twanger to develop cabinet models for one of the big modeler companies. (was that obscure enough to not violate my nondisclosure?)
My first experience with the tone master deluxe model was one morning at guitar Center. The store was virtually empty. It was sitting right next to a deluxe with the big metal ingot (transformer) inside it and the glass bottles (tubes). I was able to get them to sound as close to identical as “my“ ears could get them within a minute or two. The only reason I didn’t buy it then was due to the fact the taper on the Reverb was impossible to adjust. (it was either too much or not enough. There was no way to find sweet spot!)
A a few months later, I saw Keith on 5 W world during a review of ALL of the deluxe models. (He had vintage, custom shop, and at that point the “upgraded“ version of the tone master version - the unit with the blonde cabinet and oxblood speaker cloth and celestion neodyminun speaker. Most of my attention went toward the upgraded tone master. I basically sat there watching the upgrades that they had made to the previous model go by. I was kind of bummed because I knew where there was a brand new one for merely $800 US. Then Keith mentioned: “if you’ve bought the earlier one and want these upgrades, there’s a USB jack in the bottom of the amp chassis!“ I immediately ditched my jammies and got in the truck to go buy the cheap one.
To me, the tone master series is a unicorn of sorts in the sense that it was truly designed to function in an analog realm. (Read: clubs with a mic or not. These days I play in rooms that the PA is only for the vocals) For my work in TV/filmland I generally used a mixture of mic’d amps and “models” (mostly stock Logic stuff) using the proprietary cabinet models I had access to.
I dearly love Tom and hang on every note and bit of wisdom he imparts but, once that little black tube is placed SOMEWHERE in the circumference of that speaker, that audio is about to be converted into a binary supposition. It’s the way of the world now…
So… here’s something I did long ago. One of the guitars is an amp with a 58 on it, the other is a model with cab model… I no longer remember which was which… (yammering at the front is Larry Mullins (Swans etc) being interrogated by Mike Watt (Minutemen , MSSV) in Portugal when they were the rhythm section for Iggy and the Stooges.
Hope it at least amuses…
John, you’re one of the brighter spots in the twang phylum! Thanks for all you do!
th-cam.com/video/BOIMgYd_F5k/w-d-xo.html
Firstly, Tom and John are both sublime musicians with an excellent ear for tone and musicality, Namaste to you both. In my humble opinion, modeling wins in our modern world.
I worked. as a demo guitar player for a boutique amp company. In the booth we had a tube amp and cab, a cable and a telecaster. A hundred guys played through that rig and they all sounded different. So to say, an amp sounds like a Fender Blackface to me is ridiculous, because it'll sound different depending on who's playing through it.
Anyone who travels for gigs, sessions, trade shows and clinics etc. and is on a budget isn't flying with a tube amp. so if you have your modeler with your settings, it's much better than risking what a rental amp might sound like. Plus you have your rig in your hotel, for rehearsal, and anywhere else you may go.
I've been using the Line 6 Helix for 7 years and it sounds amazing for everything ... providing you know how to program a signal chain, and integrate your favorite pedals (for me a compressor).
I don't want to lift amps, or mic them up ... and I like how a true stereo rig sounds in a mix... and I don't think anyone can tell if it's a tube amp or modeling in a dense mix these days.
I've demo'd guitars at NAMM for Yamaha 10 or so times, and the videographers, magazines and TH-camrs love it when you hand them two XLRs for their camera audio.
Most people are listening to mastered music that's been reduced to 8 bit and played through phone audio or headphones...or their computer. So, if the amp inspires, I say go for it. But I don't think digital these days lacks the feel of a tube amp...in fact I think it sounds better for what I use it for.
Well the only thing I'll say is that in the room. There's a difference. You can feel it in your chest when you're playing through a tube amp. A solid state or modeler there's just the sound. The sound is the same. It's just the feel.
No, some solid state work e.g. JC120. Very much depends the sound you want. Plenty of good ss amps. However, what we are talking about here is emulations I.e. imitations.
John, my videos on my YT channel are currently (most recently) using the ME-90 Twin and a Headrush FRFR speaker all into an iPhone 13 microphone (live). I have a couple videos of using the UA Enigmatic into Logic. And they probably sound best. I have a Tone Master Twin and have had a real one in the past. The Tone Master is pretty sweet. But, I currently really like my ME-90 Twin choice and the Headrush speaker. Tom (Uncle Larry) is full of it. I've used it all because I've played for 58 years. And, I think the digital is very nice and I'm currently trying to work out my optimum gear for both live and recording. I'm really leaning on the ME-90 and my UA Dumble pedal. It's tricky and I've had weird issues with my interface but I really want the sound quality of my guitar into the Headrush.
Tom may be describing the feel of the gear under his fingers in real time. No way he can hear a difference of the recording and probably not through a mixer/PA
The feel under the fingers can be crucial to connect with your instrument on a higher level, and inspire you to create better music, with a more nuanced and dynamic technique. Especially for an elite improvisational guitarist, in real time.
Its what the audience hears what counts, an amp with mic in front, probably going to digital mixing desk controlled by other person, is more likely to get messed up and ends up digital anyway. Most modern bands now have inear monitors so not even hearing their amp on stage either.
When I play with my band where we use wedges and amps sitting on stage, I can absolutely tell the difference between a modeler and real amp cranked and sitting 6 ft behind me. When I play at church with no speakers or monitors on stage and everything running thru IEMs, I absolutely cannot tell the difference between a modeler and mic’d amp under the stage in an iso cab.
I've been playing on my FM9 for 2 years now through what would be, i think, considered a great powered monitor (EV PXM-12MP), and I've gotten some great tones out of it, and in a mix you'd probably never notice.... but IN ROOM as a bedroom guitar player, non-recorder, I've definitely missed the "warmth" of tube amps. I'm now waiting on a JCM800 and 1960AHW cab (as well as a Powerstation PS100 to attenuate) to get some air moving again. I like to think I'm going to keep the FM9, because it is great for low volumes and variety, and the effects are GREAT... but time will tell
I mean, they are a simulation of a tube amp. Are any simulations as good as what they are attempting to copy?
I LOVE my Fender Drluxe Tonemaster. I had gotten sick of modeling with my Axe-Fx II and my Axe-Fx Ii. Menus menus menus, IRs, twiddling etc.
I went back to two amps, which is where I started because I’m older than God (65 Y/O). And then my back got really bad and a 50 pound amp just wasn’t going to cut it anymore.
So I bought a deluxe tonemaster. Contrary to what some people say, it does not sound exactly the same as a vintage deluxe. These people are either paid shells or have no ears.
It definitely has a more precise sort of hi-fi sound. But since I like clean edging to break, and I love the glassy tones that some Fender amps can make, I love this amp! Once again, I am back in the camp of modeling.
But this amp has a very analog, user interface, which I appreciate, after going through sub sub sub menus on my previous modelers.
But it’s still a modeler. And that’s OK with me. Does it sound as good? All a matter of opinion. I think it does the glassy sounds that I like better than a vintage deluxe.
Were I doing ZZ Top music, no, it probably wouldn’t be as good, even with some really good pedals in front of it. Although, I will say that with my golden boy, and my sparkle drive, and my Timmy, it really seems to do the job just fine!
Oh, and it weighs just 22 pounds!!!
They all sounded similar. The modeling amps sounded more distorted on the front end and less defined. The pro rev had more clarity and the distortion was lighter and it came almost after the note( on the back end)
Was the pro reverb going through OX or through mics?
Luckily for me, I'm not a tone chaser. I'm not looking to get the (insert amp) sound. I have several amps that do different things but I gig with a Karana. So, I took the Katana and built sounds that sound good to me. It doesn't have to sound like another amp for me. I just dial in tones that work for me and work in the band that I play with. I can dial in a sound I like with all of the amps I have. Are they different? Sure. But they're all sounds that work for me. That is all that matters to me. Recently most of the recording I've done has been with plugins. I'm fine with it. It sounds good and that's all that matters to me. Not being a tone chaser or having a sound in my head that I'm doing for helps a lot. If I can dial in something I can work with, that's all that matters to me.
If we all were searching for the most natural sounds from the instruments, wouldn't we all just play acoustic and not electric guitars? Electric are all mod'd via boosting the signal and so on. My advice, play what you like, through what you like as often as you like and, enjoy.
These boomers want to gatekeep good tone by saying you need the “real vintage stuff” I’ve met professional touring musicians and session guys that told me in a room behind a recording desk through the speakers they couldn’t tell the difference and most of the time they liked the digital stuff better. Obviously the magic of amps is in the room with you. But through a sound system or inears there’s no real difference.
I'd be willing to bet most didn't say that until they could get and afford the "vintage" stuff. The other thing is there's a misconception that just because something is old that it's great. The "vintage" guitars you get now will have had decades of people correcting whatever problems they came with.
I mean, Tom uses a Line 6 M9 on his board. Granted, that's not an amp modeler, but that's still modeling and using tech that is far older than modern DSP stuff.
I’m 59 yrs old. Been around the amp/guitar block for 45 years. It’s all about laziness. There is a visceral difference and a purity of the beginning of the Fender/Gibson/Marshall era. Nothing will ever sound as good or as warm and real as those early amps/guitars. Just like the 50’s and 60’s muscle cars. Tell me an original Shelby Cobra isn’t the most pure form of driving experience? Everyone sits in front of
iPhones, computers, digital and E-everything. There’s NO argument. These modern modelers, Tesla cars, Social Media….they are efficient and time-saving and small. But ALL of it is disposable and artificial as is most popular music today. Ask Tom, he has to play the same 2-3 chord progressions every day and make them sound ‘different’ or exciting in each new arrangement. Human beings are not digital creatures. That Golden Era of design in automotive, music gear
And architecture for that matter…will never be topped for longevity. Tom is 100% right. Keep convincing yourselves that today’s watered down junk is something you’ll cherish for 70 years? It’s a shallow artificial and meaningless world of watered down junk spoon fed to the masses by corporate shrinkflation giants. The one issue that is tricky is that much of that vintage gear is unattainable due to the sentimental value placed on on these things. Most new guitars from Fender are junk…as are modern Amps. Kids can’t afford the older stuff and new stuff is not built to last. Last good vintage style fender guitars(AVRI)were made in 2016. Gibson on the other hand makes killer new Les Paul R8,R9 and R0 guitars that rival the originals. But $10,000? Not realistic for a young guitarist.
It would have been good to do this exercise as an A/B/C blind test and see what people thought was what gear in each case (as well as which they preferred).
Yeah, I hear what he's saying, but I have never played so much in the past 25 years, as I have with my digital gear. Starting with the boss IR-200 and ending on the Ampero 2 stomp. It's just so easy to flick the switch and not have to deal with the warm up of my tube amps or the crazy minimum volume to get a great tone.
I'm honestly playing 3 times as much as I have in 20+ years with my digital gear recently.
My bottom line is: “Does it sound good? Am I able to get the type of sound that I’m looking for to get the job done?” I’m not so much into nailing a specific amp tone perfectly. However, I’m just one guy playing in a top 40 cover/party band.
Cheers!
Amps will always be better however, when your playing live nobody in the audience can tell the difference unless their a guitar player and sometimes they can’t even tell. I use QC FOH then use a power amp with cab on stage and it sounds huge! I do love taking my Friedman BE100 deluxe out though.
The sounds are similar enough for me not to care. But it depends how it feels when you're playing. Which could also be psychosomatic. I think it "feels" different when I play my valve amp than my solid state. But it on depends on my mood to a large extent.
Front end analog back end digital…that’s my approach. When I use analog pedals for compression, drives, gain stages, and amp sims and digital modulation, delays, reverbs, cabinet sims. It maintains the FEEL of playing guitar and reacts properly with my pickups / volume pot.
I have a Bugera T5 tube amp head, Fender Princeton Chorus, Blackstar Fly3. Like them in different ways. The T5 even though it has an attenuator its still almost too loud for home use with close neighbors if your trying to make it breakup. Its easy for a professional musician to have an opinion but most of us are just bedroom rockstars and we cant annoy the neighbors all day and night.
I wish Tom would do some blindfolded tests, with some people who really know how to dial things in. I'm recently back into tube amps big time... but I've recorded a ton of music with all types of simulations over the past 15 years too. I too love the feel of the amp in the room and how it makes you play, but Tom listens as he plays ...on headphones... to the cab/amp in "another room" so he doesn't have that sensation that everyone points to. So if they could get a bunch of different digital stuff and a few amps coming back in the headphones... is it possible he might be able to play the same stuff with all of them? I have some wicked total sound presets in NDSP's Tone King amp and others that can make you really creative. Even Guitar Rig has some great presets. I use the Kemper a lot also. He should experience the best of those.
I find it is the feel. They are getting better, but not quite yet.
Merry Christmas to you and your family. I think the nano cortex came a little closer to the Pro Reverb than the Dream. As much as I understand where uncle Larry is coming from, but is it really a big enough difference. All the dynamics are there.
I think if more people experience/hear all the options, and depending on the situation: (live/studio, etc) and especially the TYPE(S) of music they play, most would pick the tube amps. Also, what volume level, what guitar. Also, are you playing arpeggiated chords, solos, funk rhythm parts, chuggy barre chords, etc?? You'll drive yourself and everyone around you nuts chasing the tone. Players need to concentrate on the notes they play.
Isn't how it feels important ? A good tube amp feels different when your playing than something digital to me , some things just feel more lively when your playing, just as some overdrive feel more lively in your hands when playing , but yes they are extremely close in sound , but how it feels is the question
Tom is right, amps and pedals started when rock was born and will continue to rule the world, modelers sound thin and uninspiring, pro players use them for touring since there are no more arenas to fill, only clubs is understandable they do not want to carry tons of gear, but modelers are crap.
The real differences become clear when you play a bunch of different guitars through a tube amp and a then a modeling amp. The tube amp will highlight the differences between the guitars much more than the modeler.