Market Research: A new amp modelling product.

[statics]

Hi guys,



I’m a final-year Product Design Engineering student at Loughborough University, UK, and I’m undertaking some market research for my major project. I will be designing and building a new amp modelling product for guitarists, and would like to ask everybody a few questions.

With your answers I hope to piece together a detailed and concise snapshot of the thoughts of my target consumers of existing products on the market, and see whether there is indeed a need that has not yet been fulfilled.



There may be more questions in the future, but at this early stage I have just 10. You can answer them in as much or as little detail as you like. I’ll be posting this on a few different forums, since I imagine needs will vary from group to group.



When answering the questions, please consider all devices that you are familiar with, both analogue and digital, that offer an amp-modelling solution (even if it is perhaps not it’s primary purpose). Examples include: Consider POD, Sansamp, Axe-FX, Tonelab, PC/Mac Plugins, BOSS Multi-FX, etc.


1. In what areas do you believe amp modelling surpasses real tube amps? This might be in sound, convenience, versatility, I/O options, price, and so on. If there are features specific to a single unit only (e.g. An Axe FX or POD feature) then please state that. Also, if some of these advantages apply specifically to the kinda of venues or types of music you play, please comment on that also.

2. Likewise, in what areas to you believe tube amps are still superior?

3. In your experience it is possible to achieve an modelled sound that is indistinguishable from the original amp? (Of course there will be differences, but are you able to perceive them?) If only a certain product, or a number of products is able to achieve this, please state which.
(Please do not confuse this with the quality of the sound - please just comment on whether you can tell the difference).

4. Regardless of how similar it is to the original amp, can you achieve a sound using modelling that you enjoy as much as a sound shaped by a real tube amp? Again, if only certain products achieve this, please state which.

5. To what extent do you believe that DSP modelling devices sound ‘digital’. Can you describe the sound, or tell-tale signs? If this only applies to some products and not to others, then please state which apply.

6. To what extent do you find the number of options available to the user overwhelming? Might this prevent you from purchasing a particular product? If so, please state which products you find overwhelming. (e.g. number of amp models and effects, I/O options, buttons, flashing lights, or other features)

7. Do you believe that price of amp modelling devices is restrictive for most? Which products specifically are pricing themselves out of the market?

8. As a performing musician, are you willing to sacrifice a degree of sound quality for convenience and simplicity? Or will you not compromise on sound, regardless of how much gear you need to lug about on public transport, or in your car?

9. Clearly the more you pay, the higher-spec hardware you get, resulting (usually) in better models and more complex algorithms in the case of DSP devices, or more complex circuitry in the case of analogue products. Which product do you believe offers the cheapest professional-quality solution, that achieves an acceptable sound?
To rephrase that, where is the price threshold, where modelling becomes acceptable for professional use?

10. In your rehearsals or live performances, do you regularly switch between clean and overdrive sounds within the same song? If the answer is yes, are floor-based modelling systems with built-in foot switches more attractive to you, or do you prefer a rack-mountable/other system, with an optional foot controller? Are you aware of any advantages or disadvantages with either design?


Thanks very much for your answers, and I'll keep you posted as the project progresses.

Tom

 

[MaxOfMetal]

1. In what areas do you believe amp modelling surpasses real tube amps? This might be in sound, convenience, versatility, I/O options, price, and so on. If there are features specific to a single unit only (e.g. An Axe FX or POD feature) then please state that. Also, if some of these advantages apply specifically to the kinda of venues or types of music you play, please comment on that also.

In my experience, amp modeling has surpassed tube amps in all of the following: convenience, versatility, I/O options, price, and ease of travel.

2. Likewise, in what areas to you believe tube amps are still superior?

Tube amps, at least most of them, are still far more plug and play than most all modelers I've used (hardware and software). You can plug in a JCM800, 5150, etc. turn a couple knobs and get amazing tones. Most modelers require a good amount of menu scrolling and deeper preset editing, unless pre-loading other user made presets, but I don't feel those fully count.

3. In your experience it is possible to achieve an modelled sound that is indistinguishable from the original amp? (Of course there will be differences, but are you able to perceive them?) If only a certain product, or a number of products is able to achieve this, please state which.
(Please do not confuse this with the quality of the sound - please just comment on whether you can tell the difference).

I think amp modelers can get damn close. Given the differences in tubes, bias, and overall rig setup that tube amps are subjected to, I feel that modelers get as close as most folks can to copying other tones, even when using the actual non-digital gear.

4. Regardless of how similar it is to the original amp, can you achieve a sound using modelling that you enjoy as much as a sound shaped by a real tube amp? Again, if only certain products achieve this, please state which.

Definitely. Some of my favorite tones I've made have been from tweaking the heck out of PODs and NI Guitar Rig.

5. To what extent do you believe that DSP modelling devices sound ‘digital’. Can you describe the sound, or tell-tale signs? If this only applies to some products and not to others, then please state which apply.

Of the cheaper "older generation" modelers just didn't sound quite right compared to a tube amp. It was more about the limits of the programming and in some cases the converters it seems. For instance, the original PODs just didn't break up or distort quite right when it comes to dynamics in playing. They didn't sound too bad, but just didn't sound exactly like tube amps, for better or worse.

6. To what extent do you find the number of options available to the user overwhelming? Might this prevent you from purchasing a particular product? If so, please state which products you find overwhelming. (e.g. number of amp models and effects, I/O options, buttons, flashing lights, or other features)

The more options and editing available the better. There is nothing stating that you have to use all the tools available. You can edit as deep as you want.

7. Do you believe that price of amp modelling devices is restrictive for most? Which products specifically are pricing themselves out of the market?

Even the most expensive modeling units on the market (Fractal and Kemper) are potentially cheaper than a full size, professional, fully configured tube guitar rig.

8. As a performing musician, are you willing to sacrifice a degree of sound quality for convenience and simplicity? Or will you not compromise on sound, regardless of how much gear you need to lug about on public transport, or in your car?

Yes. Though, I don't feel that there is a sacrifice when using certain modelers.

9. Clearly the more you pay, the higher-spec hardware you get, resulting (usually) in better models and more complex algorithms in the case of DSP devices, or more complex circuitry in the case of analogue products. Which product do you believe offers the cheapest professional-quality solution, that achieves an acceptable sound?
To rephrase that, where is the price threshold, where modelling becomes acceptable for professional use?

As many professional bands have shown, you can get amazing tones out of VERY cheap modeling (POD XT, AmpRack, NI, etc.). The biggest determinant here is going to be the tones you're looking for.

10. In your rehearsals or live performances, do you regularly switch between clean and overdrive sounds within the same song? If the answer is yes, are floor-based modelling systems with built-in foot switches more attractive to you, or do you prefer a rack-mountable/other system, with an optional foot controller? Are you aware of any advantages or disadvantages with either design?

A foot controller is a foot controller, whether it's mounted to the unit, attached via cable, or triggered via a separate unit means little as long as it's configured properly.

 

[KAMI]

1. In what areas do you believe amp modelling surpasses real tube amps? This might be in sound, convenience, versatility, I/O options, price, and so on. If there are features specific to a single unit only (e.g. An Axe FX or POD feature) then please state that. Also, if some of these advantages apply specifically to the kinda of venues or types of music you play, please comment on that also.

Convenience, versatility, I/O options, tweak-ability, consistency of sound, low maintenance...

2. Likewise, in what areas to you believe tube amps are still superior?

Feel.

3. In your experience it is possible to achieve an modelled sound that is indistinguishable from the original amp? (Of course there will be differences, but are you able to perceive them?) If only a certain product, or a number of products is able to achieve this, please state which.
(Please do not confuse this with the quality of the sound - please just comment on whether you can tell the difference).

Line 6 POD hd pro

Avid eleven rack

Fractal Audio axefx

Digitech gsp1101

4. Regardless of how similar it is to the original amp, can you achieve a sound using modelling that you enjoy as much as a sound shaped by a real tube amp? Again, if only certain products achieve this, please state which.

No.

5. To what extent do you believe that DSP modelling devices sound ‘digital’. Can you describe the sound, or tell-tale signs? If this only applies to some products and not to others, then please state which apply.

Boss/Roland... Argh! the fizz!

brittle and fizzy mids and top end, as stated above

6. To what extent do you find the number of options available to the user overwhelming? Might this prevent you from purchasing a particular product? If so, please state which products you find overwhelming. (e.g. number of amp models and effects, I/O options, buttons, flashing lights, or other features)

Axefx... but I'm sure you get used to it after a while!

7. Do you believe that price of amp modelling devices is restrictive for most? Which products specifically are pricing themselves out of the market?

Axefx

8. As a performing musician, are you willing to sacrifice a degree of sound quality for convenience and simplicity? Or will you not compromise on sound, regardless of how much gear you need to lug about on public transport, or in your car?

I would be willing compromise (only to a certain degree) sound quality for simplicity and convenience.

9. Clearly the more you pay, the higher-spec hardware you get, resulting (usually) in better models and more complex algorithms in the case of DSP devices, or more complex circuitry in the case of analogue products. Which product do you believe offers the cheapest professional-quality solution, that achieves an acceptable sound?
To rephrase that, where is the price threshold, where modelling becomes acceptable for professional use?

POD hd pro, £500 up!

10. In your rehearsals or live performances, do you regularly switch between clean and overdrive sounds within the same song? If the answer is yes, are floor-based modelling systems with built-in foot switches more attractive to you, or do you prefer a rack-mountable/other system, with an optional foot controller? Are you aware of any advantages or disadvantages with either design?

I much prefer a rack-mountable system with an optional footswitch...

because:

1. it looks cooler

2. you have your system at the back of the stage (away from audience)

3. you get to choose whichever of footswitch you want

 

[wakjob]

I'll second everything that MaxofMetal said. Spot on Max.

But, I'll add:

Gain structure/texture and how it responds to the guitar's volume knob. I call it the "open D chord test". Using med to low gain, strum an open D and just let it ring out. What do you hear?

Is it the natural distortion diminishing into a nice clean tone, then fading/sustaining out?

Or is the gain fizzling and crackling out like a dead battery in a cheap dirt box?

Rolling back the volume knob on the guitar to clean up an overdriven sound is important to a lot of guitarist. Some modelers are getting better at this.

The other biggie with me is the lack of that 2nd harmonic in the overall sound/tone. That's what we hear in real tube amps. Most modelers and solid state amps are usually called 'one dimensional' for this reason.

Modelers, analog or digital, and solid state amps lack the 'fundamental clean amp push' that sits just under the notes being played. It's what gives LIFE to the sound and feel of playing electric guitar. It's paramount to the interaction of the guitar and amp.

Most modelers and solid state devices are gain dependent. If you turn the gain down, you got NOTHING to dig into. The tone, and more importantly the feel just goes dead under your fingers.

 

[Eric Christian]

1. In what areas do you believe amp modelling surpasses real tube amps? This might be in sound, convenience, versatility, I/O options, price, and so on. If there are features specific to a single unit only (e.g. An Axe FX or POD feature) then please state that. Also, if some of these advantages apply specifically to the kinda of venues or types of music you play, please comment on that also.

Modelling Amps have several advantages such as noise gating, virtually unlimited tone, gain and effects selection plus many act as USB interfacing for direct recording.

2. Likewise, in what areas to you believe tube amps are still superior?

Tube amps have a rich full analog tone full of dynamics that I would describe as warm, husky and burly. Nothing I've ever heard replicates it perfectly.

3. In your experience it is possible to achieve an modelled sound that is indistinguishable from the original amp? (Of course there will be differences, but are you able to perceive them?) If only a certain product, or a number of products is able to achieve this, please state which.
(Please do not confuse this with the quality of the sound - please just comment on whether you can tell the difference).

No. But the AxeFx comes real close.

4. Regardless of how similar it is to the original amp, can you achieve a sound using modelling that you enjoy as much as a sound shaped by a real tube amp? Again, if only certain products achieve this, please state which.

Yes. To some extent I enjoy that sort of hollow percussive sound commonly refered to around here as "Djent" that in my mind is done best with Line 6 gear.

5. To what extent do you believe that DSP modelling devices sound ‘digital’. Can you describe the sound, or tell-tale signs? If this only applies to some products and not to others, then please state which apply.

Digital amp modelling always seems to have this kind of artifact sound to it from my perception.

6. To what extent do you find the number of options available to the user overwhelming? Might this prevent you from purchasing a particular product? If so, please state which products you find overwhelming. (e.g. number of amp models and effects, I/O options, buttons, flashing lights, or other features)

I like intuitive minimalistic controls. I don't want my preamp to be like the controls on a BMW 7 Series. The GUI should be large backlit color LCD and next to it should be four triangle navigation buttons surrounding a round enter button. There should be a headphone jack and a seperate headphone volume control. Next to that should be a row of hard to turn detent knobs numbered 1-10; Pre-Gain, Low, Mid, High and Post Gain. On the far right side there should be a big soft backlit button labelled "TUNER".

7. Do you believe that price of amp modelling devices is restrictive for most? Which products specifically are pricing themselves out of the market?

Personally I think the features fit the price. You can buy a little Line 6 bean on the cheap and do just fine or you drop 3K on an AxeFx 2 with the footswitch. Your choice. Personally I wouldn't pay $100 for the thin shrill Eleven Rack.

8. As a performing musician, are you willing to sacrifice a degree of sound quality for convenience and simplicity? Or will you not compromise on sound, regardless of how much gear you need to lug about on public transport, or in your car?

No. I've always dragged at least a half stack to a gig. The crowd up front away from the PA deserve to have their faces melted.

9. Clearly the more you pay, the higher-spec hardware you get, resulting (usually) in better models and more complex algorithms in the case of DSP devices, or more complex circuitry in the case of analogue products. Which product do you believe offers the cheapest professional-quality solution, that achieves an acceptable sound?
To rephrase that, where is the price threshold, where modelling becomes acceptable for professional use?

Cheapest value is the GSP1101. Most professional hands down is the AxeFx line however that Kemper sounds incredible.

10. In your rehearsals or live performances, do you regularly switch between clean and overdrive sounds within the same song? If the answer is yes, are floor-based modelling systems with built-in foot switches more attractive to you, or do you prefer a rack-mountable/other system, with an optional foot controller? Are you aware of any advantages or disadvantages with either design?

Yes, clean intro to dirty bomblast. Rack with a break out foot pedal.

Now do I get my $50 Visa gift card?

 

[Given To Fly]

1. In what areas do you believe amp modelling surpasses real tube amps? This might be in sound, convenience, versatility, I/O options, price, and so on. If there are features specific to a single unit only (e.g. An Axe FX or POD feature) then please state that. Also, if some of these advantages apply specifically to the kinda of venues or types of music you play, please comment on that also.

Convenience, versatility, I/O options.

2. Likewise, in what areas to you believe tube amps are still superior?

Tone, ease of use, and long term, tube amps hold their monetary value

3. In your experience it is possible to achieve an modelled sound that is indistinguishable from the original amp? (Of course there will be differences, but are you able to perceive them?) If only a certain product, or a number of products is able to achieve this, please state which.
(Please do not confuse this with the quality of the sound - please just comment on whether you can tell the difference).

Yes, the Eleven Rack (demo on Youtube with Duel Rectifier vs. Eleven Rack preset). I'm sure other modelers can do it to but I don't have enough experience with them to give any examples.

4. Regardless of how similar it is to the original amp, can you achieve a sound using modelling that you enjoy as much as a sound shaped by a real tube amp? Again, if only certain products achieve this, please state which.
Yes! The Eleven Rack and Kemper Profiling amp. How ever the tones were achieved through liberal use of multiple parametric EQ's.

5. To what extent do you believe that DSP modelling devices sound ‘digital’. Can you describe the sound, or tell-tale signs? If this only applies to some products and not to others, then please state which apply.

I remember the Boss GT3 having terrible digital artifacts on some patches at the higher frequencies. In general, "thin fizz" is a tell tale sign.

6. To what extent do you find the number of options available to the user overwhelming? Might this prevent you from purchasing a particular product? If so, please state which products you find overwhelming. (e.g. number of amp models and effects, I/O options, buttons, flashing lights, or other features)
I actually think there is room to grow. The major high end products can be be counted on 1 hand. However, the number of useless patches throughout all devices, no matter the price point, is overwhelming.

7. Do you believe that price of amp modelling devices is restrictive for most? Which products specifically are pricing themselves out of the market?
I think all the products are within the means of almost everyone. I would have to save for awhile to get an AxeFX II but I could certainly do it. There are certain boutique amps (Dumble) that will likely always be unaffordable.

8. As a performing musician, are you willing to sacrifice a degree of sound quality for convenience and simplicity? Or will you not compromise on sound, regardless of how much gear you need to lug about on public transport, or in your car?
It depends on the event but overall, yes, convenience and simplicity along with a decent enough sound is better than a great sound and 200 lbs of gear.

9. Clearly the more you pay, the higher-spec hardware you get, resulting (usually) in better models and more complex algorithms in the case of DSP devices, or more complex circuitry in the case of analogue products. Which product do you believe offers the cheapest professional-quality solution, that achieves an acceptable sound?
To rephrase that, where is the price threshold, where modelling becomes acceptable for professional use?
In general, the Pod HD500, Eleven Rack, and Tech 21 products are probably the least expensive professional units.

10. In your rehearsals or live performances, do you regularly switch between clean and overdrive sounds within the same song? If the answer is yes, are floor-based modelling systems with built-in foot switches more attractive to you, or do you prefer a rack-mountable/other system, with an optional foot controller? Are you aware of any advantages or disadvantages with either design?
I think rack-mountable with foot controller is currently the best option. Truthfully, I think my opinion is shaped by two things: higher end gear typically uses this configuration and I would be averse to "stepping" on my $2500 modeling amp.

 

[statics]

These are some really good responses, thank you guys.
As many more as possible would be really helpful, cheers.

 

[nangillala]

1. In what areas do you believe amp modelling surpasses real tube amps? This might be in sound, convenience, versatility, I/O options, price, and so on. If there are features specific to a single unit only (e.g. An Axe FX or POD feature) then please state that. Also, if some of these advantages apply specifically to the kinda of venues or types of music you play, please comment on that also.

Convenience, including weight and transportability as well as the connection directly to the board
Realiability (maybe some products have some faulty switches, etc. but you don't have to change tubes regularly)
Versatility and price for this versatility
Not only amp modellings but also a lot of effects included (e.g. AxeFX). No need for pedals, pedalboards, reworking connections, etc.
A big plus for me is that I can use "new" effects or amps just to try them if I somehow come up with the idea. I don't have to buy them in addition to what I already have.
-> I save money

2. Likewise, in what areas to you believe tube amps are still superior?

Coolness (*lol*). But foremost versatility in terms of different amps. An Axe Fx etc. may offer you hundreds of amps but it doesn't help if you are looking for the one that's not in there.
Haptics (is that an english word?). I like to turn knobs, flip switches, etc.

3. In your experience it is possible to achieve an modelled sound that is indistinguishable from the original amp? (Of course there will be differences, but are you able to perceive them?) If only a certain product, or a number of products is able to achieve this, please state which.
(Please do not confuse this with the quality of the sound - please just comment on whether you can tell the difference).

I think it is possible with the Axe Fx (Standard). Not so much with the old pod technology (I haven't really compared the HD models).

4. Regardless of how similar it is to the original amp, can you achieve a sound using modelling that you enjoy as much as a sound shaped by a real tube amp? Again, if only certain products achieve this, please state which.

Yes. I achieved this with my Axe Fx. But also with an Adrenalinn II and I liked some sounds of the Tech21 Tri AC (but not all).

5. To what extent do you believe that DSP modelling devices sound ‘digital’. Can you describe the sound, or tell-tale signs? If this only applies to some products and not to others, then please state which apply.

My Adrenalinn II sounded somewhat "harsh" but I don't know if that was part of the sound design or because it was digital. My Axe Fx does not sound digital to me.

6. To what extent do you find the number of options available to the user overwhelming? Might this prevent you from purchasing a particular product? If so, please state which products you find overwhelming. (e.g. number of amp models and effects, I/O options, buttons, flashing lights, or other features)

I really like to have as many options as possible. The only downside might be a bad user interface (like on the Boss GT-8, that was horrible...)
Shear amount of amps, effects, etc. wouldn't prevent me from buying.

7. Do you believe that price of amp modelling devices is restrictive for most? Which products specifically are pricing themselves out of the market?

I don't think you can say that per se. There is a solution available for every pocket. Especially if the used market is an option.

8. As a performing musician, are you willing to sacrifice a degree of sound quality for convenience and simplicity? Or will you not compromise on sound, regardless of how much gear you need to lug about on public transport, or in your car?

Yes I am willing to. The good thing is: I don't really have to nowadays.

9. Clearly the more you pay, the higher-spec hardware you get, resulting (usually) in better models and more complex algorithms in the case of DSP devices, or more complex circuitry in the case of analogue products. Which product do you believe offers the cheapest professional-quality solution, that achieves an acceptable sound?
To rephrase that, where is the price threshold, where modelling becomes acceptable for professional use?

As shown by different acts the threshold is quite low (Pod II on Procupine Tree records?). For me it would be in the league of the Eleven rack or a Axe Fx std (used).

10. In your rehearsals or live performances, do you regularly switch between clean and overdrive sounds within the same song? If the answer is yes, are floor-based modelling systems with built-in foot switches more attractive to you, or do you prefer a rack-mountable/other system, with an optional foot controller? Are you aware of any advantages or disadvantages with either design?

Yes I do switch.
A floor based approach is more attractive to me until it reaches a certain price. When I buy a 4 digit $$ machine I don't want it to be on the floor, but in a rack. But I would much rather buy a Pod HD in floor format than a rack mounted one.
I think I'm aware of the advantages and disadvantages, yes


Hope that helps. Keep us updated on the progress!

 

[JPhoenix19]

1. In what areas do you believe amp modelling surpasses real tube amps? This might be in sound, convenience, versatility, I/O options, price, and so on. If there are features specific to a single unit only (e.g. An Axe FX or POD feature) then please state that. Also, if some of these advantages apply specifically to the kinda of venues or types of music you play, please comment on that also.

Amp modeling has surpassed real tube amps in almost all facets, and to varying degrees depending on the modeller in question. Some things I really like are elimination of tube maintenance, the ability to 'set it and forget it' by creating presets. In the case of PC modelling, a vast wealth of available content (much of it for free) which surpasses the selection any other modeller.

2. Likewise, in what areas to you believe tube amps are still superior?

IMO, not much. The 'feel' associated with analogue tube technology (in a live situation) is still hard to emulate using current DSP technology. Also the 'learning curve' for getting great tones from analogue tube amps is usually much less than with modelers.

3. In your experience it is possible to achieve an modelled sound that is indistinguishable from the original amp? (Of course there will be differences, but are you able to perceive them?) If only a certain product, or a number of products is able to achieve this, please state which.
(Please do not confuse this with the quality of the sound - please just comment on whether you can tell the difference).

Yes- although it depends on the application and skill of the person creating the tone. In studio applications, depending on the skill of the engineer it's completely possible to create tones with digital modellers that are indistinguishable from analogue tube technology. Live situations are different, but the principle still remains that depending on the skill of the person creating the tone it's possible to almost perfectly model the original piece of gear.

4. Regardless of how similar it is to the original amp, can you achieve a sound using modelling that you enjoy as much as a sound shaped by a real tube amp? Again, if only certain products achieve this, please state which.

Absolutely!

5. To what extent do you believe that DSP modelling devices sound ‘digital’. Can you describe the sound, or tell-tale signs? If this only applies to some products and not to others, then please state which apply.

In general, lack of 'depth' or dynamics- specifically the response to picking dynamics.

6. To what extent do you find the number of options available to the user overwhelming? Might this prevent you from purchasing a particular product? If so, please state which products you find overwhelming. (e.g. number of amp models and effects, I/O options, buttons, flashing lights, or other features)

Personally, I love options and am more worried about being 'underwhelmed' with a modeller. The more options, the better!

7. Do you believe that price of amp modelling devices is restrictive for most? Which products specifically are pricing themselves out of the market?

Sometimes. The Axe-Fx comes to mind. As great as it probably is, I'll probably never own one simply because of how much it costs.

8. As a performing musician, are you willing to sacrifice a degree of sound quality for convenience and simplicity? Or will you not compromise on sound, regardless of how much gear you need to lug about on public transport, or in your car?

Yes- although I feel that I don't have to compromise with my current setup.

9. Clearly the more you pay, the higher-spec hardware you get, resulting (usually) in better models and more complex algorithms in the case of DSP devices, or more complex circuitry in the case of analogue products. Which product do you believe offers the cheapest professional-quality solution, that achieves an acceptable sound?
To rephrase that, where is the price threshold, where modelling becomes acceptable for professional use?

This is why I've been so happy with switching to a PC-driven guitar rig. By purchasing Guitar Rig and the Rig Kontrol 3, I was able to turn a laptop I already had into a very formidable modeling rig. Aside from that, a big thing that holds me back from going with something like a POD is the lack of ability to use external IRs. I understand why this feature isn't supported- convolution is quite resource-intensive and would require stronger hardware which would drive the price up.

10. In your rehearsals or live performances, do you regularly switch between clean and overdrive sounds within the same song? If the answer is yes, are floor-based modelling systems with built-in foot switches more attractive to you, or do you prefer a rack-mountable/other system, with an optional foot controller? Are you aware of any advantages or disadvantages with either design?

Yes. A floor-based system is the most attractive to me, and that's why I use NI's Rig Kontrol 3 as my interface- since it doubles as a midi controller. Floorboard control is a must for me.

 

[statics]

Thank you again guys! This is super useful, and in a few cases not the responses I was expecting which is interesting.

 

[op1e]

How about the easy intuitiveness of the GSP 1101 mixed with the power options of the new Blackstar ID Series, mixed with the Bias and Sag controls of the Pod HD. All in a 3 or 4 space rack unit with built in stereo mosfet power. I would like to see a rack mount unit with a dedicated longboard that just "works" like Line6 and Digitech without the need for midi programing.

 

[op1e]

Why I included the above ideas is that rarely any modellers actually address the power section of the amp they model after. Kinda dumb having the 5150 model without the Presence/Resonance controls. Imagine having the choice in your modeller to select between a 20w, 50w, 100w, or 200w simulated power output to perceive the headroom that the amp model or patch has. All this would interact with how hot and tight/loose the virtual power tubes are.

 

[JPhoenix19]

Why I included the above ideas is that rarely any modellers actually address the power section of the amp they model after. Kinda dumb having the 5150 model without the Presence/Resonance controls. Imagine having the choice in your modeller to select between a 20w, 50w, 100w, or 200w simulated power output to perceive the headroom that the amp model or patch has. All this would interact with how hot and tight/loose the virtual power tubes are.

Actually, Amplitube has a selectable wattage control on their new Carvin V3m model. It's pretty cool, actually. Peavey's ReValver has had component-level tweaking for a while. Guitar Rig has bias, variac, sag, response, and power supply options for most of their amp models.

 

[TemjinStrife]

1. In what areas do you believe amp modelling surpasses real tube amps? This might be in sound, convenience, versatility, I/O options, price, and so on. If there are features specific to a single unit only (e.g. An Axe FX or POD feature) then please state that. Also, if some of these advantages apply specifically to the kinda of venues or types of music you play, please comment on that also.

-Versatility, at least in terms of dramatic tonal changes. Regular tube amps can be extremely versatile, but the effects and options offered by modelers are hard to beat.
-Ease of recording - direct to PC is much easier and simpler than getting a mic position set up, tweaking it, and hoping the guy next door doesn't drive by on his Harley during the take.

2. Likewise, in what areas to you believe tube amps are still superior?

-User-serviceability. Something go wrong on a tube amp? Take it to an amp tech, swap out the broken/burned out part, and you're up and running again. Something go wrong on an Axe-FX? Return it under warranty or buy a new one; you're not likely to be able to fix serious problems.
-Durability. My modeling gear has always been more fragile or finicky than my tube amps.
-Ease of use. Plug and play, turn knobs. No deep menu editing mid-jam when you need less gain or more mids. Significantly lower learning curve. No explaining to your jam friend how to wrestle with an interface to adjust the EQ.
-"Feel." As much as I hate to use that term, a tube amp still feels far more like an "instrument" to me, even with the most dynamic amp models in the AFX II.
-Long-term value and reliability. The amps hold their value much better, and it's much easier to replace parts as noted above.

3. In your experience it is possible to achieve an modelled sound that is indistinguishable from the original amp? (Of course there will be differences, but are you able to perceive them?) If only a certain product, or a number of products is able to achieve this, please state which.
(Please do not confuse this with the quality of the sound - please just comment on whether you can tell the difference).

-Only when playing through a guitar cab, or recording direct. Even with farfield impulses, a modeler through a full-range flat-response setup in the room feels and sounds very different from an amp in the room.

4. Regardless of how similar it is to the original amp, can you achieve a sound using modelling that you enjoy as much as a sound shaped by a real tube amp? Again, if only certain products achieve this, please state which.

-I've enjoyed 5150s and AC30s in a variety of modeling programs; they're a lot of fun. I'd prefer to have the real thing though.

5. To what extent do you believe that DSP modelling devices sound ‘digital’. Can you describe the sound, or tell-tale signs? If this only applies to some products and not to others, then please state which apply.

-Typically it's due to poor A/D/A conversion, where things either are harsh and/or fizzy (hard to listen to) or very dark, compressed, and do not 'cut' very well in a mix. This is less of a problem with more modern units running better hardware.

6. To what extent do you find the number of options available to the user overwhelming? Might this prevent you from purchasing a particular product? If so, please state which products you find overwhelming. (e.g. number of amp models and effects, I/O options, buttons, flashing lights, or other features)

-A huge number of features distracts me from the playing. I want simple and sounds great, with the least amount of necessary programming to get me there, and easily adjustable on the fly during the gig.

7. Do you believe that price of amp modelling devices is restrictive for most? Which products specifically are pricing themselves out of the market?

When you include the cost of a poweramp, controller, and cab, you are getting into very expensive territory. When you can get a fully professional tube rig together for less than $1-1.5k with an amp, cab, footswitch and an OD and/or other effects pedals, it's hard to justify the expense of an Axe-FX or a Kemper plus controller plus poweramp plus cab.

8. As a performing musician, are you willing to sacrifice a degree of sound quality for convenience and simplicity? Or will you not compromise on sound, regardless of how much gear you need to lug about on public transport, or in your car?

-Convenience is important, as I take public transportation everywhere. It has to fit on a cart and be portable, but it also has to be loud enough to carry a small bar since the PAs around here are often vocals-only and there's rarely backline.

In this regard, my tube amp is actually easier to move than many modeling rigs, and I sold my big bass rig years ago in favor of a micro amp and small, loud cab (although I didn't compromise on tone with that; it actually sounds better than my old big rig.)

9. Clearly the more you pay, the higher-spec hardware you get, resulting (usually) in better models and more complex algorithms in the case of DSP devices, or more complex circuitry in the case of analogue products. Which product do you believe offers the cheapest professional-quality solution, that achieves an acceptable sound?
To rephrase that, where is the price threshold, where modelling becomes acceptable for professional use?

-Cheapest non-modeling professional-quality solution for what I do on guitar? Jet City JCA2212 1x12 combo, tubescreamer, tuner. You're out less than $600, plenty of volume to carry the room, and great tone.
-Cheapest modeling professional-quality solution? POD HD500, plus a lightweight power amp and cab, or cheap PA speaker. Even used, you're up over $7-800.

10. In your rehearsals or live performances, do you regularly switch between clean and overdrive sounds within the same song? If the answer is yes, are floor-based modelling systems with built-in foot switches more attractive to you, or do you prefer a rack-mountable/other system, with an optional foot controller? Are you aware of any advantages or disadvantages with either design?

Being able to change channels and effects mid-song is important. The floor-based models are less convenient to tweak, but don't require paying for or lugging around any extra gear. A rackmount unit for live use will require a larger outlay for that sort of external control, with more to carry around.

 

[purpledc]

Hi guys,



I’m a final-year Product Design Engineering student at Loughborough University, UK, and I’m undertaking some market research for my major project. I will be designing and building a new amp modelling product for guitarists, and would like to ask everybody a few questions.

With your answers I hope to piece together a detailed and concise snapshot of the thoughts of my target consumers of existing products on the market, and see whether there is indeed a need that has not yet been fulfilled.



There may be more questions in the future, but at this early stage I have just 10. You can answer them in as much or as little detail as you like. I’ll be posting this on a few different forums, since I imagine needs will vary from group to group.



When answering the questions, please consider all devices that you are familiar with, both analogue and digital, that offer an amp-modelling solution (even if it is perhaps not it’s primary purpose). Examples include: Consider POD, Sansamp, Axe-FX, Tonelab, PC/Mac Plugins, BOSS Multi-FX, etc.


1. In what areas do you believe amp modelling surpasses real tube amps? This might be in sound, convenience, versatility, I/O options, price, and so on. If there are features specific to a single unit only (e.g. An Axe FX or POD feature) then please state that. Also, if some of these advantages apply specifically to the kinda of venues or types of music you play, please comment on that also.

2. Likewise, in what areas to you believe tube amps are still superior?

3. In your experience it is possible to achieve an modelled sound that is indistinguishable from the original amp? (Of course there will be differences, but are you able to perceive them?) If only a certain product, or a number of products is able to achieve this, please state which.
(Please do not confuse this with the quality of the sound - please just comment on whether you can tell the difference).

4. Regardless of how similar it is to the original amp, can you achieve a sound using modelling that you enjoy as much as a sound shaped by a real tube amp? Again, if only certain products achieve this, please state which.

5. To what extent do you believe that DSP modelling devices sound ‘digital’. Can you describe the sound, or tell-tale signs? If this only applies to some products and not to others, then please state which apply.

6. To what extent do you find the number of options available to the user overwhelming? Might this prevent you from purchasing a particular product? If so, please state which products you find overwhelming. (e.g. number of amp models and effects, I/O options, buttons, flashing lights, or other features)

7. Do you believe that price of amp modelling devices is restrictive for most? Which products specifically are pricing themselves out of the market?

8. As a performing musician, are you willing to sacrifice a degree of sound quality for convenience and simplicity? Or will you not compromise on sound, regardless of how much gear you need to lug about on public transport, or in your car?

9. Clearly the more you pay, the higher-spec hardware you get, resulting (usually) in better models and more complex algorithms in the case of DSP devices, or more complex circuitry in the case of analogue products. Which product do you believe offers the cheapest professional-quality solution, that achieves an acceptable sound?
To rephrase that, where is the price threshold, where modelling becomes acceptable for professional use?

10. In your rehearsals or live performances, do you regularly switch between clean and overdrive sounds within the same song? If the answer is yes, are floor-based modelling systems with built-in foot switches more attractive to you, or do you prefer a rack-mountable/other system, with an optional foot controller? Are you aware of any advantages or disadvantages with either design?


Thanks very much for your answers, and I'll keep you posted as the project progresses.

Tom

1. For me the ONLY benefit to a modeling device is the variety for dollars ratio. Modellers can get expensive but when compared to buying all that it models the modeling unit clearly wins. The downside ive found is that I have yet to see a unit that is as simple to operate as a real amp.

2. Tube amps have a feel and and what I like to call a push to them. All modeling devices I have tried dont really shine unless powered by a tube power amp. When running a modeling device through a solid state amp it can get loud to my ears but it takes and extremely powerful amp to thump you in the chest like a good tube amp will. But if your mainly a live player I think having your rig go to a mixing console and out of PA speakers can hurt your original tone just as much.

3. You you put a blindfold on me I probably would be hard pressed to figure it out. With the blindfold off, I would be cursing the gods that you brought a modeler to my house. But Im one of the few people who will admit I have an irrational fear of modeling devices and that my ear isnt as good as id like to believe it is. And for the record I also dont recommend products I havent used which further proves how different I am from most musicians.

4. I can fully enjoy the sound of a modeling device. To me I think what I love and also hate about a modeling device is that many of them give you the sound of the instrument as you would hear it on a record. Its sounds almost too polished. That polish is what I think people refer to as artificial.
But Id be lying if I said I didnt enjoy that once in awhile.

5. For me DSP can sound artificial before and after playing. Older units almost sounded like it had digital bleeps under the fundamental tones. And again the sound is polished and sounds for lack of a better term processed.

6. To me its never how many options a unit has but how difficult it is to navigate those options. Id also rather turn more dials than buttons. Im also not a fan of scrolling through long menus.

7. For me I think if the unit is good enough people find a way. Many people who own axe fx units made sacrifices to get it. But I would love to see something that could do what it does at a price more accessible to people like me.

8. I believe in having my cake and eating it too. But I always believe in sound quality of gear being the ultimate goal. But I question why you cant have both? And also can we get something that actually looks like an amp?

9. For me the line 6 HD modelers are the bottom of the barrel of what I would personally use. And Im not saying they are bad.

10. My rig is set to kill 90% of the time.

 

[meambobbo]

rather than answer all your particular questions, I'd prefer to give a more generalized opinion of where I think modelers are lacking and should go.

from a tone perspective, i think the more high-end products are just as good as a high end tube amp. pricewise, they are competitive. ease of use, they are more difficult or at least more overwhelming, but on the contrary, they are much more versatile. the lower cost units are actually quite impressive but are all lacking in some regard, whether it be tone quality, features, ease of use, etc.

what I think a modeler needs to hit is to bridge the price gap between the higher and lower priced units without losing any tonal qualities or versatility of the higher cost models.

also, it should aim at multiple use cases, rather than a single one. i think this has two aspects - depth of configuration for each model/block, and depth of complexity of the signal chain. for the blocks, this could be from emulating a plug and play amp only exposing the knobs the modeled gear has, to common real-world tweaks like biasing and sag adjustments, to allowing the truly impossible in analog gear, or allowing heavy customizations.

As for the chain, you could choose from a simple mono signal chain with orderable pieces, to a complex chain that can branch and merge and possibly even loop. You could specify allowing multiple input/output configurations, like sending a wet and a dry signal, or a dry output, or using multiple instruments with independent paths, etc.

but the bottom line is to allow users to specify from a list of use cases that sets things up for them for the most part, so they aren't groping in the dark to try to figure out a methodology that works.

what would also be nice would be a devkit or to even open-source the software. my main gripe with my modeler is that there are a number of common complaints with no assurance or timeline that the company will ever work on them, or will even recognize them. maybe they're not make-or-break for most users, but they sure are annoying. there's also a handful of features that'd make the unit even more versatile. and of course everyone has their dream amp that's not yet modeled.