Unpopular opinions on gear

[LeftOurEyes]

To me digital vs amps are kinda like debates between cars, its all preference. I like cars and would be happy with a AWD 4cylinder turbo (like Subaru WRX STI or Mitsubishi Evo) but I would also be happy with a v8 muscle car. Both types have something they are better at than the other and it comes down to how you want to use it and what your style is. And ideally if you get enough money you buy them both and enjoy both worlds.

 

[TheBolivianSniper]

There's a massive difference between playing live with an analog rig and jamming on plugins through headphones. Nuances of tone go out the window when you're at drumkit fighting levels without being mic'd up. Even then, it's usually so loud that I feel like the nature of a tone matters more and it's down to the hands.

Chilling at home I like to boost stuff and dial in high mid focused tones. Live I'm not boosting, dialing in thicker tones, and picking a lot harder. Maybe it's just me, since I haven't been playing with a band for a long time, but it's also something I've noticed on my sax gigs. Studio/practice tone is different than live tone and feel quite a bit and it's not just nerves.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

To me digital vs amps are kinda like debates between cars, its all preference. I like cars and would be happy with a AWD 4cylinder turbo (like Subaru WRX STI or Mitsubishi Evo) but I would also be happy with a v8 muscle car. Both types have something they are better at than the other and it comes down to how you want to use it and what your style is. And ideally if you get enough money you buy them both and enjoy both worlds.

This.

Both is best.

 

[Accoun]

The Boss MT-2 is one of the best boosts money can buy.

After the Bad Monkey video, I'd better get one before JHS makes one about it :>

 

[CanserDYI]

To me, feel is about the responsiveness of the amp. There is an "immediacy" to a chord struck into a tube amp, like a bounce back that I just have yet to feel playing a modeler.

That being said, I literally play a modeler 99% of my life and I love it and am just fine using it.

 

[A.JohnHayes]

There's a massive difference between playing live with an analog rig and jamming on plugins through headphones. Nuances of tone go out the window when you're at drumkit fighting levels without being mic'd up. Even then, it's usually so loud that I feel like the nature of a tone matters more and it's down to the hands.

Chilling at home I like to boost stuff and dial in high mid focused tones. Live I'm not boosting, dialing in thicker tones, and picking a lot harder. Maybe it's just me, since I haven't been playing with a band for a long time, but it's also something I've noticed on my sax gigs. Studio/practice tone is different than live tone and feel quite a bit and it's not just nerves.

This is something I've noticed gigging with the Pod Go. I practice at home with headphones, and I go straight to the FOH at the jam nights at the local pub. The difference is huge, especially since the headphones aren't FRFR. I've started to clone presets for my core tones and then have gig-specific versions since they're so different.

 

[Emperoff]

Ok, let's shoot:

"Feel" (or lack of thereof) is just a keyword used by people who couldn't play guitar to save their lives to attack everything they dislike and/or plays faster than them.

Examples:
"X guy just plays fast notes. No emotion, no feel" -BluesLawyer72
"Y amp feels scooped and solid state without the Plexi800 mod" -MarshallLover59

 

[LiveOVErdrive]

The world of electric guitar is too mired in the IDEA of what an electric guitar is and should sound like and how it should be used.

We have all this technology and we use it to try and recreate the sound of an existing analog amp. Why? Can't we take it further? Do we need to mimic amp heads and cabs now that we don't need those to make guitar noises?

 

[GunpointMetal]

We have all this technology and we use it to try and recreate the sound of an existing analog amp. Why? Can't we take it further? Do we need to mimic amp heads and cabs now that we don't need those to make guitar noises?

I feel like the companies making all this cool new digital gear would rather not spend their time emulating grampa's technology, but that's what guitarist demand and that's what moves units. I'm usually way more excited about a Helix update that has L6 original amps than another copy of some 30 year old mid-gain amp.

 

[TedEH]

We have all this technology and we use it to try and recreate the sound of an existing analog amp. Why? Can't we take it further? Do we need to mimic amp heads and cabs now that we don't need those to make guitar noises?

I feel like the companies making all this cool new digital gear would rather not spend their time emulating grampa's technology, but that's what guitarist demand and that's what moves units.

We try to recreate those sounds because out of all the amplification methods we've tried so far, these are generally the ones that sound the best. And the major amp-sim companies DO take it farther: as far as I'm aware, L6 and Fractal both have "original" models that take what's good about "tube amp sound" and expands on it towards some ideal.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

Most of the "original" amps in modelers are incredibly slight tweaks to the same Fender/Marshall/Mesa/Peavey voicings that make up 99% of the tones folks actually use. Heck, some of them are just plain amps with a specific EQ setting or drive built-in.

Nothing is stopping anyone from creating unique sounds in the box. Why even use an amp sim block? Plenty of EQs and drives available to make whatever tone your heart desires.

I think folks who ask for stuff other than the dozens of amps on offer don't even know what they want, and probably wouldn't use whatever weird anti-amp that meets this nebulous criteria of "something different."

 

[LiveOVErdrive]

Yeah I mean im not saying I don't do it too. I love me some traditional amp sounds. Just musing about what THE FUTURE might sound like.

I SHOULD play with regular in the box stuff. I'm gonna try it.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

Yeah I mean im not saying I don't do it too. I love me some traditional amp sounds. Just musing about what THE FUTURE might sound like.

I SHOULD play with regular in the box stuff. I'm gonna try it.

Folks were asking that question 30 years ago, and guess what? Still sounds the same.

I mean, I was at a big metal festival in the 90's and it was all Rectos, 5150s, and JCMs, and if I went again today it probably be all those just inside an AxeFx or Kemper.

Even in three or four decades very little has changed as far as the tones being chased.

Because folks want guitars to sound like guitars. Usually.

But if you want to sound different, the facility is there. Just no one really uses it because at the end of the day, even most of the folks who say they want something different just want a very minor tweak, which is probably only visible in their own head. Sort of like we all hyperfocus on small parts of our sound.

 

[PuckishGuitar]

Most of the "original" amps in modelers are incredibly slight tweaks to the same Fender/Marshall/Mesa/Peavey voicings that make up 99% of the tones folks actually use. Heck, some of them are just plain amps with a specific EQ setting or drive built-in.

Nothing is stopping anyone from creating unique sounds in the box. Why even use an amp sim block? Plenty of EQs and drives available to make whatever tone your heart desires.

I think folks who ask for stuff other than the dozens of amps on offer don't even know what they want, and probably wouldn't use whatever weird anti-amp that meets this nebulous criteria of "something different."

I think that video series of "where tone comes from" summarizes the whole situation. Amps will promote or demote different frequencies depending on how the tone stack interacts with the gain - compare a Marshall to a Mesa - and have their own special sauce handling clipping. I did some Fourier analysis early in my professional education and career, boiling down a very erratic signal to a set of equations, and it seems close to how (I think) captures fundamentally work. If you have an infinite ability to dial in an EQ curve and clipping (waveform?) then you can probably match any pedal+amp combination. There's just so much variability in that right now though that makes it hard, although the gap is closing fast.

I view amps and pedals as shortcuts to a certain tone I have in mind, and if I try hard enough (usually very hard) with EQ pre- and post- FX loop I can probably match tones between different amps. But think of what needs to happen to match the boost difference between a TS and SD-1, there would need to be a parametric EQ pedal to align the mid boost frequency and gain, something to fix the symmetrical clipping; or we just say that yeah, a TS or SD-1 is close enough to what I want to hear and work within those confines.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

I think that video series of "where tone comes from" summarizes the whole situation. Amps will promote or demote different frequencies depending on how the tone stack interacts with the gain - compare a Marshall to a Mesa - and have their own special sauce handling clipping. I did some Fourier analysis early in my professional education and career, boiling down a very erratic signal to a set of equations, and it seems close to how (I think) captures fundamentally work. If you have an infinite ability to dial in an EQ curve and clipping (waveform?) then you can probably match any pedal+amp combination. There's just so much variability in that right now though that makes it hard, although the gap is closing fast.

I view amps and pedals as shortcuts to a certain tone I have in mind, and if I try hard enough (usually very hard) with EQ pre- and post- FX loop I can probably match tones between different amps. But think of what needs to happen to match the boost difference between a TS and SD-1, there would need to be a parametric EQ pedal to align the mid boost frequency and gain, something to fix the symmetrical clipping; or we just say that yeah, a TS or SD-1 is close enough to what I want to hear and work within those confines.

It's all part of chasing the dragon.

You'll probably never find exactly what you're looking for in your head, because that changes more often than we think.

So we'll keep buying gear and tweaking and get further and closer, but that's part of the fun.

It's fun trying new things and playing around with gear.

 

[TedEH]

Kinda dumb analogy: Imagine asking someone to draw an entirely new and unique animal. They're going to draw up something made up of components of existing animals.

Someone somewhere could jump in and go "yeah, but that's derivative, why not something completely new?" Because people experience and understand everything by frames of reference. We're literally incapable of creating something brand new without deriving it from some existing understanding of what you're aiming for - outside of just generating something random, and even then, you'll be judging it by the standards of what's already out there. You need some specific parameters, or problem to solve, or something, otherwise there's nothing to lead you away from what you already have.

People have experimented with ways to affect amplified guitar sounds forever, and we focused/iterated on the ones that sound good or solve particular problems. Someone who says they want something "unique" without being able to describe any parameters past that - they literally don't know what they're asking for - which is nothing.

If you want an entirely new guitar sound you need to either:
- Identify a problem and try to solve it
- Throw anything and everything at the wall until something sticks, which might never result in anything useful

I mean, there's only so many ways to make a signal loud and distorted but still pleasant to listen to.

 

[GunpointMetal]

Most of this conversation for me comes back to: Guitar cabinets are terribly designed speaker systems and the fact that they have such a massive impact on tone is a weak point in guitar sound.

 

[TedEH]

Guitar cabinets are terribly designed speaker systems and the fact that they have such a massive impact on tone is a weak point in guitar sound.

Counter-point: Guitars sound awful through "good" speaker systems, so you're not wrong, but it's deliberate rather than being a flaw.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

Most of this conversation for me comes back to: Guitar cabinets are terribly designed speaker systems and the fact that they have such a massive impact on tone is a weak point in guitar sound.

They're objectively terrible, but subjectively awesome.

 

[GunpointMetal]

Counter-point: Guitars sound awful through "good" speaker systems, so you're not wrong, but it's deliberate rather than being a flaw.

That's because the preamps are being designed around the speakers, though. I've seen some guys replace their IRs with an EQ to relative good results, so why not just have a preamp that sounds good through a "good" speaker system in the first place?