Page 2 of 5
#41
I use that method for sustain all the time. I'd be lost without it. And no, a feedback effect just isn't the same. By changing the angle between guitar and speakers you can alter the feedback in real time in a very dynamic manner, a pedal/plugin can't do that.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#42
I'd imagine eventually modeling technology will be able to bring the same sounds as a tube amp. Who knows when though.

Jackson RR3 Rhoads and DK2M Dinky
Peavey 6505+ w/ Avatar 212 cab
Ibanez TS9, ISP Decimator, MXR 10 Band EQ
-Digitech RP1000
#43
Quote by Cathbard
I use that method for sustain all the time. I'd be lost without it. And no, a feedback effect just isn't the same. By changing the angle between guitar and speakers you can alter the feedback in real time in a very dynamic manner, a pedal/plugin can't do that.

Modelling amps can but that's still an amp, a plugin certainly can't do that but most dirt pedals can force it when maxed out into a loud enough amp. That's not a replication though that's the pedal's gain and volume enticing the amp into it.
#44
Yeah, to do it properly you need lots of volume. So even if you were using a modeller for your preamp you'd still need a big power amp and a wall of speakers. May as well just use a real amp.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#45
Quote by Cathbard
Correct.


ABSOLUTELY!! When I can that is...when the house is empty, I'm knockin pictures off the walls! If I'm playing quieter, I'll run my Line 6 head (just for FX) into an old tube powered 1969 Fanon-Masco 35w head. I couldn't play and has as much fun without sound pressure/sustain. That was one of the things that intrigued me as a kid....
#46
Quote by Cathbard
I use that method for sustain all the time. I'd be lost without it. And no, a feedback effect just isn't the same. By changing the angle between guitar and speakers you can alter the feedback in real time in a very dynamic manner, a pedal/plugin can't do that.


Yeah. I've heard a lot of cheesy feedback effects that just crack me up.
#47
You can't play Santana or Gary Moore without it.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#48
Quote by tukk04
Modelling amps can but that's still an amp, a plugin certainly can't do that but most dirt pedals can force it when maxed out into a loud enough amp. That's not a replication though that's the pedal's gain and volume enticing the amp into it.


I've got to say for the record, with these plugin programs like Guitar Rig and Amplitube, they might be useful in the studio for some people but, anytime I use them, I NEVER hear THAT much of a difference between guitars. All guitars tend to sound practically the same. That always used to piss me off and destroy a sacred sector of my love and passion for guitar tone....that and the latency. There was always latency that I could never get rid of. I didn't have the greatest computer either but still. There was always a slight delay....
#49
Quote by Cathbard
You can't play Santana or Gary Moore without it.


I'm so glad you just mentioned Gary Moore.... He's such an underrated guitarist. Of course, now he's getting more recognition now that he's dead
#50
I'm a huge Gary Moore fan.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#51
Quote by Tremolo Bum
I'd imagine eventually modeling technology will be able to bring the same sounds as a tube amp. Who knows when though.


I own Axe FX and reality is, with tweaking, it does! Im so close to having my 5150 sound dialled into the axefx its not funny. 99% of people would be hard pressed to tell the difference on a blind test
Originally Posted by ibanez_guru
ARE YOU TONE ******ED??????

Thats not a dig either, its a serious question!!!!!!!!!


Quote by gregs1020
well i did sit 5th row for the who in '82.

ears are still ringing a bit.
#52
Quote by Cathbard
Yeah, to do it properly you need lots of volume. So even if you were using a modeller for your preamp you'd still need a big power amp and a wall of speakers. May as well just use a real amp.

No you don't, I can make my little 1-watt 2-inch speaker SS dano honeytone feedback. It's a slightly different feedback but it does and my 5 watt tuber can do it, but santana/gary moore sustained notes are a different thing. I think what you meant earlier was more about sustain than feedback. Yeah, in fact I believe you were talking about sustain though sound presure, basically what an ebow is supposed to replicate so never mind your comment is right you do need a lot of speakers and wattage going for that.

Basically, just forget this post.
Last edited by tukk04 at Mar 27, 2013,
#53
Quote by ibanez_guru
I own Axe FX and reality is, with tweaking, it does! Im so close to having my 5150 sound dialled into the axefx its not funny. 99% of people would be hard pressed to tell the difference on a blind test


I DO have to agree. I'm always skeptical about emulations and mods (or whatever the hell you want to call it )but the Axe Fx (1 or 2) is absolutely, hands down, the most impressive on the market. It has become, truly, and industry standard. People say it's complicated, which it is but, it's only as difficult/complicated as you want to make it. So it still for the most part, leaves you a choice.

The only thing that's a bitch-and-a-half is coughing up the money for the floorboard controller. Waaaaay too overpriced.
#54
That type of sustain is done with feedback. It's all about volume. When Gary hit that note in Parisienne Walkways he kicked in another 100W halfstack. I do it the same way except I use a 100W 2x12 combo. You can't get the same sort of interaction with a pedal. You can get something similar but it is a pale imitation. Some of us want the real thing.


Edit. Just read your edit.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
Last edited by Cathbard at Mar 27, 2013,
#55
Quote by tukk04
No you don't, I can make my little 1-watt 2-inch speaker SS dano honeytone feedback. It's a slightly different feedback but it does and my 5 watt tuber can do it, but santana/gary moore sustained notes are a different thing. I think what you meant earlier was more about sustain than feedback. Yeah, in fact I believe you were talking about sustain though sound presure, basically what an ebow is supposed to replicate so never mind your comment is right you do need a lot of speakers and wattage going for that.

Basically, just forget this post.


#56
Quote by Dimarzio45
I DO have to agree. I'm always skeptical about emulations and mods (or whatever the hell you want to call it )but the Axe Fx (1 or 2) is absolutely, hands down, the most impressive on the market. It has become, truly, and industry standard. People say it's complicated, which it is but, it's only as difficult/complicated as you want to make it. So it still for the most part, leaves you a choice.

The only thing that's a bitch-and-a-half is coughing up the money for the floorboard controller. Waaaaay too overpriced.



The problem with most people is that they are impatient. I hear people bash the axefx saying it sounds shit, or they cant acheive the sound they want etc etc but generally when u ask them, they pull it out of the box, flip through the factory presets, plug it into a shitty amp without making changes to global settings ie-turning of cab sims and then complain that it sounds terrible.

I own tube amps, and i love them. Im not gonna sell them because i got axe fx tho. It just makes more sense that i can travel and have unlimited sounds and effect on tap without the extra effort of taking 5 different amps and 10 different pedals.
Originally Posted by ibanez_guru
ARE YOU TONE ******ED??????

Thats not a dig either, its a serious question!!!!!!!!!


Quote by gregs1020
well i did sit 5th row for the who in '82.

ears are still ringing a bit.
Last edited by ibanez_guru at Mar 27, 2013,
#57
I paid a little under $300 AUD for a Ground Control Pro
Originally Posted by ibanez_guru
ARE YOU TONE ******ED??????

Thats not a dig either, its a serious question!!!!!!!!!


Quote by gregs1020
well i did sit 5th row for the who in '82.

ears are still ringing a bit.
#58
Quote by ibanez_guru
I paid a little under $300 AUD for a Ground Control Pro


No. I'm talkin' about this.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/fractal-audio-MFC-101-foot-controler-/111040841775?pt=Guitar_Accessories&hash=item19da8cc82f

But yeah, you're 100% right. Most of the people that complain are in over their heads right from the get-go. I think every review of the thing, down to Steve Vai and Dweezil Zappa, said the thing requires attention and patience. Much like a woman.
#59
Quote by Dimarzio45
No. I'm talkin' about this.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/fractal-audio-MFC-101-foot-controler-/111040841775?pt=Guitar_Accessories&hash=item19da8cc82f

But yeah, you're 100% right. Most of the people that complain are in over their heads right from the get-go. I think every review of the thing, down to Steve Vai and Dweezil Zappa, said the thing requires attention and patience. Much like a woman.



This i dont really understand...... In Australia, i can buy a brand new MFC101 for $999
Even given the AUD is stronger than the USD, we still pay way over the top prices for everything
Originally Posted by ibanez_guru
ARE YOU TONE ******ED??????

Thats not a dig either, its a serious question!!!!!!!!!


Quote by gregs1020
well i did sit 5th row for the who in '82.

ears are still ringing a bit.
#60
Quote by ibanez_guru
This i dont really understand...... In Australia, i can buy a brand new MFC101 for $999
Even given the AUD is stronger than the USD, we still pay way over the top prices for everything


Wow that is strange. I wonder why that is....
#61
I used to blame Allan's monopolistic practices at the importer level so now that they are out of business we may see some improvement. Time will tell.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#62
Quote by Cathbard
I use that method for sustain all the time. I'd be lost without it. And no, a feedback effect just isn't the same. By changing the angle between guitar and speakers you can alter the feedback in real time in a very dynamic manner, a pedal/plugin can't do that.


Motion/gesture capture is in development right now for this stuff. We're going to have amp sims tied into Xbox kinect type device functionality that will be built into everything from toasters to battle armor.

It's right around the corner because all the technology required was delivered yesterday.

http://vis.berkeley.edu/~willettw/portfolio/pdf/guitar-paper(willett).pdf
#63
You actually work your position and adjust dynamically depending on the situation. You think an Xbox type thing is going to give the same level of expression? I highly doubt it. It isn't just your gestures, it's an organic interaction. This is art, not a video game.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#64
Quote by Sethis
I don't know if its gonna be plugins or hardware but eventually yes. Tube technology is really old and it will die sooner or later.


the wheel is old tech, it won't die.

aspirin predates tube amplifier technology, as do Ben-Wa Balls and i don't think they are going anywhere. somethings are just good ideas.

as long as we are capitalists and there is a population that wants tube amps (and there is money to be made from that demand) then there will be tube amps.

bring on the new technology as well, i can be creative on that stuff too. if i can not be creative with some new technology then i credit my lack of skill and imagination rather than the inadequacies of the new technology.
punk isn't dead, it's always smelled that way.

"A perfection of means, and confusion of aims, seems to be our main problem."
-ae
#65
Quote by Cathbard
I used to blame Allan's monopolistic practices at the importer level so now that they are out of business we may see some improvement. Time will tell.


I agree. Their poor business model was always gonna be the demise of that business.
Originally Posted by ibanez_guru
ARE YOU TONE ******ED??????

Thats not a dig either, its a serious question!!!!!!!!!


Quote by gregs1020
well i did sit 5th row for the who in '82.

ears are still ringing a bit.
#66
Quote by Cathbard
You actually work your position and adjust dynamically depending on the situation. You think an Xbox type thing is going to give the same level of expression? I highly doubt it. It isn't just your gestures, it's an organic interaction. This is art, not a video game.


Not now. But soon? Absolutely!
If you are into that sort of thing, technology is going to take exactly the artistic expression that you are talking about - to the next level. It's an evolution of the art. Its organic and digital.

http://youtu.be/P9uheL7ryxM

They will have devices that will include the simulated feedback response of specific amps based on the xyz position of the guitar relative to the amp (or the device simulating the amp).
Last edited by 667 at Mar 27, 2013,
#67
And you think that is going to replace actual sound hitting the strings and the artistic manipulation of same? I'll believe it when I see it - no, when I can test it.
You may get something similar happening but art is all about subtlety. You can shove your guitar hero crap - I'm an artist, I want the real thing. A mouse cannot replace a paintbrush. You can do fun things with a mouse and create new things that a brush can't - but it aint a brush.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#68
Quote by 667
Not now. But soon? Absolutely!
If you are into that sort of thing, technology is going to take exactly the artistic expression that you are talking about - to the next level. It's an evolution of the art. Its organic and digital.

http://youtu.be/P9uheL7ryxM

They will have devices that will include the simulated feedback response of specific amps based on the xyz position of the guitar relative to the amp (or the device simulating the amp).


That's pretty interesting. But, I don't see that being a very practical application for guitarists. Everything they do can be done with a pedal and no use of the hands. I could see it working for DJ's and Keyboard players. Hell, that'd quite possibly revive keyboard players in the public view and make them more entertaining (I guess).

Edit- Expression pedal in conjuction with synth fx. You should really mess around with synth fx. You'll find waving your hand around/taking your hand off your instrument is not going to help you become more creative. It's just a distraction and potentially cripples your ability to create.
Last edited by Dimarzio45 at Mar 27, 2013,
#69
Video games bollocks. I'm a guitarist, not a gamer. I'm not relearning how to play to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#70
Quote by Cathbard
Video games bollocks. I'm a guitarist, not a gamer. I'm not relearning how to play to solve a problem that doesn't exist.


Agreed. I'm gonna need a lot more than that video to prove it has a PRACTICAL use for guitarists. It might work wonders in other areas of life. But not guitar.
#71
The XboX does have a place in the industry tho.

The Tour Bus
Originally Posted by ibanez_guru
ARE YOU TONE ******ED??????

Thats not a dig either, its a serious question!!!!!!!!!


Quote by gregs1020
well i did sit 5th row for the who in '82.

ears are still ringing a bit.
#72
I do get the feeling that a lot of young guitarists are trying to turn guitar playing into a video game. Maybe it's a generational thing but for my part I'd like to say "**** off and get off my lawn."
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#73
Quote by Cathbard
I do get the feeling that a lot of young guitarists are trying to turn guitar playing into a video game. Maybe it's a generational thing but for my part I'd like to say "**** off and get off my lawn."


Hahahaha!
#74
Tone is one thing, and digital modeling technology has been there for years. It's not hard to get a kick-ass tone from digital models.

Feel and responsiveness on the other hand, is a far more complex affair. That's what modeling has not yet been able to master. The technology is there, but the engineering of that technology to replicate the complex dynamics of how the player interacts with the amp--and subsequently how the amp interacts with the player--has not been reached.

There is a cyclical synergy involved when playing a good guitar through a good tube amp and speaker cab. The player ends up playing not only the guitar, but essentially the amp and speakers as well. It is a total system type of thing. It can often be unpredictable, which is why we have so much trouble replicating it with digital algorithms.
Last edited by CECamps at Mar 28, 2013,
#75
Lets see... I've owned an F-100, Mark IV, RoadKing, Splawn QuickRod, and Framus Dragon. Now the only metal amp I own is the Vetta II.

Here's why:

Tubes amps always felt inconsistent to me. One day I loved the tone the next day I hated it.

Tube amps are harder to play on than most solid state amps.

I prefer to have all of my effects, tones, and whatnot in one simple package. A good tube amp and a good effects unit generally will cost way more than a good modeling amp. Additionally, I like having 64 preset channels, that can be quickly adjusted or changed to further increase my tonal pallet.

A $400 tube change (2 amps) every 2 years gets old fast.

I've never had an issue with any of my solid state amps. I've had several hundred dollars in repairs to "high quality" tube amps. Actually, the only tube amp I didn't have problems with was the Framus Dragon, which is probably considered the cheapest in terms of manufacturing of all the tube amps I've owned. I was always WAY more careful with tube amps than my Vetta and my Vetta has yet to fail me.

I'm sure many of you will disagree or have your own experiences which contradict mine and that's understandable. No two amps are the same, even if they're of the same brand, model, or even production run. I'm currently in the market for a new tube amp because despite the conveniences of digital modeling, tonally, it's only about 90% there. Tube amps are irreplaceable, or at least for the next several years. And even then, you're only gonna pry a tube amp from a dead guitarist's hands if you try to take them away.
Major of 7 String Legion 7 > 6

Carvin DC747
Ibanez RG2228
Schecter Avenger Custom Shop
and my baby....
Gibson Explorer Studio
#76
Tube amps are harder to play on? Do you mean that they highlight any mistakes you make? The depth of expression that causes that is the very reason I prefer them.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#77
It's not necessarily about reliability. Tube amps will always be more prone to damage because their components are inherently more "fragile."

It's not necessarily about tone either. I've owned a Vetta II, and it is indeed a killer amp. Got some amazing tones out of it.

It's about physics, and the physical interaction that happens when you are playing through a tube amp--and more importantly what that creates in the context of a performance. Digital modeling has failed to replicate this in an algorithm. Period.
#78
They won't because modellers spend all their time trying to sound like valve amps, if you're in a room with an amp and the best modeller version they still sound a lot different, Axe FX still sounds fake compared to the real thing side by side, on record not so much.

I do think that modelling will in the future take up a bigger place in the market, as they improve, they are more affordable to make after all.
Cornford Hellcat
Peavey 5150
1994 Ibanez Jem 7V
#79
Quote by Cathbard
And you think that is going to replace actual sound hitting the strings and the artistic manipulation of same? I'll believe it when I see it - no, when I can test it.
You may get something similar happening but art is all about subtlety. You can shove your guitar hero crap - I'm an artist, I want the real thing. A mouse cannot replace a paintbrush. You can do fun things with a mouse and create new things that a brush can't - but it aint a brush.


The actual sound hitting the strings is still going to happen Cath. We are talking about using human motion to alter that sound. Human motion is a very organic expression.

I'm not saying that tube amps are going away, and to be honest, I'm an analog purist for the most part. Doubting that motion/gesture technology is not going to translate to the guitar effectively is simply a technologically naive outlook on what is happening. The technology is in it's infancy but even for something so new, it's very effective. It's only going to get better and more prevalent. I only brought up the Xbox set top device as an example that showcases the concept in a cheap consumer device that is available now. The set top motion capture box is going away and motion gesture/capture is going to be built into EVERYTHING.

The same way AxeFx simulates a tube amps tone (and even to some extent feel) to the point a layman cannot tell the difference, a device will be created that effectively simulate feedback (and more) using stereoscopic spacial positioning of the guitar relative to the device. If AxeFx don't build it into their tech, a third party's will as an effect package in the chain.

I'm in this business and I follow trends in stereoscopic 3d positioning and augmented reality. My expertise is in Stereoscopic Image Guided Neurosurgery. We use stereo cameras to track electrodes and biopsy needled in 3D space with sub millimeter accuracy. I know the technology's trends, potential and costs. It's going to happen whether you like it or not - and simulating authentic feedback based on the spacial relationship of a tracking device to a guitar will be tit.
#80
Quote by 667
The actual sound hitting the strings is still going to happen Cath. We are talking about using human motion to alter that sound. Human motion is a very organic expression.

I'm not saying that tube amps are going away, and to be honest, I'm an analog purist for the most part. Doubting that motion/gesture technology is not going to translate to the guitar effectively is simply a technologically naive outlook on what is happening. The technology is in it's infancy but even for something so new, it's very effective. It's only going to get better and more prevalent. I only brought up the Xbox set top device as an example that showcases the concept in a cheap consumer device that is available now. The set top motion capture box is going away and motion gesture/capture is going to be built into EVERYTHING.

The same way AxeFx simulates a tube amps tone (and even to some extent feel) to the point a layman cannot tell the difference, a device will be created that effectively simulate feedback (and more) using stereoscopic spacial positioning of the guitar relative to the device. If AxeFx don't build it into their tech, a third party's will as an effect package in the chain.

I'm in this business and I follow trends in stereoscopic 3d positioning and augmented reality. My expertise is in Stereoscopic Image Guided Neurosurgery. We use stereo cameras to track electrodes and biopsy needled in 3D space with sub millimeter accuracy. I know the technology's trends, potential and costs. It's going to happen whether you like it or not - and simulating authentic feedback based on the spacial relationship of a tracking device to a guitar will be tit.

I totally agree with you and I think Roland will be among the first to experiment with it, given their direction towards motion detection implemented on the VG-99, although it is not 3D and doesnt use fancy technology as you mentioned, I think this is a step towards 3Dsystems.


As far as digital modeling, it is all about refining the algorithms and reducing the differnce or margin of "error" numerically speaking to a point where this margin is too small for even the most tone picky guys. As far as I'm concerned we're so close already, seeing even the big names are using AxeFx almost exclusively on stage.