Digital Modelling vs The Real Thing

[xilddx]

[quote name='51m0n' post='862113' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:21 PM']Fair enough, every now and then I play in a room thats acoustically pants and no one can do anything about it, same deal really

I'd still think that you are more likely to have monitoring issues, or do you have your own In Ear monitoring solution?[/quote]
Exactly, there can be all sorts of problems at any venue irrespective of backline.

No IEMs, just have to put up with not hearing myself properly. Being well rehearsed is the only way to deal with that. I was thinking of getting a Mackie SRM V2 as a monitor, but I can't be arsed lugging one of those around on public transport. I don't like driving to London venues. I suppose I should get a trolley but I don't want to look like a busker either

[wateroftyne]

I play small venues with crap PAs, and large venues with awesome PAs.

Until the industry standard monitoring system can compete with a pair of Berg HS210s, I can't see myself binning my amp & caps any time soon.

There's no better feeling than that gentle punch in the back...

[BigRedX]

One off the problems with people's perceptions of digital modelling is the need for the models to be identified. This means that they are going to be compared with the "real thing" no matter how cryptic the description is.

If you like the sound of a particular amp/speaker combination, then it is unlikely that a model of it is going to sound exactly the same, and if only your favourite amp will do then a modeller isn't going to be the right device for you.

For me I don't care what the models are. When I first flipped through the presets on my pod my thoughts weren't how close to the amps they were supposed to be emulating they were but whether or not each would be a good starting point for getting a bass tone I liked that would work in the musical context I was operating.

Those that I liked get tweaked until they are right for a particular bass in a particular musical setting, and those I don't like have been overwritten with variations on ones that I do like.

Having a Bass Pod in my rig means that I don't have any problem letting other bassists use it. I call up my default patch, and let them play. Most people tweak the tone controls a bit and that's it. If anyone has gone mad, all I have to press a button and I'm back to my sound. No mess no fuss.

Oh and digital clipping is a user problem not an equipment problem. If you don't know how to use your gear properly, you won't get the best out of it no matter what underlying technology is powering it.

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='silddx' post='862116' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:25 PM']No IEMs, just have to put up with not hearing myself properly. Being well rehearsed is the only way to deal with that.[/quote]
Pah.. where's the fun in that?

Did a gig on Sunday... one of those acoustic freaky things occurred in that bass was inauduble where I was standing, but fine out front. I know the set off-by-heart, but I couldn't hear a note I was playing.

I hated it.

[xilddx]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='862128' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:35 PM']Oh and digital clipping is a user problem not an equipment problem. If you don't know how to use your gear properly, you won't get the best out of it no matter what underlying technology is powering it.[/quote]
I agree with all your points, but particularly this one.

There's US Technology Service Desk slang for this, "PICNIC" Problem in Chair, Not in Computer.

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='862128' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:35 PM']Oh and digital clipping is a user problem not an equipment problem. If you don't know how to use your gear properly, you won't get the best out of it no matter what underlying technology is powering it.[/quote]

I think that is another +1 of idiot proof/completely unresponsive 3 band passive EQ.

[quote name='silddx' post='862132' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:39 PM']I agree with all your points, but particularly this one.

There's US Technology Service Desk slang for this, "PICNIC" Problem in Chair, Not in Computer.[/quote]

Wasn't an issue when computers were valve. No chair.

Edited June 9, 2010 by Mr. Foxen

[BottomEndian]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='862131' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:36 PM']Did a gig on Sunday... one of those acoustic freaky things occurred in that bass was inauduble where I was standing, but fine out front. I know the set off-by-heart, but I couldn't hear a note I was playing.[/quote]
I sincerely hope you weren't playing fretless...

[xilddx]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='862131' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:36 PM']Pah.. where's the fun in that?

Did a gig on Sunday... one of those acoustic freaky things occurred in that bass was inauduble where I was standing, but fine out front. I know the set off-by-heart, but I couldn't hear a note I was playing.

I hated it.[/quote]
Agreed, but I get kicks out of other things too at a gig, not just a stool-loosening bass sound.

[bigjohn]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='862133' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:40 PM']Wasn't an issue when computers were valve. No chair.[/quote]

Edited June 9, 2010 by bigjohn

[BigRedX]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='862133' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:40 PM']I think that is another +1 of idiot proof/completely unresponsive 3 band passive EQ.[/quote]
All well and good but if the "idiot proof/completely unresponsive 3 band passive EQ" doesn't deliver a fundamentally appropriate tone for you particular musical setting then you are just as stuffed.

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='BottomEndian' post='862138' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:43 PM']I sincerely hope you weren't playing fretless... [/quote]
I was intending to, but decided against it...!

[Dubs]

[quote name='silddx' post='862051' date='Jun 9 2010, 01:29 PM']That's totally cool man, but why?[/quote]

Because, IMHO, you cannot beat the real thing. If you have the chance to use a Fender Twin with a couple of nice 414s, why would you model it? With bass it's a bit different, but with guitar I'd always try and use the real thing.

[xilddx]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='862133' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:40 PM']I think that is another +1 of idiot proof/completely unresponsive 3 band passive EQ.



Wasn't an issue when computers were valve. No chair.[/quote]
Good one.

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='silddx' post='862140' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:44 PM']Agreed, but I get kicks out of other things too at a gig, not just a stool-loosening bass sound.[/quote]
Ah.. that's where we differ. If I can't hear and feel the bass in the traditional stylee, I might as well go down the park and feed the ducks.

[mcgraham]

I'd agree with the sentiment that a lot of the cheap stuff gives a bad rep for the good sounding digital modelling gear. I also agree that not everyone needs digital modelling, like me.

For bass AND guitar, I like plug'n'play. EQ a little to suit the room, vary the tones with my hands, volume/tone knobs, and pickup selection. For guitar I do tend to use a boost or two together with delay (w/ modulation on it), but my new amp will solve the boost issue with having switchable channels. Ultimately, I like simplicity too much and (at present) have no need for digital modelling live.

[dlloyd]

[quote name='Dubs' post='862148' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:50 PM']Because, IMHO, you cannot beat the real thing. If you have the chance to use a Fender Twin with a couple of nice 414s, why would you model it? With bass it's a bit different, but with guitar I'd always try and use the real thing.[/quote]

I ditched my Twin because it was heavy and unreliable, and went for one of the Fender/Boss modelling pedals... you couldn't tell the difference on tape.

[xilddx]

[quote name='dlloyd' post='862156' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:58 PM']I ditched my Twin because it was heavy and unreliable, and went for one of the Fender/Boss modelling pedals... you couldn't tell the difference on tape.[/quote]
Likewise, I ditched my Fender twin 4x10, expensive power soak, and all my effects and went for a POD. I can't tell the difference either, in fact I get sounds out the POD I prefer and i can taylor all of them to exactly how I want them. The POD is my Desert Island piece of kit.

[escholl]

I don't dislike digital modelling, but I'll always choose the real thing if given the choice. It has it's place, certainly, but I don't think it should ever be considered a replacement for the real thing. Having said that all that, two of my favourite synths, the Oberheim OB-12 and the Nord Wave, are both analogue modelling. And in some cases, the DSP modelling is actually lower noise than the original analogue counterpart.

To add to that, the term "digital modelling" in general is pretty vague, and the end result of it can vary as everyone knows. Some companies, such as UA, I feel take a more accurate, if slightly less popular approach to it, and I feel they have very good results. Having said that, other companies such as Waves, SSL, Digidesign etc all employ various forms of digital modelling in their signal processing, and they all get very good results too. The big weakness nowadays is still the quality of the ADC, DAC, and clock driving them, along with the quality of the low-pass filter used on the ADC input. These are all expensive components, so, generally the cheaper the digital modelling unit, the cheaper the quality of these.

Would I own and use digital modelling for my live bass sound if I wanted portability and a decent sound? Yes.

Would I use it instead of the analogue equivalent on stage and in the studio, if I had the choice? No.



Just out of curiosity, where do people stand on products that are halfway between the real thing and DSP, such as the [url="http://www.anamodaudio.com/ats1.html"]Anamod Audio ATS-1[/url], which uses what is known as an analogue computer to simulate a tape machine? Presumably, at some point, this technology will spread to emulate other things as well.

[umph]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='862004' date='Jun 9 2010, 12:37 PM']Digital clipping is a totally different thing to digitally modelled distortion. Digital clipping occurs from overdriving a digital unit, which is generally a bad idea. (unless i'm wrong, I know you know your amps etc).

EDIT: It's like, you wouldn't wnat to clip the input on a digital recorder, it'll just sound horrible and seriously hurt your ears. Compare that to a tape recorder, which might sound nice if you over drive the input. This doesn't mean that you can't digitally model the effects of the tape recorder using your digital set-up.[/quote]
I was more on about the modelling, overdriving a digital unit does sound horrific though.

I do have to say digital modelling has come along way in the last year or so, it still doesn't cop the tones of using a proper amp. Most digital stuff is lowpassed to cut out the high end after a certain frequency because it just sounds harsh, listen to meshuggah and new deftones, both great examples of both how digital processing can sound good but how they've had to cut out most of the high end to make it sound good.

IMO if you like a bright "open" sound you really can't beat using a real amp and you'll do even better to go with something with a quad of kt88's

[umph]

[quote name='silddx' post='862089' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:02 PM']Are you taking the piss, old son?

Have you heard valve clipping from a valve amp?[/quote]
come try out some of my amps cranked and say you don't like the distortion from them!

[Dubs]

[quote name='dlloyd' post='862156' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:58 PM']I ditched my Twin because it was heavy and unreliable, and went for one of the Fender/Boss modelling pedals... you couldn't tell the difference on tape.[/quote]
[quote name='silddx' post='862161' date='Jun 9 2010, 03:04 PM']Likewise, I ditched my Fender twin 4x10, expensive power soak, and all my effects and went for a POD. I can't tell the difference either, in fact I get sounds out the POD I prefer and i can taylor all of them to exactly how I want them. The POD is my Desert Island piece of kit.[/quote]

Well, as seems to be the general consensus that is coming out of this thread, it's horses for courses. Personally, I'd never choose to play a gig with no backline, and I'd always prefer to record with real amps.

[algmusic]

[quote name='Adrenochrome' post='861969' date='Jun 9 2010, 11:58 AM']On CD, MP3 etc - NO
Stood in front of real amps - YES
Can modelling sound as good as tubes - YES
Do most guitards use them to their best - NO[/quote]


I agree.. I've been great recording studios with great vintage gear, but the engineer was sh*t, so you get s sh*t sound. I've worked with a friend with my sansamp and logic and because he was proficient at it it sounded miles better than most analogue recordings that people that say they use 'vintage gear'

it also depends on your the use of it.. if it's everyday, I don't think people can hear the difference especially on crapped compressed mp3's.. on a expensive hi-fi.. probably

I love the old school vibe and analogue, but like a friend said to be ' buy the time they compressed the sh*t it and eq'd out the tone it really doesn't matter it won't change the song.

that said, on a recording for function band earlier this year.. 3 bassist using the same rig except different basses and I used my sansamp in my setup with a classic amp svt 8x10 rig.. mine sounds different, yet all the others sound exactly the same. interesting.. www.habitlive.com (i'm in the rock band)

So it's just a personal preference really

[cheddatom]

[quote name='umph' post='862208' date='Jun 9 2010, 03:31 PM']I was more on about the modelling, overdriving a digital unit does sound horrific though.[/quote]

So you'd say that digital modelling of distortion is horrible sounding?

I'm quite interested in what you say about the top end. I tend to roll everything off above say 6KHz anyway (that's live and recorded) so i'm not sure if i'd know what the "air" is you're talking about.

I'd love to try out some tube amps, but that's because I want to stand in front of a massively loud rig and play. For recording though (I think) i'd mic it up, compress it a bit, EQ it a bit, then realise I could have got just as good a sound useing modelling.

[Lfalex v1.1]

[quote name='velvetkevorkian' post='861942' date='Jun 9 2010, 11:34 AM']Someone on TB posted a blind AB test between a Variax on the Fender Jazz setting and an actual pre-CBS Jazz- the consensus was, if I recall rightly, that the Line 6 sounded better to most people.[/quote]

Which means that my 2004 MIA Jazz must be uber-wicked.
I went out with every intention of buying a Variax Bass. I got on fine with it in terms of playability and feel, but had the shop let me try a Stingray, Corvette and Jazz just for comparison. Every one of them sounded better than the Variax, even when it was at its best.
The Jazz was SO good, I bought it.
I did quite like the 8/12 string (Hagstrom/Hamer) modelling on the Variax, though.

[xilddx]

[quote name='umph' post='862217' date='Jun 9 2010, 03:35 PM']come try out some of my amps cranked and say you don't like the distortion from them![/quote]
I'd love to, and I believe you. I loved the distortion from my Fender twin and a Blackstar HT-Dual, as I did my Marshall JCM 900 with a compressor pedal. But I'm also just as happy with my X3 LIVE and I can get virtually any sound I want from it as my moods or needs dictate.

BTW, the quote of mine you cited wasn't aimed at you, hope you realise that