making your solid state amp sound like tubes

[jzucker]

Right, but there are multiple variables in play in those comparisons - tone stack, speaker type, form factor,.etc. It's not easy to determine how much weight to give each.

John

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

yes, but I've owned amps like the mambo with the fender tone stack and a barber barbeq which also has a fender tone stack and it doesn't sound anything like a fender amp. The tubes definitely lend a unique quality to the tone.

[jzucker]

I still have an AF - but I use it just for fx and IRs and DI. I enjoy my Mambo Fender pedal a lot more than the AF modelling... Funny enough, Jay Mitchell designs stuff for the AF, he claims to know a good jazz sound.

it's hard to quantify what a good jazz guitar sound is. Some folks like the slightly distorted early benson and some like the pristine clean of jimmy bruno.

To me, the best clean sound was pat martino "Once I loved". You can't get that out of any SS amp I've ever played through.

[jads57]

Lovely tone for sure! Very Wes inspired tone. Sounds to me as though he's using flatwounds on an L-5CES or similar Gibson into an ampeg or perhaps even Fender amp at a relatively low volume. But like any great musician it's his touch

[Dhango]

Actually I go back and forth with tube and SS amps depending on guitar, volumes, settings, and music. I love both type amps.
My main SS is a Henriksen 312. My big complaint is SS reverb. I simply do not like it.
I only like Fender type spring reverb. Can someone give me a recommendation for a simple reverb pedal that will nail Fender reverb on a SS amp ? I like to keep my setup really simple so something with fewer the knobs the better. Sorry to go a little off topic.

¿Maybe this one? Two knobs, two switches, three springs. Pure analgo reverb...

[jzucker]

Lovely tone for sure! Very Wes inspired tone. Sounds to me as though he's using flatwounds on an L-5CES or similar Gibson into an ampeg or perhaps even Fender amp at a relatively low volume. But like any great musician it's his touch

he was using a stuffed L5 (literally 4lbs of cotton) and super heavy rounds guages .059, .049, .039, .029, .018, .016

he uses flats and SS amps now. I personally liked his tone much better in the old days but I certainly understand the need to change it up after as many years as he's been "doing it".

[John A.]

it's hard to quantify what a good jazz guitar sound is. Some folks like the slightly distorted early benson and some like the pristine clean of jimmy bruno.

To me, the best clean sound was pat martino "Once I loved". You can't get that out of any SS amp I've ever played through.

I think ultimately it's the player and the music making that sound more than it's the sound itself.

John

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

[jzucker]

I think ultimately it's the player and the music making that sound more than it's the sound itself.

John

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

yes of course but I can play simple octaves and hear a huge difference between guitar amp tone

[jorgemg1984]

it's hard to quantify what a good jazz guitar sound is. Some folks like the slightly distorted early benson and some like the pristine clean of jimmy bruno.

To me, the best clean sound was pat martino "Once I loved". You can't get that out of any SS amp I've ever played through.

Agreed, but that tone was produced through a Twin Reverb. So, what the modeller should do, is not have a great jazz sound. What the modeller should do, is have a great Twin Reverb sound - so you can use it the way you want. I saw lots of players using Twins and getting very different sounds - and in theory, that should happen with a modeller, too.

If the AF had a great Twin sound, it would be able for someone to get a tone somewhat close to that, but it always sounds quite compressed and twangy. I guess you can, using all the eq and amp parameters, eventually, find a good jazz sound - but with a good blackface pedal, I can do that in five seconds and it sounds as I want and very close to what a real Twin would give me.

I've heard your AXE-FX clips - I assume you're using some sort of twin model and it sounds close to that Martino sound. I've heard lots of other players using the same Twin base and get vastly different sounds, as would happen with a real Twin

Anyway, try the AF and prove me wrong, please!

[jzucker]

Agreed, but that tone was produced through a Twin Reverb. So, what the modeller should do, is not have a great jazz sound. What the modeller should do, is have a great Twin Reverb sound - so you can use it the way you want. I saw lots of players using Twins and getting very different sounds - and in theory, that should happen with a modeller, too.

I agree and that's why I like the axefx. With the amplifire and the kemper, you don't have a single amp. You have an amp capture. I know you understand the diff but for those who don't, the kemper and amplifire sample actual amps and when you play through them, they are playing back utilizing those samples. The axefx is different in that it actually models the amp's circuitry including tubes, speakers, etc. The biggest difference being that if someone captured a twin but had it turned up really loud or had the treble or bass up very high it would sound terrible for jazz. They both have tone controls but when sampling a tube amp with the tone stack really cranked you are fundamentally changing the amp's gain. So when you adjust the tone and gain with amplifire and kemper, you are adjusting it after the fact.

With the axefx, it's very different because your tone controls work the same way they do in the real amp.

If the AF had a great Twin sound, it would be able for someone to get a tone somewhat close to that, but it always sounds quite compressed and twangy. I guess you can, using all the eq and amp parameters, eventually, find a good jazz sound - but with a good blackface pedal, I can do that in five seconds and it sounds as I want and very close to what a real Twin would give me.

I've heard your AXE-FX clips - I assume you're using some sort of twin model and it sounds close to that Martino sound. I've heard lots of other players using the same Twin base and get vastly different sounds, as would happen with a real Twin

Anyway, try the AF and prove me wrong, please!

i'm actually using a vibroverb but i agree with your points.

[jorgemg1984]

I agree and that's why I like the axefx. With the amplifire and the kemper, you don't have a single amp. You have an amp capture. I know you understand the diff but for those who don't, the kemper and amplifire sample actual amps and when you play through them, they are playing back utilizing those samples. The axefx is different in that it actually models the amp's circuitry including tubes, speakers, etc. The biggest difference being that if someone captured a twin but had it turned up really loud or had the treble or bass up very high it would sound terrible for jazz. They both have tone controls but when sampling a tube amp with the tone stack really cranked you are fundamentally changing the amp's gain. So when you adjust the tone and gain with amplifire and kemper, you are adjusting it after the fact.

With the axefx, it's very different because your tone controls work the same way they do in the real amp.



i'm actually using a vibroverb but i agree with your points.

Very cool, Jack. Didn't know the AF worked with samples, too - explains a lot! One day money won't be an issue, I'll for sure get an AX8!

[wzpgsr]

With the axefx, it's very different because your tone controls work the same way they do in the real amp.

Thanks for that clarification. Personally, I’d have to opt for the Axe FX then.

There is a trade-off I suppose: the Axe FX is a more accurate representation of the amp as a whole, but you are limited to the amps that the developer wants to model. On the other hand, you can add any amps that someone else has profiled to your Kemper, or even profile your own amps if you are handy in the recording studio, but you are limited to whatever speaker, EQ, and gain settings were in place at the time the amp was profiled. Is that an accurate description?

Are there any hardware-based modeling solutions that allow you to mix and match components? For instance, if an Ampeg Gemini II with an alnico speaker is not actually modeled, is there something that would allow me to effectively copy the real amp by combining an emulated 12ax7 pre-amp section with an emulated 7591 power section, a baxandall tone stack, choose a virtual rectifier, speaker, etc.?

Edit: It looks as if Bias has a 600 watt head that might do some of what I would be interested in. Any experiences with that?

[Robertkoa]

People always talk about this Modeler/ that Modeler
and no doubt starting with AXE Fx and it's tendency to be able to eliminate the harsh harmonics that most Solid State Guitar stuff has had since long ago
and the Kemper ...

Either way - the common denominator is often the Cab IRs ...and it is fairly easy to get excellent Tones including pristine cleans from good Guitar Tube Preamps into Cab IRs and EFX for direct recording.

Years ago I remember getting great Tones- clean and light overdrive from a Tube Amp padded down to line level by a Harry Kolbe Silent Speaker into a Tac Scorpion Board and a Lexicon LARC EFX right through to the Tannoy Monitors ( not super accurate but flattering for Guitar )- it was actually hard to make it sound even mediocre...I didn't own any of the Chain except the Guitar ...lol.
I suggested the Kolbe Device to the Studio but the guy had stopped making them when I tried to get one ...

I think CAB IRs and my Tube Preamps will get close to that except for those great Lexicon Studio Reverbs
with the Remotes...

Also yes If I plug my Hughes& Kettner Tubeman or
ADA MP1 ( very clear sounds - someone Modded it ) into a Solid State Clean Amp - it sounds like the Tubes rather than the Solid State Amp even super clean- less ear fatigue ...

Advanced Modelers are great it seems for creating unusual Combinations which are impractical or impossible otherwise...
But people who try to sound exactly like some other Rig both live AND in the Studio with a Modeler drive themselves crazy lol . As long as you only need close or very close ...we are in a great ERA due to Cab IRs and Modelers etc.

[jzucker]

Thanks for that clarification. Personally, I’d have to opt for the Axe FX then.

There is a trade-off I suppose: the Axe FX is a more accurate representation of the amp as a whole, but you are limited to the amps that the developer wants to model. On the other hand, you can add any amps that someone else has profiled to your Kemper, or even profile your own amps if you are handy in the recording studio, but you are limited to whatever speaker, EQ, and gain settings were in place at the time the amp was profiled. Is that an accurate description?

Yes, that's correct although there is a huge list of amps that axefx has modeled.

Amp: models by manufacturer - Axe-Fx II Wiki

Are there any hardware-based modeling solutions that allow you to mix and match components? For instance, if an Ampeg Gemini II with an alnico speaker is not actually modeled, is there something that would allow me to effectively copy the real amp by combining an emulated 12ax7 pre-amp section with an emulated 7591 power section, a baxandall tone stack, choose a virtual rectifier, speaker, etc.?

You can do some of that with the axefx. For example, I could take a 100W Marshall plexi but configure it for EL84s , 600W voltage (try doing that with real EL84s), Single 10" 15w Alnico speaker.

Or run a Fender Twin with a princeton output transformer or put EL34 tubes in your twin, etc., etc.

Axefx also has some tube preamps so you could mate them with whatever amp you want. AFAIK, you can't change the preamp topology (i.e. use a bandaxall with a marshall) but you can insert effects anywhere you want. For example, I keep my time effects (reverb, delay, etc.) after the speaker. You can put a bunch of different EQs there as well...

Edit: It looks as if Bias has a 600 watt head that might do some of what I would be interested in. Any experiences with that?

Have not tried the Bias

[John A.]

I actually hear a big difference between the tones I get out of this system and the tones I get out of something like a mambo, acousticimg, evans, quilter, etc. The high end sheen is much more present so if you like - for example - early benson tone, you can get it. You can also get solid state tones by just using one of the preamp models. But once you get the guitar in the mix with a band, I agree - the differences are not all that big.

I mentioned the same thing recently on my blog regarding 175s. I recently got another gibson '88 175 which when I play it by itself sounds great but in a mix with a band, there's little difference between it and any of my other archtops.

A lot of high end detail gets lost in the cymbal wash, for sure. Just to be able to hear myself with a band and find a niche in the frequency spectrum where the guitar stands out, I tend to go for a more mid-heavy tone than I do otherwise, which tends to minimize the differences between guitars.

I tried an AmpFx only very briefly at a friend's place with his settings and his guitars, so I really couldn't get a sense of what it can do, but agree that it sounds like an amp. So far, the best model I've used was a Pro-tools plug-in of a tweed Bassman I used on a session about a year ago; that really sound and felt like a tweed Fender, even through studio monitors. I'll tell you, though, I recently upgraded my Macbook, and have found the amp models in the new GarageBand to be really outstanding. To my ears, this SF model sounds as close to the real thing as I'll ever get in a home studio environment:

To the original topic, I guess if I had something in the Evans/AER/AI family I might be tempted to put a pedal in front. I used to use a few different DI devices (Pandora PX4, original SansAmp, Mesa V-Twin) for recording and would keep one in my gig bag just in case. But I think small modeling amps are the way to go now. I have a little Fender (Champion 20) that weighs nothing, is surprisingly loud, and gets a sound much closer to my tastes than, say, an AER Compact 60. I've also been playing semi-regularly through a friend of mine's small Vox modeling amp, which has a pretty decent tweed Deluxe model. My favorite sound ever is still my actual Princeton Reverb, but as someone who walks or takes mass transit everywhere, it's not really a grab and go option.

John

[christianm77]

he was using a stuffed L5 (literally 4lbs of cotton) and super heavy rounds guages .059, .049, .039, .029, .018, .016

he uses flats and SS amps now. I personally liked his tone much better in the old days but I certainly understand the need to change it up after as many years as he's been "doing it".

Thanks for the info. I do think people who buy l5s and stuff them with rags a bit comical but that is only coz I want an l5 and am jealous. (He got a les paul later, right?)

Strings gauge wise that makes sense as a 14 set with a .16 on top. Pretty bonkers.

I used a .12 set with a .15 on top. Actually pretty nice.

I preferred his earlier tone too actually.

[jads57]

I tried the Bias Grid head w/600 watt Class D power amp recently. While I didn't use a laptop to access it's many features, i just tweaked it manually. I had a couple of good tones, but many that I didn't like. In fairness I've since read up and watched video demos, and need to go back and visit it again.

I think while modeling has improved vastly with the computing power nowadays in small chip form. To me it still lacks the 3 dimensional tone of a real amplifier in live use. I'm not sure how else to describe that in better terms. But Jack Z said it best in an above post about capturing a model of real amps.
In other words, maybe thosands of modeling captures need to be done to represent what a real amp feels and actually sounds. The problem being is every one makes the amp sound a bit different.