Metal Guitarist Forums banner

Modelers as practice tools?

3K views 20 replies 11 participants last post by  zslane 
#1 ·
I think there's a couple of us on here that use modelers as practice. I've been curious about a few things. 1) Do you dial up a tone that's exactly like your main amp? 2) Or do you get something that's close enough? 3) And then do you use the head your "emulating" to reamp your track? These questions is also applies to the ones that use modelers for scratch tracks when you are recording. Right now I've got a Formula Pre for my tones when I do my recording. When I get back to the states I plan on getting an amp (not sure if it'll be a V or Roadster/Triple) and like to hear as many thoughts on this as possible.

Thanks.
 
#2 ·
Modelers have the great advantage of being very quiet, so they're nice for practicing in an apartment, or around roommates who are sleeping/studying/etc. That said, most amps can be dialed in to have a somewhat OK tone at low volume levels.

My advice: get a cheap digital device for quiet places, and sink the rest of your budget into a really nice full-on amp.
 
#7 ·
That the issue that I had when I had an Axe Fx. I would always be tweaking and creating new patches or modifying my current patches. I've found I just prefer twisting the dials on amps. Another reason why I picked up a Formula Preamp. It's a Mark flavored preamp that I can get to go into Rectoish tones easy enough.
 
#8 ·
I don't have any more desire to tweak my Snax patches while practicing than you likely do to twist knobs on your Formula Pre while practicing. I've got some good tones programmed for my band so I just fire my basic rhythm patch up, or a slightly wetter lead patch if I feel like wanking a bit, and have at!
 
#9 ·
I'm a knob guy myself. Wait... :lol:

But yeah, I think the TriAxis is as close to a modeling system as I'd like to go, in terms of tweaking. I've actually strayed very little from Vince's original settings :vince:
 
#13 · (Edited)
I use a V-Amp 2 for practicing right now (especially as it seems my preamp tubes are starting to go). My first set of patches is all super-dry, no effects or reverb at all for practicing: a nice clean with a tiny bit of crunch, a nice mid-gain, and a nice high-gain (no noise gate on any of these). Works great for me. :shrug:


edit: NICE
 
#14 ·
I find if I use a POD or (more recently) guitar plugins (ReValver sounds fantastic for high-gain sounds) and move away from the modeler, then I don't spend as much time tweaking. I tend to dial in a sound I like (which ends up sounding a lot like my real amp) and then just going with it.
 
#15 ·
Given the fact that I record at home and will most likely never step foot into a recording studio (mostly because I refuse to pay someone to basically play with knobs when they have no vested interest in my music), I will probably never record through a real amp again. My opinion is that the ability to re-amp tracks on the fly with Modellers (regardless of the brand) is too valuable a tool. Does a tube amp feel more real? Yes. In the right situation will it trump a modeller? Yes. But my opinion is that I will never be in a situation where I will be able to take advantage of that. For most people, an amp modeller will get better results recording at home than a real amp.

Let's think about this for a second. You mic up a speaker on a cabinet for your guitar tones. I just don't agree with that ideology anymore. Distortion itself is manipulation of an audio signal. Why should recording a guitar signal be any different?
 
#16 ·
Let's think about this for a second. You mic up a speaker on a cabinet for your guitar tones. I just don't agree with that ideology anymore. Distortion itself is manipulation of an audio signal. Why should recording a guitar signal be any different?
Because guitarists tend to be conservative with their tone, and want the same exact sound they hear when they jam to be in the recording. They like the sound of an amp+cab because it's what they've always heard, and it's what they are used to. If we were more sonically liberal, then we might still be recording with first generation digital systems. However, most guitarists refuse to let go of that amp+cab tone, so the digital world has had a lot of work to do to catch up to simulating that sound.
 
#21 ·
It is well known amongst Axe-FX owners that you have to build patches a little differently for recording than for gigging. You must fine-tune the configuration for the situation. This is not unlike properly mic'ing a traditional speaker cab, either in a studio or at a live venue. You still have a lot of fiddling and diddling to do before it sounds "right". This aspect of dialing in your tone doesn't go away (or become more prevalent) with modelers, but the details differ a bit.

The way I plan to approach it when I get my Axe-FX is this: I plan to build a few tones (virtual rigs) that I really like and expect to use 99% of the time. I plan to come up with patches for each that are suitable for going direct into a recording DAW/console or direct into a house P.A. system, and then I'll just be done with it. I don't plan to get all wrapped up in endless tweaking because that is just OCD in a different guise, and I don't suffer from that. Even if I did, I wouldn't describe it as a weakness of the device, but a weakness of my own biological software.

What I like about the Axe-FX is that it can simulate the effect of tubes going into saturation while leaving me in control of the final volume (sorta like an ideal master volume control). I can practice at home with a dimed Marshall Plexi and play it at bedroom levels, i.e., the level I hear when I listen to a Led Zeppelin CD, for instance. And that's really what we're after when we practice or record anyway, right? I guess I'm not so used to (or in love with) the sound or feel of ear-splitting "in the room" tube amp tone that I have to have it in order to play with inspiration (honestly though, nobody would call my playing inspired regardless of the gear anyway).

If I were ever to gig with such a "dimed Marshall Plexi" Axe-FX rig, I would also have an adjusted patch that sounds right through a house P.A. and I wouldn't have to think about it again. This is really no different to my mind than adjusting the knobs of a real Marshall head until it sounds "right" in a live versus recording versus rehearsal scenario. The difference is I can store my patches on a portable thumb drive and take them to any studio with an Axe-FX and get the exact tone I built for myself every time. No wasting time re-mic'ing amps in an attempt to capture "that sound" again.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top