Metal Guitarist Forums banner

Have you owned a modeller?

  • I own a modeller and it's good enough for me. It's the foundation of my main rig.

    Votes: 26 44.1%
  • I own one but use it for effects only.

    Votes: 3 5.1%
  • I own one and use it only for effects but I plan to start using amp modelling in the near future.

    Votes: 1 1.7%
  • I own one but it's not part of my main rig.

    Votes: 10 16.9%
  • I owned one for less than 3 months but it didn't do it for me.

    Votes: 1 1.7%
  • I owned one for more than 3 months but it didn't do it for me.

    Votes: 7 11.9%
  • I tried some but they didn't do it for me.

    Votes: 4 6.8%
  • I've never owned or tried one.

    Votes: 1 1.7%
  • I own a modeller but I'm going back to the real thing. I've owned it less than 3 months.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I own a modeller but I'm going back to the real thing. I've owned it more than 3 months.

    Votes: 6 10.2%
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
RG 7 player of doom
Joined
·
690 Posts
Not sure how I'm meant to be voting here.
I have the real deal tube head and cab setup on the way.
However, it's going to have two main uses.
For when my cover/tribute band finally gets a drummer and we start playing live, I'm actually only using the power amp stage of the head for the volume, and the preamps of my POD X3 for the actual tones.
Since I'll be using a real cab, I get to totally bypass the cabinet models, which are the weakest point of the POD.
Since the preamp models are actually good, going into a real tube poweramp and real cab means I'm pretty close to having a real deal tube sound we are all familiar with.

Why am I using this setup you ask? I hate the pedal tap dance, simple as that.
Back in the day, I used to have to turn on and off delay pedals, over drive pedals, AS WELL as changing the amp channels just to get to certain sounds.
And honestly, it's not worth the effort IMO and I want to just concentrate on practicing the songs and not having to practice the pedal moves.
So with the POD, I hit one switch, bam I have my clean tone, another switch, clean tone with delay and compression, another switch will be high gain rhythm, and another switch is high gain lead with reverb and delay.
Being able to do that with one hit of a button just makes life so much easier and with the music I'm playing, I literally do not have the time to be turning on and off multiple pedals at once.
It also means I can completely leave my footswitch for the amp at home, which is one less item to bring and of course means less weight to carry.

Also, on the live stage, I'm not going to chance the fact many venues around will have terrible monitoring (many of the venues I've seen around here seem to use pretty fucking cheap monitoring speakers), so no way would I just plug my POD straight into FOH.
I wanna feel that air moving behind me as I play and have some good backline support.

However for home use, I'll have a real amp to finally use instead of resorting to amp sims for my recordings.
The real amp will be the basis of most of my rhythm tone stuff , and with quad tracking I can blend two tracks of real amp with 2 tracks of amp sim for certain sounds.
For leads, I'll mainly still be using POD Farm since it's my favorite amp sim product for leads, but of course I'll experiment with the real amp and cab for leads too


I guess it's fair to say I believe that both real amps and modeling are both tools in the box that are highly useful
 

·
RG 7 player of doom
Joined
·
690 Posts
@Stu : Well admittedly, being on a government welfare unemployment wage means I can't really drop the cash on a MIDI based, high end tube rig any time soon :(
I don't use many of the PODs models. Maybe about 10 or most (5 or so for high gain, 5 different ones for leads, I don't really play anything that isn't high gain or super clean :lol:)
 

·
RG 7 player of doom
Joined
·
690 Posts
I've owned various Line6 amps, as well as one of the Hughes & Kettner Zen Terras, back when I went through my "modeler phase". I figured I could get a range of good sounds, cop about any tone I wanted, and have a simpler (built-in effects), more reliable rig. Boy, was I ever wrong, since every single Line6 amp I ever owned was in the shop at some point, unless I felt like selling it broken. Now, the only Line6 stuff I own is a X2 wireless, which was broken out of the box. Mike has one, too, and the instrument cable on it died within two weeks. Line6 quality control is just plain shitty, I know tons of guys who have their stuff let them down, and there is no way I would rely on their amps for a gig ever again. It's just not pro level stuff.

Someone offered me a straight up trade, his JCM900 SL-X for the H&K, and I took it, thinking it would be easier to flip. Plugging into that was like the heavens opening up and shining on you, and if you think that about a friggin' JCM900, then you know you have been too long without a real amp. :lol:

Tubes just sound better, and more importantly, they feel better. A tube amp is dynamic and responsive, and you can feel it push back against you when you back off, and give in when you slam into it. My Mesa inspires me to play my best, and when we recorded the Division album direct, with modelers (to be re-amped later) for monitoring, Mike and I had a really hard time getting into that comfort zone. Keep in mind that I work in IT, I embrace modern technology, and I really, really wanted to like the modeling stuff. I gave it more than a fair shake, trying lots of different stuff, and spending the better part of a year gigging 2-3 a month with it. I liked it at home, but it just didn't hold up in the real world.

I even spent some time with an AxeFX over at Chris' (jacksonplayer) house, and while it was way better than anything else, I still knew it wasn't for me. It sounded a hell of a lot better, but the stiff feel was still there. Since then, Chris has picked up a Mesa Quad preamp and an isolation cab for home recording, since he expressed many of the same concerns I did. However, I will concede that Cynic sounded fantastic with them live, so it is brutally obvious why so many guys are ditching their PodXT Lives for them. The Line6 stuff might as well be sold at Toys R' Us.

I know I probably just stepped on a lot of toes with this, and if you can get your sound out of a modeler, then more power to you. For me, I just know there is no substitute for the real thing, and at this point, I doubt there ever will be.
While I can agree that tubes are far more responsive and articulate (which is why I have a proper high gain 3 channel tube amp on the way for my recording rig to replace my POD as the recording rig/dongle for POD Farm), I find your "It's just not pro level stuff" claim to be a little over the top.
Meshuggah relied on it for many years, touring around the world. If it wasn't "pro quality" I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have used it for so long.
Their bass player STILL relies on the POD XT and you know what ? When I saw them live a few weeks ago, his bass tone absolutely destroyed the other two bands that used real bass amps mic'd up.
Yes, they did move onto the Axe FX for guitar tones (which mind you, sounded AMAZING that same night I went to see them) but the POD stuff isn't always bad and doesn't always break down for everyone.
I've never tried the Axe FX personally (not that easy too being an Australian, it's much harder to find guys who own one here), but I imagine I'd feel the same as you. Pretty close to a real amp, but no cigar
 

·
RG 7 player of doom
Joined
·
690 Posts
My toes are fine, I think your feelings are shared by a number of people. This thread is not about what's better, that's a matter of taste and I still think tubes would get the majority vote by a decent amount. This thread is about seeing what percentage of guitarists here actually own and use modellers and think they are good enough and what do they use them for.

My experience has been different to yours most likely due to having a lot less experience with tube amps. I have now completely eliminated tubes from my rig because for what I do the GSP1101 direct into my 115 PA cab sounds better than the tube gear I have owned. I haven't noticed a difference in feel or response either or that in room feel when comparing the two rigs. However I thinks my results would be different with certain tube heads.

I don't care though, I never sit there thinking there is something missing. The same goes for the glowing reviews the AFX gets. Shannon's thread gave me a few moments of GAS until I plugged in the next time and remembered why I didn't care about the AFX before the thread. I'm happy with my rig, I never find myself unsatisfied or wishing something was better but I do wonder how the AFX could be so much better like everyone says since when I play my GSP1101 I often feel like it couldn't be better.

Chances are even if I found a tube amp I like better I wouldn't upgrade because I am happy with the GSP. I'm going to assume that most decent tube heads are better than what I have and that most guys who have years of experience playing tube heads would not be satisfied downgrading to my rig. For me though after a lot of AB testing my current rig sounds way better with piezos and sounds better for everything else as well and I did not feel like it gave anything away in feel or response so for me my current rig is actually better at everything and I wouldn't consider getting rid of my tubes if it was not.

I think everyone is different, what works best for you is not what will work best for everyone and you have to go with what works best for you. I can respect a guy who thinks tubes are best and is happy with his tube stack just as much as I can respect a guy who is equally happy using a Pod and I don't need to like the tone of either guy. Jeff Loomis is a great example, I hate his tone, plenty of guys love it, I assume he loves it and I can respect that.
Hmm, hate ALL of Loomis' tones?
He's had plenty of different tones throughout the years.
This Godless Endeavor certainly sounds a fair bit different to Dead Heart In a Dead World or Enemies of Reality (or indeed his solo album)
I find it strange one could hate every single tone he's had, despite having had a fairly diverse range of tones.
Surely there's some in there that you like, or at least, hate less than others?
 

·
RG 7 player of doom
Joined
·
690 Posts
I've long used Meshuggah as an example of about one of maybe two genres were modeling makes sense. I don't know exactly why (I suspect it may have something to do with an exaggerated frequency response relative to a "real" cab and mic), but the only times I've ever been able to cop the vibe of their post-Nothing stuff has been using speaker emulation. It's just a little more immediate in the attack - this works horribly for 99% of guitar tones, but for their percussive, almost percussion-like approach, it's just perfect.

(the other exception is electronica/metal hybrid stuff like Orgy or Prodigy, where you don't WANT natural tones).
Indeed, I actually think Line 6 is FAR superior for the kind of saturated, thick tones I go for.
I know the whole "Djent" thing is popular at SS.org, and every second guy there wants the tightest sounding amp in existence, but I come more from a background of death metal and groove metal rather than this new breed of "djent-OMG-I-copy-all-of-Meshuggah's-And- Bulb's-riffs-core", and I find higher levels of gain and a somewhat loose, saggy lower mid range to be desirable.
Line 6 can do the "djent" but I've managed to coax some very saturated, thick and lower mid heavy tones that you'd hear on the likes of Killswitch Engage's End of Heartache (a commonly referenced guitar tone for the saturated lower mid heavy style) or Arch Enemy's Doomsday Machine.
Every clip I've heard of someone trying to cop that kind of tone with the Axe FX has never worked.
It ALWAYS sounds too tight, too articulate and too percussive, and it just ends up sounding too thin.

I believe Dave is referring to the Krank tone from the last tour in this case. Loomis does always sound like Loomis, though, somehow, even if the shading's different. I still think the best tone he got was through Pat O'Brien's Mark IV on the "In Memory" EP, but that's probably just me...
Not quite sure what you're hearing, but the first Nevermore guitar tones sound RADICALLY different to the newer stuff.
The older stuff was far more mid scooped and trebly (and ultimately too fizzy), whereas something like Dead Heart In a Dead World has a nice, deep, aggressive core mid range with a very smoothed off treble and a biting upper mids.
This Godless Endeavor again, sounded quite different from DHIADW. It was slightly pushed back in the core mids, with more lower mids, more upper mids and the treble/air frequencies centered around 7-7.5Kz are markedly much more present.
It was also somewhat more percussive and articulate too.

To be fair though, I listen to the 00s Nevermore stuff A LOT (those 3 albums are some of my favorite metal records released last decade) so this kinda stuff is ridiculously ingrained into my memory a lot:lol:
But yeah, I do notice the tonal characteristics being different quite immediately when I change from album to album
 

·
RG 7 player of doom
Joined
·
690 Posts
Like Mike said, I'm only talking about his live tone on the Godless tour. Those Kranks sounded absolutely abysmal, even if Jeff's playing went a long way towards getting the most out of them. His studio tone has always been something else.
That's fair enough.
My experience with Kranks is that of an amp that feels RIDICULOUSLY stiff.
It was not inspiring at all to play.
I can see how they can work in a studio setting (their tonal characteristics blend well with other amps) but for a live or rehearsal amp, forget about it, it feels like crap to play, and there's no way that will inspire anyone to play their best on stage.

Since i don't buy the "Tone in hands" thing, it should figure that I found that Jeff's tone changed a lot through the years. My favorite was always Dead Heart in a Dead World, personally. It sounds significantly different than the albums before it, and much better than Enemies of reality. Godless Endeavor has a pretty nice tone to it, but i just prefer the DH tone more.
Bingo:yesway:
I don't buy into the tone is in the hands thing either.
Tone is a result of EVERYTHING in the guitar chain, be it pickups, amp, pedals etc.
The picking hand can to a degree, affect the final response (because after all, no one picks exactly the same) but I've always found the "all tone comes from the fingers" thing to be far fetched and unrealistic.

No not all of them and hate is too strong a word, that's what you get when I post at 2 in the morning :lol:

I was thinking of Zero Order Phase and his recent live tone when I wrote that. I'm not a big Jeff Loomis or Nevermore fan, I own nothing by them and haven't listened to everything they have done. To clarify I never heard about Nevermore before I joined ss.org and I actually like some of their stuff but haven't got around to buying anything yet. TBH some of his earlier Nevermore tone is OK (Dead Heart in a Dead World for example) but from what I've listened to nothing has jumped out at me as great. I generally think Nevermore recorded tone is too saturated for my taste and despite being saturated sounds a bit thin and dry. When I read that back it doesn't make a lot of sense and those are probably not the right terms and I'm struggling to get what I mean across but the best way I can describe it is that it reminds me of playing my EMG equipped RG7EXFX2 through the Pod, I got super saturated tones but in comparison to the much less saturated, more open tone of the Dean through my GSP1101 I would use words like thin, dry, bland and boring to describe it.

The tone on Dead Heart in a Dead World is my favourite.
Aww man, I LOVE saturated tones :lol: but that really comes down to the style of metal I play.
It wouldn't work for the current "djent" stuff, or the older school stuff neither of which I really listen to often and don't really play on guitar.
But for that modern groove metal and death metal, saturation is king.

Although I would say, for Sneap to have really made that tone on This Godless Endeavor work, it needed to have a little less lower mids than you can get away with on a 6 string guitar tuned to say, C# standard or whatever, because when you start deep riffs in Bb and when they get as technical as what Jeff Loomis plays, you need all the clarity you can get to make sure the listener can hear every note.
Personally I think it was a great compromise between being saturated and having a little less lower mids to ensure that you didn't miss a note of Loomis' performances in the studio
 

·
RG 7 player of doom
Joined
·
690 Posts
I own/employ a Line 6 X3 Pro, and a POD 2.0 (in the form of a Pocket POD Pro) and well, I dig the Sybreed/Fear Factory/Mnemic/Meshuggah cybergroovewhateveryou'dcallit tones above all, and L6 is the wellspring those sounds came from, so I fail to see why I should aspire towards the latest Recto or a vintage AC/30. :shrug:

My findings with the Line 6 stuff have been echoed by others in the past, mainly keep the gain down, as well as layer, layer, layer. That seems to get things into zone, at least in my DAW.
Keep the gain down? Nah not all the time.
For some styles yeah, but there have been plenty of times where I've used about 70 per cent gain on the amp sims and then used Boost+EQ set to 100 per cent drive and it sounded great.
And there are heaps of tones all over the internet that quite gainy, done with POD Farm, that sound crazy good.
For a while I really bought into the "less gain" thing that gets thrown around SS.org seemingly all the time, but I realized that suddenly my palm mutes didn't have enough chunk and sustain.
The less gain thing really fits the Meshuggah/Sybreed stuff, but for a lot of the death and groove metal stuff I like doing (think guitar tones in the style of Arch Enemy's Doomsday Machine, Chimaira's last two records, most of Killswitch Engage's stuff, Between the Buried and Me and some of the 90s Carcass stuff, just all that saturated to fuck kinda guitar tones), more gain just sounds better.
Yes you lose out on a little clarity, but I'll ALWAYS trade clarity for more chunk on palm mutes and for more sustain and also slightly more compression for being able to do quick legato licks in between chunking away on the lower strings
 

·
RG 7 player of doom
Joined
·
690 Posts
Yeah, that is completely not for me at all. It is not even an ethics thing as much as "4-5 guys with 3 amps and a drumkit" ALWAYS sound bigger and badder than the guys dragging SkyLab up on stage with them. I've just yet to see a band that does all sorts of complicated stuff sound as good live as a solid backline will provide.
Absolute truth. Certainly a case where less can be more.

There. Fixed that for you. :lol:
This Godless Endeavor AND Doomsday Machine were two tracks of Dual Recto and 2 tracks of Krank.
The Krank would have sounded like garbage on it's own, but the whole point is the the two tones blend together to create something unique
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
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