Such amps [powered speakers], often called "FRFR" (full range frequency response), are meant to be the amp and speaker for the super-fancy modelers which emulate the frequency response of a guitar driver and cabinet as well as a tube amp. The sound going through a "guitar speaker" twice (once through the simulator and once through an actual guitar speaker cab) would be too much, and not "sound good." This also lets the simulator be switched between the responses of several amps/drivers/cabinets without going through the same physical cabinet every time. The Fender Tone Pro is the latest plug-and-play unit, but there are several guitar modellers that can record and save "profiles" of an amplifier/cabinet and recall them as presets later. People swear they sound the same or "similar enough" that many big names are doing tours without carrying the stacks of big guitar amps around.
@benb agreed, I am convinced this can be achieved to a great extent. At the end a guitar amp is some piece of technical stuff that can be emulated by modern technique. Not emulated will be the directivity pattern of the oldies with their ear bleeding treble focusing on axis - and that is fine for me.
So the modern way will be the venue has the PA, perhaps stage monitors already in place. All the guitarist needs is his instrument and pedal board with the fancy modeler. Direct to the house mix, "gimme a bit more monitor if you've got it" to hear him/herself play.
The stage monitor being the local FRFR, while the rest of the sound goes out the house FRFRs.
I am very much with jasniew here.
I have a Quad Cortex modeller; nifty bit of kit that replaces my valve live rig, cabinet and a rack of fx for modulation / delays / reverbs. I.have. no intention of getting a FRFR amp / system; a monitor and the FOH do it just fine.
Do I intend getting rid of the big live rig? Hell no! But for rehearsals and smaller pub gigs, the QC is good enough.
I've captured my big rigs into the QC; the captures are pretty close IMO. Not perfect: a fully dirty or fully clean capture is very good, but I'm not as convinced about captures from amps set up on the edge of breakup.
Is modelling the future? Hell yes!
Is it perfect yet? No.
But as DSP gets better with time (or more accurately, as the amount of DSP per dollar / pound / Matabele gumbo bean increases), it can only get better.
Ironic then, that many of the models that ship with these modellers are old valve amps....
Cheers!
Ant.
I have a Quad Cortex modeller; nifty bit of kit that replaces my valve live rig, cabinet and a rack of fx for modulation / delays / reverbs. I.have. no intention of getting a FRFR amp / system; a monitor and the FOH do it just fine.
Do I intend getting rid of the big live rig? Hell no! But for rehearsals and smaller pub gigs, the QC is good enough.
I've captured my big rigs into the QC; the captures are pretty close IMO. Not perfect: a fully dirty or fully clean capture is very good, but I'm not as convinced about captures from amps set up on the edge of breakup.
Is modelling the future? Hell yes!
Is it perfect yet? No.
But as DSP gets better with time (or more accurately, as the amount of DSP per dollar / pound / Matabele gumbo bean increases), it can only get better.
Ironic then, that many of the models that ship with these modellers are old valve amps....
Cheers!
Ant.
The real sound is whatever the guitarist decides it is. Always was. Doesnt really matter how he / she / they / it* generates it.
Cheers!
Ant
*other preferred pronouns are available
What inspires me though is the sort-of play-by-ear approach to the tone. After spending too much time looking at amplifier design from a "hi-fi" perspective, I'm starting to get new ideas here...
For my purposes, I need a daily driver "hi-fi-ish" amp, but I want tone controls, and colour adjustment via, say, playing with the load line of a tube stage. Even a bit of overdrive could make things fun. Call it "soft clipping" when the knee is turned all the way up. On top of that, I'm keen to try out my "active XO, soft-clip the bass, then recombine" distortion management algo for under-powered (or that overpowered?) FR speakers.
I have one other idea, but I'm not sure if I can fit it in with so much stuff already happening, though it's so awesome I might have to at least do the simplified version:
--Rotary encoders for a minimalist, "blind" interface. Too much bass/treble/whatever? Turn the knob for that, but you have to trust your ears. There's no objectively correct middle clicking point for a "neutral" tone -- you just have to let all that go and only adjust the volume on a particular dial when your ears tell you to.
--The simplified version reduces that to up/down buttons, but the underlying analogue level is still the same.
For my purposes, I need a daily driver "hi-fi-ish" amp, but I want tone controls, and colour adjustment via, say, playing with the load line of a tube stage. Even a bit of overdrive could make things fun. Call it "soft clipping" when the knee is turned all the way up. On top of that, I'm keen to try out my "active XO, soft-clip the bass, then recombine" distortion management algo for under-powered (or that overpowered?) FR speakers.
I have one other idea, but I'm not sure if I can fit it in with so much stuff already happening, though it's so awesome I might have to at least do the simplified version:
--Rotary encoders for a minimalist, "blind" interface. Too much bass/treble/whatever? Turn the knob for that, but you have to trust your ears. There's no objectively correct middle clicking point for a "neutral" tone -- you just have to let all that go and only adjust the volume on a particular dial when your ears tell you to.
--The simplified version reduces that to up/down buttons, but the underlying analogue level is still the same.
If you look at a plot of a typical Fender / Marshall Treble / Mid / Bass tone stack, ypu'll see that it is anything but flat at control mid-points! Its a terrible tone stack compared to.say a traditional Baxandall, yet that same crappy tone stack appears on many, if not most, half decent valve guitar amps. Something about it that just works for guitar players?
Cheers!
Ant
Similarly, the hifi community pretends that a flat "on axis" response constitutes some kind of standard, but then everyone arbitrarily toes/tilts their speakers as a kind-of mechanical EQ. Or the polar response "heat maps" have any EQ slope you want, based on speaker size / XO points etc.
The guitar / instrument approach to distortion, I mean tone, is a breath of fresh air in a way, and a reminder that the colourations never really disappear, so they may as well be adjustable.
Cheers,
Lech
The guitar / instrument approach to distortion, I mean tone, is a breath of fresh air in a way, and a reminder that the colourations never really disappear, so they may as well be adjustable.
Cheers,
Lech
Exactly. Otherwise tone tacks wouldn't be as ubiquitous as they are. Tone stacks tend to put a dip in the FR were electric guitars may have a less pleasant or overbearing sound, and make the frequencies that may sound better or more balanced for electric guitar more easily adjusted to find a good tone.
Hi Lech,
Interesting indeed. But I suppose thats the difference between hi-fi and recording / production.
In a studio theres so much tonal sculpting done as part of the mixing phase to shape the recorded parts so they fit together without crowding the mix. In a sense,.anything goes in that artistic process.
Hi-fi wants to reproduce the final result as accurately as possible... as good or as bad as it may be.
Both noble aims, but two very different agendas.
Cheers!
Ant
Interesting indeed. But I suppose thats the difference between hi-fi and recording / production.
In a studio theres so much tonal sculpting done as part of the mixing phase to shape the recorded parts so they fit together without crowding the mix. In a sense,.anything goes in that artistic process.
Hi-fi wants to reproduce the final result as accurately as possible... as good or as bad as it may be.
Both noble aims, but two very different agendas.
Cheers!
Ant
According to this Celestion speaker expert from a Guitar amp manufacturer, the EVM12L is a PA speaker as is the Celestion neo250. It is instructive from his explanation how from 50 to 90 the guitar sound evolved through speakers.
I once had a Peavey Nashville 400. Probably has the same typical guitar speaker (BW equipped) response; it was a really long time ago when it and I crossed paths. Just saw a Simmons 8" / CD powered drum speaker go for <$50 shipped at my fav online auction. Checking it out to see what it was, Simmons has lots of models intended for electronic drums that would fall under "FRFR". The 8" one was 100W; one would imagine lots of dynamic range available to emulate actual drums to even get in the ballpark.
Of course I'm curious how many different amplifiers there are, that one could successfully put downstream of a Quad Core or ToneX - or PC with Scarlet USB I/O for that matter - and have a decent sounding rig. Alas, I only really play nylon acoustic these days; my fingers are so slow I have to rephrase the songs to the time it takes to wrap them around the next chord sometimes. I do have one solid body electric still.
Wow. Thanks! I've been educated.
I can't judge if he is right about every single thing in the video, but it should be mandatory for every beginner upgrading from, or choosing their first amp to watch that.
He doesn't say that most bigger amps and cabs are way to loud, which is what I feel, but that would be dumb from a business perspective.
Cheers!