|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 26, 2018 15:01:05 GMT -6
I have tried plugin sims they have to much latency. Unless you can get the latency under 2ms you will effect the performance to much. The artist may not notice a first but will struggle with the feel. This is pretty interesting to me. It's a thing I've also noticed on occasion. 2ms is the time it takes for sound to travel 2-ish feet. I've worked with a lot of guitar players - and I've heard of a lot of guitar players working with big-name guys who also work this way - who prefer to track their guitars standing in the control room playing everything back through the mains. They've DEFINITELY got more than 2 ms of delay between the monitors and their ears. When playing live (and not using in-ear monitors), guitar players are often standing more than 2 feet from their amps and more than 2 feet from their monitors. Way more than 2 ms of delay no matter where they are on stage. Some of what people refer to as the best sounding stuff in recording history was made with people in a room and no headphones. I'd be curious if the engineers at that time moved players closer to and further from sound sources in order to get them to groove. I wonder if Bob Olhsson , johneppstein , or any of the other folks who worked in larger rooms a while back (I don't ever remember who around here did what when and where) have any insight into this? I've also come across many people who have a hard time playing an amp sim (or a soft synth) and grooving. I wonder why that is? What's the difference between 3ms of round-trip latency being problematic in the studio but those same people standing 10 feet from their amp live or at rehearsal have no problem with the feel? A thing I've been doing lately is - for instrumentalists who are rushing the beat in a way that doesn't work with the song - is putting them 8-14 feet back from the monitors in my room and recording them that way. Using distance to literally make them hear the beat a little later than the DAW says it is. I see varying success with it. I think part of the time the non-success is just me working with a talent pool that doesn't always have virtuosic command of the groove...or are just downright unskilled players! Well, there are actually two or more questions here Live onb a big stage is considerably differrent than recording in a biog room. As to the recording question, most of the sessions that I attended in large rooms like The Automatt were with one of the first "modern style" producers and he didn't generally gi in for the more "old fashioned" methods that I'm into now - he nearly always had the musicians on cans excepty when actually playing in the control room and when having musicians play together he didn't come close to utilizing the whole room; he'd set people up in one section and use gobos to regulate bleed. He also didn't usually have the whole band play at the same time. Donr would probably be able to tell you more, as he worked with Sandy a lot more than I did. Shortly before The Womb shut down William Wittman (Weedywet) posted about the sessions he did for Cyndi's recent country album in which they did do it "the old fashioned way" with everyone playing as an ensemble and doing things nin one take and he said that they just set everyone up so they could hear comfortably, controlled the bleed with gobos, and let the bleed be your friend. I don't recall exactly what he said about drum isolation but I don't think they used a booth. IIRC the only booth in use was for Cyndi's vocal and I could be mistaken about that. I'm pretty sure they ended up using at least a couple of scratch vocals done off the floor. As to playing live on a big stage, that's a bit of a different story. The first thing you need to understand that pretty much any large concert gig since the mid-70s had an extensive stage monitor rig with one or two mixes for each musician, plus large stereo sidefills controlled by a monitor engineer at stageside who could give anyone anything he needed in his monitors. However musicians would move around and wouldn't always be near their mons, but the sidefills would help with that. Also there's a difference between latency and acoustic delay. Latency is an artificial fixed delay that is not mathematically related to the music. That makes it very distracting to many people. One notices latency in far less amounts and shorter time increments than natural acoustic delay. Acoustic delay on stage, however, tends to blend with the overall reverberant field in the stage environment to which everybody contributes and so it kinda "averages out" (or mixes in) with the early reflections and hence is generally less distracting. Also, there's a reason that the drums and bass are nearly always next to each other, center stage. BTW, in many situations (when it's not latency and isn't in a situation where it causes comb filtering) 2ms of delay is not considered to be audible.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Apr 26, 2018 15:16:25 GMT -6
If you use a DI, the musicians should be hearing a studio monitor and not a guitar amp. If they are listening to an amp, it's better to put the DI across the speaker and not the input.
Musicians should be placed as close together as possible. That way they hear the best and that way the bleed is cleaner and less troublesome.
|
|
|
Post by schmalzy on Apr 26, 2018 16:21:57 GMT -6
Well, there are actually two or more questions here Live onb a big stage is considerably differrent than recording in a biog room. As to the recording question, most of the sessions that I attended in large rooms like The Automatt were with one of the first "modern style" producers and he didn't generally gi in for the more "old fashioned" methods that I'm into now - he nearly always had the musicians on cans excepty when actually playing in the control room and when having musicians play together he didn't come close to utilizing the whole room; he'd set people up in one section and use gobos to regulate bleed. He also didn't usually have the whole band play at the same time. Donr would probably be able to tell you more, as he worked with Sandy a lot more than I did. Shortly before The Womb shut down William Wittman (Weedywet) posted about the sessions he did for Cyndi's recent country album in which they did do it "the old fashioned way" with everyone playing as an ensemble and doing things nin one take and he said that they just set everyone up so they could hear comfortably, controlled the bleed with gobos, and let the bleed be your friend. I don't recall exactly what he said about drum isolation but I don't think they used a booth. IIRC the only booth in use was for Cyndi's vocal and I could be mistaken about that. I'm pretty sure they ended up using at least a couple of scratch vocals done off the floor. As to playing live on a big stage, that's a bit of a different story. The first thing you need to understand that pretty much any large concert gig since the mid-70s had an extensive stage monitor rig with one or two mixes for each musician, plus large stereo sidefills controlled by a monitor engineer at stageside who could give anyone anything he needed in his monitors. However musicians would move around and wouldn't always be near their mons, but the sidefills would help with that. Also there's a difference between latency and acoustic delay. Latency is an artificial fixed delay that is not mathematically related to the music. That makes it very distracting to many people. One notices latency in far less amounts and shorter time increments than natural acoustic delay. Acoustic delay on stage, however, tends to blend with the overall reverberant field in the stage environment to which everybody contributes and so it kinda "averages out" (or mixes in) with the early reflections and hence is generally less distracting. Also, there's a reason that the drums and bass are nearly always next to each other, center stage. BTW, in many situations (when it's not latency and isn't in a situation where it causes comb filtering) 2ms of delay is not considered to be audible. Really interesting thoughts - especially about the smear/blend/averaging of those time delays. I suppose it's something our brains are just used to: as we move we hear things change their time/distance relationship. There's no changing in that digital latency and perhaps that's part of the problem - the uncanny valley-ness of it all. That melange of time differences keeps changing but gets triangulated by our brains to place things in locations with predictably comfortable/accurate results (because our brains have been doing it since the day we started hearing). We almost NEVER hear something slap back in an unchanging amount of time and, when we do, we're distracted, panicked, or somewhere in the middle - or at least I feel that way. That disorientation thing is something I've experienced when talking to a person who has a curved wall in their room: if I get too close to the middle of that arc, I notice myself get agitated and distracted. When I'm in the middle of it, I'm getting a super weird slap back that comes from all sides and arrives back with me at the same time (like a latency-heavy element in a monitor mix would) and it feels like I'm on another planet entirely. I wonder if those low-yet-feel-destroying-latency sources would be less distracting if hard panned to one side of the artist's cue mix? A guitar sim might feel wrong if both ears are getting it identically late but I wonder if it would be less weird if it was only in one side of the headphones? What if the other side had another few extra milliseconds of delay plus some short room reverb on it - almost building a fake acoustic environment to get some of the smear and blend John's talking about? Well, my brain's broken for the day. Thanks johneppstein for giving me something to keep me awake all night. I'm invoicing my next bourbon purchase to you!
|
|
|
Post by formatcyes on Apr 27, 2018 0:56:52 GMT -6
I've worked with a lot of guitar players - and I've heard of a lot of guitar players working with big-name guys who also work this way - who prefer to track their guitars standing in the control room playing everything back through the mains. They've DEFINITELY got more than 2 ms of delay between the monitors and their ears. When playing live (and not using in-ear monitors), guitar players are often standing more than 2 feet from their amps and more than 2 feet from their monitors. Way more than 2 ms of delay no matter where they are on stage. Some of what people refer to as the best sounding stuff in recording history was made with people in a room and no headphones. I'd be curious if the engineers at that time moved players closer to and further from sound sources in order to get them to groove. I wonder if Bob Olhsson , johneppstein , or any of the other folks who worked in larger rooms a while back (I don't ever remember who around here did what when and where) have any insight into this? I agree with what you have posted, Re sound and 2ms but I cannot get into a grove with the amp sims in the box I love their sound but cannot make it work for me. Interested in what other peoples experience is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2018 2:03:57 GMT -6
The best DI's I've used for JUST an extremely clean sound with no fuss, great for re-amping later, are: Avalon U5, Avenson Audio Small DI and Orchid Electronics Micro DI. The former is overkill for that purpose, the latter two are both amazing products, tiny (can easily tape them on a guitar strap), active FET based designs, with low prices. I directly A/Bd the U5 vs. the Avenson on electric guitar a few years ago, and for ultra clean the Avenson won out. The Orchid is the cheapest of the bunch but just as good as the Avenson.
|
|
|
Post by donr on Apr 29, 2018 17:46:17 GMT -6
If you get one of those Two Notes Torpedo boxes (starting at around $250) you can plug in a spare amp head and silently record it, for monitoring, or for adding cabinet IR in the mix. You don't even have to connect a guitar cabinet, the Torpedo has a 4, 8, or 16 ohm reactive load built in. The more expensive ones cointain reamps and stuff, IR loaders within the hardware, etc. And there's the new UA Ox Amp Top Box but that's a spendy option. That's probably going to sound better than any POD or SansAmp. It's opening a new world for me. I don't think you can plug an amp output into the small stomp box version of the Torpedo. Check first.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Apr 30, 2018 7:39:46 GMT -6
If you get one of those Two Notes Torpedo boxes (starting at around $250) you can plug in a spare amp head and silently record it, for monitoring, or for adding cabinet IR in the mix. You don't even have to connect a guitar cabinet, the Torpedo has a 4, 8, or 16 ohm reactive load built in. The more expensive ones cointain reamps and stuff, IR loaders within the hardware, etc. And there's the new UA Ox Amp Top Box but that's a spendy option. That's probably going to sound better than any POD or SansAmp. It's opening a new world for me. I don't think you can plug an amp output into the small stomp box version of the Torpedo. Check first. There are lot of Torpedos, mine is called the "Torpedo Captor." It's a load-box version of the Torpedo, but with no reamp, cab simulation, or fancy extras. If I remember correctly the pedal you are talking about is just a cab simulator//IR loader. Their product line is admittedly pretty confusing, until you do some research. By the way I heard you're playing with my friends Nik Flagstar in Ft. Walton Beach wish I could make that gig!
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jul 27, 2018 14:41:02 GMT -6
In response to my earlier post about simulators, I think I might try the Moorer GE200. Seems like it makes pretty decent likenesses of the amps it models.
|
|
|
Post by javamad on Jul 29, 2018 3:13:29 GMT -6
I am opening a one-room facility and am planning to have one of these in the corner; grossmann-audio.de/en/product/sg-woodbox/I’m also going to have the UA OX box. These are two solutions to the same problem. I’m hoping mosttimes one or both will work. EDIT: I also have a ZOD DI and love it
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 5:11:09 GMT -6
I am opening a one-room facility and am planning to have one of these in the corner; grossmann-audio.de/en/product/sg-woodbox/I’m also going to have the UA OX box. These are two solutions to the same problem. I’m hoping mosttimes one or both will work. EDIT: I also have a ZOD DI and love it
I had a sneaky peak at the OX Box after speaking to Ragan about it, I agree with him really not a fan.. Especially for the price you'd be far better off with a Suhr or Two notes reactive load and an IR..
|
|
|
Post by javamad on Jul 29, 2018 7:52:57 GMT -6
I am opening a one-room facility and am planning to have one of these in the corner; grossmann-audio.de/en/product/sg-woodbox/I’m also going to have the UA OX box. These are two solutions to the same problem. I’m hoping mosttimes one or both will work. EDIT: I also have a ZOD DI and love it
I had a sneaky peak at the OX Box after speaking to Ragan about it, I agree with him really not a fan.. Especially for the price you'd be far better off with a Suhr or Two notes reactive load and an IR..
Could you explain why you didn’tlike it? I heard some comments about it not being good for metal tones, which seems like a solid comment due to its not having much in the way of metal-type sounds and the wattage limitation. I don’t expect to be doing much metal though so it is something I am looking at.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 12:39:18 GMT -6
I had a sneaky peak at the OX Box after speaking to Ragan about it, I agree with him really not a fan.. Especially for the price you'd be far better off with a Suhr or Two notes reactive load and an IR..
Could you explain why you didn’tlike it? I heard some comments about it not being good for metal tones, which seems like a solid comment due to its not having much in the way of metal-type sounds and the wattage limitation. I don’t expect to be doing much metal though so it is something I am looking at.
As far as I know ragan doesn't do metal.
Actually I'll explain it better, one of the issues I have with the Kemper is it can sound somewhat weak / phasey and aliased at times.. I've recorded through a DI / SM7 / MD-441 into Pro Tools, then hit the profile button.. My boutique amp with a custom 2X12 sounds strong / right in your face yet organic, remembering I've not touched the mic's here the Kemper (level matched) sounds like a shadow of it's former self.. Although it's close enough for lead duties and comp'ing sub tracks so it has it's uses..
I found the OX-Amp to be even worse and tbh I often found myself prefering Amplitube into an Owhammer IR.. The Suhr / IR for me has been the best compromise so far, but I still mic up the amp for rhythm sections.
At the price they're asking for this thing I expected it to wipe the floor with the competition, but I don't think it comes close.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jul 29, 2018 13:47:30 GMT -6
Yeah I'm no metal guy whatsoever.
I agree with what @shadowamd is saying. Both times I've owned the Kemper and the time I had the OX, I just can't get the simulated version to come out from the fog. Phasey/alias-y is exactly how I'd describe it too. Kinda smeared and just flat.
Here's a good example. Jump to 2:14. He plays some basic overdrive tone from a Vox, then goes right into the Kemper profile of that amp. It's not a close call in my opinion. I can hear that flattened phasey thing a mile away at this point. Right after that he does the same thing with dual panned rhythm guitars and backing tracks. It's even more dramatic.
I don't mean to piss on anyone that likes Kempers. It's cool tech no doubt and you could totally make cool records with it. But if we're talking about how it stacks up to real amps mic'd, well, it just doesn't to my ears.
FWIW, having had both, if I had to pick from the OX or Kemper, I'd pick the Kemper. I think they're on about the same level sonically and the Kemper is much bigger bang for your buck. What's the point of paying, what is it $1200 for the OX, and still having to use real amps but having it sound like a sim? If I'm gonna live with sim-sonics, I at least want the convenience that comes with it.
|
|
|
Post by javamad on Jul 29, 2018 17:47:02 GMT -6
Yeah I'm no metal guy whatsoever. I agree with what @shadowamd is saying. Both times I've owned the Kemper and the time I had the OX, I just can't get the simulated version to come out from the fog. Phasey/alias-y is exactly how I'd describe it too. Kinda smeared and just flat. Here's a good example. Jump to 2:14. He plays some basic overdrive tone from a Vox, then goes right into the Kemper profile of that amp. It's not a close call in my opinion. I can hear that flattened phasey thing a mile away at this point. Right after that he does the same thing with dual panned rhythm guitars and backing tracks. It's even more dramatic. I don't mean to piss on anyone that likes Kempers. It's cool tech no doubt and you could totally make cool records with it. But if we're talking about how it stacks up to real amps mic'd, well, it just doesn't to my ears. FWIW, having had both, if I had to pick from the OX or Kemper, I'd pick the Kemper. I think they're on about the same level sonically and the Kemper is much bigger bang for your buck. What's the point of paying, what is it $1200 for the OX, and still having to use real amps but having it sound like a sim? If I'm gonna live with sim-sonics, I at least want the convenience that comes with it. Some interesting points there thank you both. I was planning the ISO cab first anyway, the price of the OX does seem excessive although I did feel that some demos were quite good. I still haven’t seen any side by side(amp and OX) comparisons apart from the official UA ones which I presume are well selected.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jul 29, 2018 17:57:50 GMT -6
Yeah I'm no metal guy whatsoever. I agree with what @shadowamd is saying. Both times I've owned the Kemper and the time I had the OX, I just can't get the simulated version to come out from the fog. Phasey/alias-y is exactly how I'd describe it too. Kinda smeared and just flat. Here's a good example. Jump to 2:14. He plays some basic overdrive tone from a Vox, then goes right into the Kemper profile of that amp. It's not a close call in my opinion. I can hear that flattened phasey thing a mile away at this point. Right after that he does the same thing with dual panned rhythm guitars and backing tracks. It's even more dramatic. I don't mean to piss on anyone that likes Kempers. It's cool tech no doubt and you could totally make cool records with it. But if we're talking about how it stacks up to real amps mic'd, well, it just doesn't to my ears. FWIW, having had both, if I had to pick from the OX or Kemper, I'd pick the Kemper. I think they're on about the same level sonically and the Kemper is much bigger bang for your buck. What's the point of paying, what is it $1200 for the OX, and still having to use real amps but having it sound like a sim? If I'm gonna live with sim-sonics, I at least want the convenience that comes with it. Some interesting points there thank you both. I was planning the ISO cab first anyway, the price of the OX does seem excessive although I did feel that some demos were quite good. I still haven’t seen any side by side(amp and OX) comparisons apart from the official UA ones which I presume are well selected. I posted some OX vs my ISO cab here in the OX thread. If you want to listen blind (recommended!), don’t read ahead.
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on Jul 29, 2018 21:52:09 GMT -6
Have been helping a client with Line6 Helix Native lately and it does sound pretty darn good. That said, we got some great sounds from an SG, and old JCM 900 and a DS-1 (!) on Friday. I was talking to my friend about it and the thing that really made it come alive, and that you can't fake, was the omni several feet back and above the amp in an excellent acoustic space.
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Sept 27, 2018 1:05:22 GMT -6
Dammit. I really wanted the Ox to be better than what you guys are saying.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Sept 27, 2018 7:45:15 GMT -6
An update on my Moorer GE200..
Pretty decent for the money. I picked up a used one for around 190$ and it's at least 80% as good as a Helix or Kemper. I used it a few weeks ago for monitoring for a guitarist. She usually plays an Orange rocker, but this time we were tracking bass and drums as well, so all stringed instruments went DI to be reamped later. In order for the guitarist to "hear" her amp, I dialed up the Orange amp and cab sims in the GE200 and tweaked for a 2x12 close mic'd with a 57 profile and according to her it sounded very, very close to her amp. I later reamped through my orange rocker and a 2x12 and it did indeed sound similar. The pedal was a little more strident on top, but it did nail the gritty overdrive sound pretty closely. Given some time, I'm sure I could match the pedal's settings to my real amp and cab through some A/B work.
There's no digital harshness or aliasing noise the older modelling pedals used to have.
A guitarist might still opt for the higher end stuff, but I feel like I got exactly what I needed out of this pedal. it's not going to replace my real amps as it still lacks a little nuance, but I'd put it in the mix in a pinch.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 27, 2018 16:27:45 GMT -6
The Avalon U5 is an option, as is the countryman into a tube preamp. Make sure you get everything in there averaging -18dbFS Try not to record with additional compression that will negatively affect the re-amping process later. JMHO If you're considering the Avalon you owe it to yourself to check out the A-Designs KGB-1, which also incorporates a 3 band Baxandall EQ and has better output level and noise spec, plus dual transformer balanced outputs.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 27, 2018 16:36:00 GMT -6
already answered.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Sept 28, 2018 6:35:20 GMT -6
The Avalon U5 is an option, as is the countryman into a tube preamp. Make sure you get everything in there averaging -18dbFS Try not to record with additional compression that will negatively affect the re-amping process later. JMHO If you're considering the Avalon you owe it to yourself to check out the A-Designs KGB-1, which also incorporates a 3 band Baxandall EQ and has better output level and noise spec, plus dual transformer balanced outputs. Thanks. Whilst I'm fairly satisfied with the Avalon and countryman options, using either with a British amp almost always results in a ground loop hum that can't be eliminated. Particularly disturbing when you want to record the mid-70s Mark 2 Lead and take a direct off the guitar for reamping later. So another option would be nice!
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 28, 2018 11:41:37 GMT -6
If you're considering the Avalon you owe it to yourself to check out the A-Designs KGB-1, which also incorporates a 3 band Baxandall EQ and has better output level and noise spec, plus dual transformer balanced outputs. Thanks. Whilst I'm fairly satisfied with the Avalon and countryman options, using either with a British amp almost always results in a ground loop hum that can't be eliminated. Particularly disturbing when you want to record the mid-70s Mark 2 Lead and take a direct off the guitar for reamping later. So another option would be nice! Check it out, I think you'll like it! It was designed by Carl Johnson, who is a close friend of my former bass player. I got to do testing on the original prototype of the 2 channel, non-EQ version (KGB-2) and liked it enough to purchase one when it went into production, which I use both as a DI/Preamp (It easily capable of driving the input to my Studer) as well as for a makeup gain amp for my Altec passive EQs, which I've mentioned here.
As far as more "conventional" DIs go, I also have 4 Countryman Type 85s.
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Sept 28, 2018 15:41:40 GMT -6
Anybody here try the Fryette Power Station or the Badcat Unleash? I see that the Fryette is currently on back order, but they have a couple other boxes too that look like they record direct. link
Cheers, Geoff
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Sept 28, 2018 16:51:14 GMT -6
Anybody here try the Fryette Power Station or the Badcat Unleash? I see that the Fryette is currently on back order, but they have a couple other boxes too that look like they record direct. link
Cheers, Geoff In that Pete Thorn video where he compares a bunch of different boxes, the Fryette won the day, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by din on Sept 29, 2018 13:15:48 GMT -6
I do this all the time. The Chandler Germanium DI sounds badass w/ distortion pedals. I usually split like this: Clean signal > U5 Dirty signal (post-guitar pedals) > Germanium DI.
|
|