Sure, it's not the same thing as samples at all. Just using that as an example. This might hurt some guitar players but we respect guitars way too much IMO. High gain guitar tones are simply un-dynamic static like sound. If there's dynamic stuff in high gain guitars, usually all engineers limit those.
Just saying that I am a guitar player and I've been experimenting with different amps for years. I mean I've owned almost ten different Mesa amps, Oranges, a Bogner... even a Marshall and spent plenty of hours recording them and the fact is that when we're at the studio finding the sound it works really well. Then when I come home it's very rarely comparable to "high-end" recordings. I mean it's something that still sounds great and can be post-processed to work really well but still nothing "hifi". Getting that hifi thing is way easier with impulses and the tonal difference is so tiny that honestly... no one gives a f***. Maybe the guys who are interested on how many tubes and what Neves were involved but that's like 3% of the "crowd" so why bother?
Nowadays we see so many people recording with Axe-Fx and professionals swearing by it from Steve Vai to Satriani, Bulb, OLA, Sfogli and Petrucci. Although not all of these guys use Axe-Fx on records some of them do but no one has noticed a difference. Axe-Fx is also running on impulse responses. Honestly I got better results when I got to make tones with the Axe-Fx in the control room.
I've got the Axe-Fx cabs in my Overloud TH2, OwnHammer IRs, Redwirez IRs and match EQ'd IRs. The only thing I'm missing is natural feedback... which I can get by driving my KRK's LOUD!
But hey... I'm not trying to force-feed this to you guys. Just hate it when people bash without trying which ALWAYS happens when something new comes around.
Like I said before, I am willing to make comparison clips to prove my point.
I know match EQ isn't 100% accurate and that's not the point. It's accurate enough that no one gives a f*** what it is.