MT01
Member
Thanks for uploading those clips.
A 6505 from Revalver clip would be great for comparison.
Nick Crow 7170 Lead - Guitar Amp VST
- Thread starter blackbird
- Start date
Thanks for uploading those clips.
A 6505 from Revalver clip would be great for comparison.
jauernis
Member
6505 wins for me as well! Solo c second just a bit of digitalness to it and sterile but pretty close tone wise
A shootout including wagner, revalver, overloud th1 would be awesome!
A shootout including wagner, revalver, overloud th1 would be awesome!
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
Yeah, you can get the Ghandi as part of the Recabinet demo. It is a Mesa Oversize cab.
Thanks for uploading those clips.
A 6505 from Revalver clip would be great for comparison.
Abyssofdreams and I actually did this a while back. Revalver was amazingly close to the real 6505 model! I don't have the files on me anymore unfortunately otherwise I would've posted it for sure.
I would hope that SoloC would sound even closer with the real TS. I'm feeling that the TSS is sucking a bit of tone... it's a bit of a one-trick pony and it gives you a character that may not necessarily work with the better amp sims.
Pedro Teixeira
Member
We need to bear in mind that while I only preamp accurately modeled, therefore, in comparison Pow Amp regulator should be set to 0.
cobhc
Amiga Enthusiast
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
I can't remember exactly to be honest. I was quickly rushing through each sim, seeing which can get the best tone on the fly. I recall having the bass around 12 o'clock, mids at 9 o'clock, high-end maybe 2 o'clock, OD boost on, master volume down slightly from default to avoid clipping. I tried to tone match by listening - I didn't pay much attention to the settings I ended up with.
cobhc
Amiga Enthusiast
Sounds great Ermz, SoloC is definitely my fav (7170 is a bit too muffled sounding), and damn, the creator may have modeled it after a Mesa (according to hoehlentroll), but Dirthead sure sounds like an Engl to me!
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
Likewise Marcus. It has ENGL written all over it... though perhaps a bit too much? It has some really weird phasey/midbump spectral characteristics going on. Sounds super fake and inorganic.
I keep feeling the 7170 was misrepresented in my clip... I might try to improve on that tone, but TBH, the SoloC made the process of matching tones a whole lot easier. The 7170 controls don't respond much like a real 5150 to me. The one that's closest is perhaps the 'Gain' control, which gives you that compressed distortion sound as soon as you hit '6'.
Generally agreed though, SoloC kicks arse.
I keep feeling the 7170 was misrepresented in my clip... I might try to improve on that tone, but TBH, the SoloC made the process of matching tones a whole lot easier. The 7170 controls don't respond much like a real 5150 to me. The one that's closest is perhaps the 'Gain' control, which gives you that compressed distortion sound as soon as you hit '6'.
Generally agreed though, SoloC kicks arse.
LePou
Member
Öwen;8199615 said:So in conclusion the Soldano simulation sounds like a Peavey, the Mesa simulation sounds like an Engl and the Peavey sim doesnt sound like anything.
It's all just a tad backwards.
If you look at the schematics you'll see that the preamp gain stages of the soldano, the rectifier and the 5150 are very very simalar, if not the same. Differences lie in the filters between stages.
LePou
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
How hard are these stages to emulate digitally, LePou? I can't even begin to imagine the mathematics behind it, but it seems like you got really close. Where do you feel the current slew of amp sims fail in regards to nailing that final 10 to 20% of tone from a real tube amp?
Now you can download the version for older CPUs without SSE2.
http://sites.google.com/site/nickcrowlab/
LePou
Member
Unfortunately I don't have the answer. I don't consider myself as an expert in this domain (I mean electronics and plugin development, SoloC is my first try). All I can say is that every model is more or less an idealised (or simplified) representation of the real world. Models are always based on assumptions that lead to differences with the real things. Maybe Nick has some ideas on this question.
Regarding how hard it is to emulate a tube stage, for me it was maybe one of the easiest part. I have a good background in process modelling so the maths were not that hard for me. The toughest part was related to all the digital stuffs: oversampling, aliasing, filtering, code optimisation for real time processing (I used to model chemical processes which are much slower). I have had hard time with these.
Btw, I gave a quick ride to the 7170 yesterday and it sounds realy good. Quick question for Nick regarding the power amp section, did you model everything from the phase splitter to the power tubes and the load ?
LePou
Wild Hades
Clean channels are for pussies
Tolerances, I would say...
Creating an amp model from a schematic is going to make it sounds like an "ideal" amp, where all the components have that exact value and behaviour, when in the real world there could be up to a 20% of difference, for instance...
I've been talking to Thomas Serafini (the guy from Simulanalog and now Overloud) about this some days ago, and he told me that, for example, a real pot could not be perfectly logaritmic or linear, so it could react way different from an ideal one... this could explain the differences on the tonestack settings or the tone pot on an overdrive pedal...
Something I don't understand is the huge sound difference between different models of the same amp (Revalver 6505 vs 7170 or Revalver Mesa vs TH1 Mesa, etc.), but it could be dued to the schematics used and approximations...
