The Ultimate Modelling Challenge

some of you are still not understanding the point.
people on here keep saying "ampsims almost sound like the real thing and if not now latest in x years we won't need amps for recording"...
then the same people ask for impulses through the poweramp of my REAL amp and my REAL cab and mic in my REAL room.
the next step would be to ask for my REAL amp.

I'm not asking to copy 100% (I know that's not possible), I just want them to be really close to make comparison easier...
and it's not like these tones are so extremely radical for the amps...very basic settings and a single sm57 on axis in front of a v30.

IF the modellers are close to the real deal it should be possible to get a sound close to the real deal...as simple as that.
if lolzgreg reamps this through HIS recto and HIS cab in HIS room of course it'll sound different....but the tone will be similar and will have a similar depth and 3d-ness (word?)....I want to see which modeller (if any) can get this perception of depth, and to compare it'd be best to have similar tones...hence the very standard setup I chose.

so you're saying "modellers can replace the real thing" but in the next senmtence you say " all you need to achieve that is a real amp, real mic, real cab to take impulses from"....I call BULLSHIT ;)

if a modeller can model a Recto and another sim can model a mesa cab accurately you should be able to get sounds that are similar to these very basic sounds...
if that's not possible it just shows that the modellers aren't that close to tªe real thing to begin with.

I know I've said that before, but I don't know how else to explain this simple thing....

you all have simulations and impulses of 57 mic'd mesa cabs and also modellers of most of the amps I used....if the modelling technology is good enough to get close to the original you will be able to get a sound that is SIMILAR to the original sound....
what use would a modeller be if you can't model the sound it's supposed to model?

you're way overthinking stuff here....
now get crackin! :)


(I can't believe these people are the same people asking Sneap for ampsettings ;) )



@zeronaut: cool, checking them in a bit
 
The purpose of this challenge is to make the amp sim sounds close to "YOUR real deal", not "ANY real deal", so I think the impulse request makes sense. I mean, if people use Recabinet´s impulse it will probably sound much closer to a tone that Kezrog would get with his "real deal" than with yours, but the result wouldn´t be any less "real deal".
 
I really have no idea how I could explain it any simpler or how I could make it clearer.

I can only say the same things again...
anyone with a rectifier and a mesa cab and an sm57could get similar tones! (I'm not talking about exactly the same, but as close as possible).
if the sims can't do the same they're not good sims, as easy as that.
any mesa cab in the world with any rectifier head (just an example) will get you in the ballpark of this tone, since all those ampsims claim to sound close to the real thing they should be able to do the same...not really difficult to understand IMO.

the purpose of this test is NOT to say "haha, real amp sounds better than ampsims", but to find out WHAT exactly is different (that's what we need similar tones for).
IMO people listen to much to the frequencies when they're comparing (fizz here, lowend there), but the real difference is depth and 3dimensionality...both are difficult to be modelled IMO cause the DYNAMIC aspects of the amps/cabs comes into play...

I just really don't understand why people aren't getting what I'm going for here...this is not meant to be a competition really.
 
Ampsims can't beat a real life amp and cab (!), real amps responds instantaneous at the speed of light.. ampsims are approximations, and it's processing are done in steps compared to the "instant flow" in a real amp... Personally, I have never said that an ampsim can sound 100% the same or better as the thing it's modeling, but I've said that after a couple of years, the technology will be better and the difference will get smaller.. Doing this test is just stupid in my opinion, and I don't see the point in doing this except for justifying your money spent on a large amp collection.. sorry .. Ampsims are digital toys, it's fun to compare against the real deal and it's digital counterpart, but you already know who wins..
 
It's curious....there are hundreds of threads where people claims that modellers are so close to the real deal, that they are awesome, that in 2 years we will not need real amps, etc etc....
And now that you can prove all these things........one needs curve eq, one needs surgical eq, one needs something else :D

I'm jocking of course :p

Agree:)
Result would be interesting to hear.
 
Lasse, if you post the same clip 3 times: one DI, one miced and one with only the head, the whole thing will be much easier. Then we can try to simulate it by steps, first nailing the head, then the cab/mic.

I mean, load an impulse on the "head only" signal, load the same impulse on an ampsim and try to match them. After nailing the head tone we pass to the next step, that is messing with the impulses on the amp sim trying to match the miced clip.

Without these steps it will be like trying to match the head, the cab and the mic all at the same time.
 
seriously lads, I give up!
am I speaking a different language or something?
lol, really ;)
Onqel, Blacklight etc: please re-read my previous posts, don't wanna say the same thing for the fourth time AGAIN :D

To everyone who understands what I'm saying (everyone else please ignore!): you've got simulations of the gear I used? please use it and tweak to get as close as possible so we can compare the depth etc of amp vs. simu, this is NOT a competition, I DONT wanna prove or even justify anything, I'd just like to compare the depth and 3dimensionality of all the used components with their modelled/simulated counterparts.

seriously, how hard is this to understand?
there are simulations of amp xyz out there and there are simulations of cab xyz out there, IF these are ANYTHING close to the original it MUST be possible to get similar tones....that's all I want, I want someone to try and get a similar tone using the simulated equivalent of the hardware I used.
NOT to prove anything, JUST to compare them for the mentioned things.

I REALLY have no idea how else to explain that, if ANYONE understood what I'm trying to say (been trying to say for the last 3 pages) please help me out here, I'm getting the feeling I'm speaking some sort of fucked up language that noone can understand, lol


*sigh*
 
Stop bitching around y'all ... do it already!
I love my amp-sims - I think you can get great sounds with 'em - I DON'T think I will nail the tones, not because amp-sims suck, but because tiny changes in mic-positions on a real cab alter the sound so much, that we are a bit limited with the usage of impulses.

I'm in tomorrow with one or two attempts. I'm really curious myself, how close one could get.
 
Which camps are you referring to? Are there people who honestly believe that amp sims are better than real amps?

Depends on the real amp , the studio my band recorded at had some shitty sounding amps so I used digital amps on it and it is already sounding a thousand times better . I think ampsims can be awesome when done correctly , real amps are awesome too , everything has its place
 
I just tried to do this with my PODxt.... Now I remember why I don't use it anymore. The PODs cab/mic simulation sucks donkey balls.