Srill no Marshall modeler? (and the death of the amp?)

[nortiks]

Maybe a third thing that began the ruin of the live rock show experience… FOH sound engineers telling you to turn down so low to where they have total control. 9 times out of 10 in a club scenario at least, you’re putting all of those hours of hard work in the studio and rehearsal room into the hands of somebody you just met at load in. But I digress.

LOL, no friggin way you're digressing! This is the giant elephant in the room that very few want to talk about, imo. FOH sound engineers are usually, as in 999 times out of 1000, exactly what the name says on the tin. Meaning audiophile/gear nerd, but not musician and/or producer. And tbh the amp vs modeler debate can get wiped out, right along with everything else, at this one bottleneck imo. Would anyone say "not a problem" paying a non musician/non producer to mix their next recording? Yet it happens 99.9% for "mixing" FOH.

 

[Antti Heikkinen]

It's a double-edged sword really...as a member of audience, it's better than ever. Bands sound like they sound on records, and great regardless where you happen to be in the audience.

Most mixing guys I've met have been greatly professional; if the place has like a 15KW PA system with a big digital board and a rackful of compressors and such, independent monitor mixes for everyone and a separate sound guy, it's likely he will make us sound even better than on our recordings, which we do ourselves.

If we use our own PA it still sounds good - out of acoustic drums we mic just the kick and snare, and we have under 3KW of power, but separate tops and subs, as well as a finalizer processor/room corrector, IEMs for everyone no floor monitors, and the mixer is controlled with a tablet or laptop, with gates and comps for every channel as well as FX. It sounds hugely better than gear did 20 years ago...yet the whole system has cost us just a few grand maximum.

 

[bnipper]

Show me a modeler that can really nail an old Fender Bassman and a cranked Twin Reverb (at room levels) and I'm interested. Fractal are out of the question because I'm not going to pay a few thousand for the privilege of 'finding out'. I would be open to solutions that I can try before buy. This would something purely for the studio, no hauling and gigging. What would you guys suggest?

As divided as this forum is on tube vs modeling, the modeling forums are just as divided. Right now it’s Fractal vs Fender. Way back 11 pages ago (mostly about EV cars and guns) the OP mentioned Fender’s modeler.…the Fender Tone Master Pro is shaking up the modeling world. its not perfect but it’s the right solution for me (for now). It’s the most “responsive to the guitar” of any modeler I’ve tried and they really nail the Fender (and EVH) tones. Their biggest advancement was the user interface. It’s touchscreen is realistic and like twisting knobs on a real amp. I play in a cover band where I may need to play a Van Halen song, and hit a switch and bring up a tone preset for Def Leppard, so modeling makes sense for me. I love looking at the Marshall stacks in my man cave, but I’m through gigging with them.

if Marshall released a modeler on the same day as Fender, and they did a good job of replicating their own amps and had a realistic user interface I probably would have bought it instead. That was the original question. ’m sure Marshall is watching how it goes for Fender.

 

[Skull5]

I find it sort of curious Marshall doesn't seem to have plans to release proper digital versions of their amps, while many other makers obviously offer plenty of Marshall models. Even Fender now has their own modeler out. Do you think people would not be interested in a modeler by Marshall? They used to be so in the forefront with rack/DI gear back in the day with stuff like the JMP-1 and others...and now nothing.

It really seems to me that the tube amp is dying - or maybe not dying, but becoming a niche market of old geezers mostly, while everyone else seems to be going strongly to modelers/DI gear. It's been very apparent of late. I mean, I've been buying and selling amps on and off for over a decade as a hobby, and to facilitate testing different amps, but lately it seems you can't move any tube amps any more. Like just this week I've offered my Marshall JVM at a ridiculously low price for trade for guitars and whatnot, to many sellers, and almost invariably the answer is something alomg the lines 'nah man I've gone all digtal' amd so on. Seems to me the only people who still use real, big tube amps, are the guys who have that halfstack in their living room. Those who gig and play in bands seem to be going digital very strongly.

I mean, the JVM is like brand new mint condition, retails for what, 1300;- and I asked the local music store what would they give me for it and they said 400;- in exchange for a guitar. I've been selling it for months for 700;- and zero enquiries. I've offred to trade it for 400;- partscasters and no takers.

It's been slower and slower all the time. Even my 1959 Plexi which were like well north of 1000;- used a while back, I had to sell for 650;- and considered myself lucky I got rid of it.

So the market for a modeler under Marshall brand name certainly is there. And they could make it truly desirable by using the looks and style of Marshall, I mean, like make a super liight 'amp head' that kinda looks like a small tube amp, but actually is a modeler...and an FRFR speaker with the piping and the logo and looking kinda like a classic Marshall...

Yeah they have the solid state line, but they're not really like proper modelers with completely software based systems only, and they're cheap as well. I just think they COULD develop an all new modeler-based, top-quality, upgradeable, IR-based, customizable system with great FRFR speakers - they have the tech from their BT speakers even and so on...so why not?

If there was a Marshall head with completely digital, programmable and upgradeable system instead of a normal amp...I'd buy one, if it was on par with the other makiers and I don't see why could it not be,

 

[Matthews Guitars]

Digital modelers have established their usefulness, but it doesn’t eliminate its main pitfall….They simply do not react or respond like a REAL guitar amplifier. I don’t care how you parse it. It sounds as flat as looking at a one-dimensional picture on the wall.
Stand in front of a 100 watt Marshall halfstack and your pants legs will be flapping.

Stand in front of the digital modeler at the same DB level and it’ll sound like a Marshall thru a PA. No air movement, just a loud noise behind you.

Sorry, NOT true at all. Thought it's a minor pain for me to set it up, I can run my Fractal in place of both my JMP Superlead heads on two stacks and get the pants flapping, head exploding 3D tone that the JMPs get, only with some added effects to make the tone even bigger and fatter if I want to. I just have to sub in some power amps and in this case I'd use two of my Mesas as the power amps. Thus preserving the tube tone of tube power stages.

In some respects I AM a tube amp snob. And I'm far from done with buying more tube amps. But modern modellers...THEY DO THAT. If you set them up right, oh yes they will. Not going to let my pro-tube "confirmation bias" prevent me from speaking this TRUTH.

IF, after all this time and so many generations of modellers having come and gone, the better modern ones can't fully duplicate the entire performance envelope of real tube amps, then the engineers who have worked on them have failed miserably at their craft. And that would be a shame.
The reality is, they succeeded.

 

[nortiks]

So has anyone here tried the UAD Marshall modeler? I own everything they offer in native and its all great, so guessing their one trick pony pedal might also be great as well. I'm still in the real amp camp, but pragmatic enough to keep looking at alternatives.

 

[marshallmellowed]

I'd say that depends. If you're trying to nail "that one tone from this album back in 196x that's only on one single record", then yes. If you just want a "ballpark" shot at the exact tone but want a 'good sound' a 57, 906 and a cab go a long way. Long enough for just about everyone for decades.



I'd prefer to avoid anything PC based like Amplitube. It's not that I don't appreciate how awesome it may be, but I'd just prefer a 'unit' like the Tonex, for example. We all know a Bassman or a Twin Reverb have a wonderful sound that they only release when turned way up (actually contrary to a fair few Marshall amps IMHO, but that's another discussion). If you (or someone else) has actual experience doing this; how close is it? I mean, I can buy a Bassman for just over a K, I can get a Twin Reverb for probably a bit more. If a Tonex (or whatnot) can get *almost* there, I'm happy. If it's more like "well, two thirds of the way", then I'd rather go a different route. What I'm looking for are for example some Keef tones and so on. Not very clean, not overly dirty. Simple signal chain, letting the glory of the guitar and amp do the work.

I've spent time with Amplitube, as was as a few other PC based solutions more than a few times, not a fan. You can get some good results, but they're a bit limited compared to what I can get with the Axe Fx. With Fractal, you don't need the latest and greatest to get good results. I could buy an Axe Fx III if it felt I needed it, but I don't. I have an Axe Fx II XL+, which was the last released version of the Axe Fx II. That unit sounds great and exceeds anything I'd ever need. For live playing, I bought an AX8 so I wouldn't have to take my Axe Fx rack unit to gigs (I used to use the rack unit live). The AX8 is a floor unit, not as powerful as the rack unit, but still exceeds what I need for live playing. I paid $1100 for my Axe Fx II XL+, and $650 for my AX8. I don't try and convince anyone they need a modeler, because it depends on a players needs and situation. My solution is using the Fractal live, while enjoying my Marshalls at home where I can play them at the volumes I want to hear them (can't do that at most venues we play). When running through set lists at home, I almost always use the Axe Fx II or AX8, as it's the sound and feel I'll be using live. For flat out fun and personal indulgence, it's the Marshalls. Some Fractal guys are "sold all my tube amps and never looked back" guys. I think I'm a "gotta have both" guy.

 

[Skull5]

Bwahahahahaha! Oh, you're serious? Over the many years of working both stage and studio, I have developed a mental audio library of "do's" and "don'ts". "Proper digital versions"... in the opinion of what all-seeing celestial body? Having worked as an engineer, I know the process of processing; when it comes to guitar amps, they aren't even close. In our coffee clutches, our lament of the concept of "close" is prominent, even still after a couple of decades. One can no sooner digitally approximate the tone of any given amp, tube or otherwise, than they can redesign the complexity of a single organic leaf. If an individual is satisfied with the dry generic sound of what amounts to the worlds most complicated of stomp boxes being imitated by many samples that cannot be sewn together by microprocessors and meet any kind of "grand design" intended to re-create that which must be ultimately a disappointment, I posit that they are too easily satisfied. When life's ratio of "day job to dream job" put me most happily in studio working on material that was meant to be performed for a live audience, the flaws in the economy of studio spending cuts including "modeling" instead of "micing"were glaring. I found that I am so very lucky as to be able to hear what kind of piano, is it open or closed and if the hinges need lubricating. If one truly cares about the tapestry about to be woven, it is not unthinkable to be so concerned about such details. Recordings of bands on a budget end up sounding sterile and generic. If their material survives the "processing", taking it out of the in-ear monitor and pushing air from a stage for public consumption may result in remarks in the, "It sounds so much better live", or worse, "It sounds nothing like the recording". The myopia of blanket statements like "tube amps are becoming a niche market.." evince a personal agenda without any basis in fact. If it is the intention to create a techno-voice corrected concoction, this may be the only way to do it. If the intention is to entertain a live crowd in a much broader market of tones largely attributed to "geezers", I'd love to be there when that straight jacket goes on. In conclusion, neither you or I speak for that which is the "all". Playing live and pushing "Play" are entirely different worlds.

 

[Dogs of Doom]

Digital modelers have established their usefulness, but it doesn’t eliminate its main pitfall….They simply do not react or respond like a REAL guitar amplifier. I don’t care how you parse it. It sounds as flat as looking at a one-dimensional picture on the wall.

Stand in front of a 100 watt Marshall halfstack and your pants legs will be flapping.

Stand in front of the digital modeler at the same DB level and it’ll sound like a Marshall thru a PA. No air movement, just a loud noise behind you.

That’s fine if it’s all you need to get your gig done, but if you want to actually feel and physically be a part of your guitar and what you’re playing, remain analog.

There is something inherently unnatural about digital, at least when it comes to physics of sound. Not sure that part can ever be replicated.

In our live stage performance, we have figured out ways of controlling stage volume without having to resort to amps off-stage or using digital modelers. In my case, the SV20 certainly has helped and have even resorted to the lower 5W setting on occasion with excellent results.

Two things that have ruined the live rock show experience… Modelers/amps offstage and plexiglass in front of drums. Part of the live music experience is not just what you hear through the PA, but also the sound coming off the stage.

Maybe a third thing that began the ruin of the live rock show experience… FOH sound engineers telling you to turn down so low to where they have total control. 9 times out of 10 in a club scenario at least, you’re putting all of those hours of hard work in the studio and rehearsal room into the hands of somebody you just met at load in. But I digress.

the "silent stage" is a boondoggle...

I went to a show (JBLZE), not too long ago, where they had amp's on-stage, they had the typical set-up that Zeppelin would have had, w/ 4 1960 cab's & on the bass side 2- Acoustic 360 set-ups.

From the 12th row, & could not hear a good mix, because there was no stage volume, the FOH was going over my head. I didn't realize this, until everyone stood up & then the sound was 80% better, because the FOH were now, closer to the plane of my ears.

It would be nice, if the band told you if they are doing silent stage. If so, I'll opt for a cheaper seat, where the mix is good, vs an expensive up close seat where all you hear is rumble & high-end treble.

I really think that plexiglass cages for drums, are the worst invention known to man. They are really bad for the drummer, who now hears the drums 3 x's as loud, bouncing of the plastic shield right back into their face. They should subject the person mandating the drummer to be plexi-caged to sit through a couple of sets inside the cage w/ him w/o hearing protection, so he can see what he's subjecting the drummer to...

Someone should do an OSHA study, to measure the sound pressure (db) level of a drum set in open air, vs inside a plexi-cage & see what sort of added hazard it is making for the drummer.

but, really, IMO, silent stage is counter productive, since who wants to be close to the stage where the sound is like ass? Isn't the whole idea to lower the db level on stage so those near the front aren't subject to high db levels & hurt their ears?

So, now, the best seat in the house is near the mixing console, otherwise the sound is not very good, if you're too close to the stage & FOH are over your head & all you hear is the backside of the cab's...

 

[PelliX]

One can no sooner digitally approximate the tone of any given amp, tube or otherwise, than they can redesign the complexity of a single organic leaf.

Eh, you realise there's a huge difference between creating 'life' and RNA vs understanding electron flow in a circuit?

If an individual is satisfied with the dry generic sound of what amounts to the worlds most complicated of stomp boxes being imitated by many samples

Samples? Who said samples?

that cannot be sewn together by microprocessors and meet any kind of "grand design" intended to re-create that which must be ultimately a disappointment, I posit that they are too easily satisfied.

What's the grand design of electrons passing through a vacuum tube, resistors and capacitors? Or are you implying the complexity _prevents_ greatness?

If their material survives the "processing", taking it out of the in-ear monitor and pushing air from a stage for public consumption may result in remarks in the, "It sounds so much better live", or worse, "It sounds nothing like the recording".

You're the studio tech and you're worried about 'surviving processing'? If you're at the desk, I guess you need to take a look in the mirror. If not, blame whoever is doing this processing... I'm not sure what you mean by the in-ear thing. IEMs are what they are - monitors, they shouldn't affect anything (except maybe the listener, of course).

The myopia of blanket statements like "tube amps are becoming a niche market.." evince a personal agenda without any basis in fact.

But, beg your pardon, wouldn't the inverse hold just as true? Are you perhaps attempting to sell valve amps?

 

[DavidRavenMoon]

I have a Code100 Combo. I always thought they did the whole thing half heartedly. I realize it was Softube that did the modeling, but Marshall should have offered VST and AU plugin versions to match the amp, that way you could record with the same tones.

The other issues with the amp is no real MIDI port... it has USB, but you need a MIDI host controller if you're going to integrate it with a MIDI switcher. The speakers are very generic too.

If they hadn't skimped on features, even if the amp was priced a little more, they could have had a great product.

 

[nortiks]

So, now, the best seat in the house is near the mixing console, otherwise the sound is not very good, if you're too close to the stage & FOH are over your head & all you hear is the backside of the cab's...

PA literally used to be called a "sound reinforcement system" because it was designed to fill in where the stage sound didn't fill...but as you point out, not any more, and its not a good thing imo.

 

[DavidRavenMoon]

Digital modelers have established their usefulness, but it doesn’t eliminate its main pitfall….They simply do not react or respond like a REAL guitar amplifier. I don’t care how you parse it. It sounds as flat as looking at a one-dimensional picture on the wall.

Stand in front of a 100 watt Marshall halfstack and your pants legs will be flapping.

Stand in front of the digital modeler at the same DB level and it’ll sound like a Marshall thru a PA. No air movement, just a loud noise behind you.

That’s fine if it’s all you need to get your gig done, but if you want to actually feel and physically be a part of your guitar and what you’re playing, remain analog.

There is something inherently unnatural about digital, at least when it comes to physics of sound. Not sure that part can ever be replicated.

In our live stage performance, we have figured out ways of controlling stage volume without having to resort to amps off-stage or using digital modelers. In my case, the SV20 certainly has helped and have even resorted to the lower 5W setting on occasion with excellent results.

Two things that have ruined the live rock show experience… Modelers/amps offstage and plexiglass in front of drums. Part of the live music experience is not just what you hear through the PA, but also the sound coming off the stage.

Maybe a third thing that began the ruin of the live rock show experience… FOH sound engineers telling you to turn down so low to where they have total control. 9 times out of 10 in a club scenario at least, you’re putting all of those hours of hard work in the studio and rehearsal room into the hands of somebody you just met at load in. But I digress.

That's not true at all.. You are talking about the difference with Class D amps. My Marshall Code100 is 100 watts. But unlike a tube amp, it's just 100 clean watts. a 50 watt tube amp will put out more than 50 watts, but it's not clean. I have to crank the master all the way up to get to 100 watts... but it's louder than I'd ever need on a gig.

Also people have ideas like you can't get feedback with a modeling amp and that it wont clean up when you roll the guitar volume back, etc. None of that is true.

After one of the first gigs I did with the amp I had a guitarist from the audience come up and tell me he loved my tone, and what kind of amp was it. I told him it's a digital modeling amp... his eyes glazed over and he said "naw man... I don't like those... I gotta have my tooobes..."

Yeah, but you just said you loved my tone, right? lol

I've been playing for 55 years... I don't care what's in the amp as long as I get tones I like from it.

 

[marshallmellowed]

the "silent stage" is a boondoggle...

I went to a show (JBLZE), not too long ago, where they had amp's on-stage, they had the typical set-up that Zeppelin would have had, w/ 4 1960 cab's & on the bass side 2- Acoustic 360 set-ups.

From the 12th row, & could not hear a good mix, because there was no stage volume, the FOH was going over my head. I didn't realize this, until everyone stood up & then the sound was 80% better, because the FOH were now, closer to the plane of my ears.

It would be nice, if the band told you if they are doing silent stage. If so, I'll opt for a cheaper seat, where the mix is good, vs an expensive up close seat where all you hear is rumble & high-end treble.

I really think that plexiglass cages for drums, are the worst invention known to man. They are really bad for the drummer, who now hears the drums 3 x's as loud, bouncing of the plastic shield right back into their face. They should subject the person mandating the drummer to be plexi-caged to sit through a couple of sets inside the cage w/ him w/o hearing protection, so he can see what he's subjecting the drummer to...

Someone should do an OSHA study, to measure the sound pressure (db) level of a drum set in open air, vs inside a plexi-cage & see what sort of added hazard it is making for the drummer.

but, really, IMO, silent stage is counter productive, since who wants to be close to the stage where the sound is like ass? Isn't the whole idea to lower the db level on stage so those near the front aren't subject to high db levels & hurt their ears?

So, now, the best seat in the house is near the mixing console, otherwise the sound is not very good, if you're too close to the stage & FOH are over your head & all you hear is the backside of the cab's...

Been getting seats in the middle of a venue for years for this very reason. Even if the stage is not "silent" the best sound is always center, near the console. That's assuming it's not Ted Nugent, where it's too damn loud no matter where you are.

 

[marshallmellowed]

That's not true at all.. You are talking about the difference with Class D amps. My Marshall Code100 is 100 watts. But unlike a tube amp, it's just 100 clean watts. a 50 watt tube amp will put out more than 50 watts, but it's not clean. I have to crank the master all the way up to get to 100 watts... but it's louder than I'd ever need on a gig.

Also people have ideas like you can't get feedback with a modeling amp and that it wont clean up when you roll the guitar volume back, etc. None of that is true.

After one of the first gigs I did with the amp I had a guitarist from the audience come up and tell me he loved my tone, and what kind of amp was it. I told him it's a digital modeling amp... his eyes glazed over and he said "naw man... I don't like those... I gotta have my tooobes..."

Yeah, but you just said you loved my tone, right? lol

I've been playing for 55 years... I don't care what's in the amp as long as I get tones I like from it.

Exactly. I'm very particular about my playing experience and sound. Any modeler I use has to be right there with my tube amps, in both sound and feel, or I wouldn't use it. What others think or play through for their live rigs is of no significance to me, whatever works for them.

 

[marshallmellowed]

Damn, must be a bitch to move something around with wheels under it......................................

View attachment 141873

In my particular case, it's also a matter of how much gear a given band member has to haul. I run sound for both of the cover bands I play in, so I also have to haul all of the PA gear to most gigs (gigs that don't provide PA). By the time I load mains, subs, guitars, a mixer, bags of cabling... my SUV is full. No way I could fit an an amp and cab, unless it was a tiny combo amp. With an amp, unless you're playing blues on a street corner, you'll also need a decent pedalboard. If you're not a gambling man, you'll need a spare amp in case your amp dies mid-gig. Guess what I'm saying is, space can also be a big factor.

 

[Dogs of Doom]

Exactly. I'm very particular about my playing experience and sound. Any modeler I use has to be right there with my tube amps, in both sound and feel, or I wouldn't use it. What others think or play through for their live rigs is of no significance to me, whatever works for them.

regardless... when you are using tube amp's the sound is very dependent on the sound guy of the day & other forces, venue, etc.

At least w/ a modeler/profiler, you can get pretty consistent sound, night after night. A sound guy would have to be a buffoon to mess it up.

Sometimes w/ an analogue setup, there may just be sound demons messing w/ you that night...

 

[LoudStroud]

That's not true at all.. You are talking about the difference with Class D amps. My Marshall Code100 is 100 watts. But unlike a tube amp, it's just 100 clean watts. a 50 watt tube amp will put out more than 50 watts, but it's not clean. I have to crank the master all the way up to get to 100 watts... but it's louder than I'd ever need on a gig.

Also people have ideas like you can't get feedback with a modeling amp and that it wont clean up when you roll the guitar volume back, etc. None of that is true.

After one of the first gigs I did with the amp I had a guitarist from the audience come up and tell me he loved my tone, and what kind of amp was it. I told him it's a digital modeling amp... his eyes glazed over and he said "naw man... I don't like those... I gotta have my tooobes..."

Yeah, but you just said you loved my tone, right? lol

I've been playing for 55 years... I don't care what's in the amp as long as I get tones I like from it.

I have not heard the Code series. Will have to check em out. I’m going by Kempers and Fractals. They sound good, but simply do not move air like real analog amps. Or respond to the volume control on the guitar the same way.

Something not many take into account is that your guitar’s electronics become part of the amplifier circuit once plugged in. Impedance and the guitar’s circuit design come into play.

 

[Flight_of_Icarus]

I speak purely from the perspective of a hobbyist as opposed to a sound engineer or professional musician, but from what I've seen at more recent gigs I've attended, the tube amp isn't dead, it's just smaller most of the time now. I tend to see a pretty even mix of modeling setups and smaller tube amps with 1x12 or 2x12 cabinets. The 100-watt head and 4x12 setups are definitely becoming less common, I can say that much.

 

[gjohnson]

You can keep your modlers. Nothing thumps better than the real dealIMO Our stage set up at our show earlier this wk opening for Burning Witches which also used our backline.