Plugin Alliance Big Al

[cclarry]

5 hours ago, Grem said:

That was a great video!!

I LOVE Weird Al....my favorite is "Amish Paradise" LOL
Probably because I lived amongst the Amish when I lived in
Sturgis, MI!

Edited February 3, 2021 by Larry Shelby

[Bruno de Souza Lino]

10 hours ago, TheSteven said:

Vintage doesn't necessarily mean used - more common is to use NOS (New Old Stock - 'new' unboxed parts found in back of warehouse, garage, etc) and yeah those parts may not 100% adhere to spec but many of them didn't even when new.

There's a clear difference between component tolerances and components out of spec. When your 20% resistors are 40% out, they're out of spec. That can damage other components and put you in danger if you're talking high voltage gear.

10 hours ago, Brian Walton said:

Add to this some of those NOS parts can't legally be sold and used in new products and it can make for one off products that are as they say, not made like that anymore.

That's because engineers actually have their heads stuck on.

10 hours ago, Brian Walton said:

Now if those differences would translate into a digital emulation of the circuit, I'd generally doubt it at this point, but I do see the appeal of actual hardware using unobtanium parts.  

Not only digital can emulate the behavior of analog circuits, but that behavior can be deterministic and repeatable, unlike the physical unit, whose sound and behavior will change due to external factors beyond your control.

9 hours ago, TheSteven said:

If you look at a number of classic guitar pedals, such as the 'Big Muff' or FuzzFace, there was tremendous sonic variation within a given production run even though they all had the 'same' components.
So if you're creating an emulation of something are you modeling the pearl or the lemon of a particular production run?

If you're taking about the Germanium transistors in the Fuzz Face, that pedal came out in 1966. Silicon transistors started appearing in the market in 1956 and the switch was done on later models because silicon transistors gave the pedal a more stable operation despite having a harsher sound and being susceptible to AM interference. More a case of "I'll use this component because it's what is available cheap" than any other mojo motive.

I'll offset any spicy memes with this

 

[Brian Walton]

2 hours ago, Bruno de Souza Lino said:

There's a clear difference between component tolerances and components out of spec. When your 20% resistors are 40% out, they're out of spec. That can damage other components and put you in danger if you're talking high voltage gear.

That's because engineers actually have their heads stuck on.

Not only digital can emulate the behavior of analog circuits, but that behavior can be deterministic and repeatable, unlike the physical unit, whose sound and behavior will change due to external factors beyond your control.

If you're taking about the Germanium transistors in the Fuzz Face, that pedal came out in 1966. Silicon transistors started appearing in the market in 1956 and the switch was done on later models because silicon transistors gave the pedal a more stable operation despite having a harsher sound and being susceptible to AM interference. More a case of "I'll use this component because it's what is available cheap" than any other mojo motive.

I'll offset any spicy memes with this

 

"out of spec" doens't matter if you are dealing with an engineer that also has good ears and knows what they are doing.   "To spec" is only relevant in mass production that tries to replicate the original design.  Those that deal with original and custom builds swap parts out based on how things sound in the context of the whole, not just this cap has to have exactly this value, those that do that are the low paid solder monkeys.  Different parts sound different.

As for digital emuating behavior.  Sure to a certain degree.  But I have yet to find a single plugin that truly responds like the best guitar amps that have been made.  We are not there yet.  Getting closer, but not there yet.  So when I talk about the minute differences in a single component swap out, my point is it is arguable that the digital version of that circuit in most instances isn't going to reveal the same super subtle differences.  Some circuits are very forgiging for part differences others are not.

There is a reason why Trainwreck amps could not be reproduced on an assempbly line.  Kenny designed the Komet circuts to be more forgiving for parts differences that would yield a good consistant output.  Transformers "off the line" can vary tremendously.  

I don't know anything about this circuit as it is some one-off build.  

[Hatstand]

Seeing that picture reminded me of my youth where I used to buy a home electronics magazine that had projects in it like how to build your own volume pedal and distortion unit and so on and so on. Stood me in good stead later when on the road being able to fix amps with my trusty 'dering iron.

More recently I bought an audio interface for parts or spares and fixed it for 90p (two new caps inc. postage). It brought back memories and gave me an immense feeling of satisfaction getting it to work again.

[simon]

^^^ that Craig Anderton book did it for me - that cmos (?) distortion was great - that and Amp kits from Maplins (RIP)

[Bruno de Souza Lino]

On 2/3/2021 at 12:28 PM, Brian Walton said:

"out of spec" doens't matter if you are dealing with an engineer that also has good ears and knows what they are doing.   "To spec" is only relevant in mass production that tries to replicate the original design.  Those that deal with original and custom builds swap parts out based on how things sound in the context of the whole, not just this cap has to have exactly this value, those that do that are the low paid solder monkeys.  Different parts sound different.

Pyschoacoustics says otherwise. The more experience you have, the more scrutiny you have to use, as you can easily fool yourself using it. You see that at a lot of time. People believing in tone woods, fancy dancy cables, amp mojo and so on.

On 2/3/2021 at 12:28 PM, Brian Walton said:

As for digital emuating behavior.  Sure to a certain degree.  But I have yet to find a single plugin that truly responds like the best guitar amps that have been made.  We are not there yet.  Getting closer, but not there yet.  So when I talk about the minute differences in a single component swap out, my point is it is arguable that the digital version of that circuit in most instances isn't going to reveal the same super subtle differences.  Some circuits are very forgiging for part differences others are not.

I don't think so. The behavior and operation of tube amps has been decoded and understood since people started replacing MOSFETs with pilot lights with MOSTFETs. The former is the funny name some engineers call vaccum tubes. Digital has pretty much all of the characteristics of analog with none of the drawbacks. And you can also dial in the drawbacks. Many plugins allow you to even go down into the minutia of changing transformer response, tubes and so on. A modern example of that is Positive Grid's BIAS Amp 2.

On 2/3/2021 at 12:28 PM, Brian Walton said:

There is a reason why Trainwreck amps could not be reproduced on an assempbly line.  Kenny designed the Komet circuts to be more forgiving for parts differences that would yield a good consistant output.  Transformers "off the line" can vary tremendously.

Which means any amp can do the Trainwreck sound, since "any part can go in there due to the circuit's forgiveness".

[Brian Walton]

3 hours ago, Bruno de Souza Lino said:

Pyschoacoustics says otherwise. The more experience you have, the more scrutiny you have to use, as you can easily fool yourself using it. You see that at a lot of time. People believing in tone woods, fancy dancy cables, amp mojo and so on.

I don't think so. The behavior and operation of tube amps has been decoded and understood since people started replacing MOSFETs with pilot lights with MOSTFETs. The former is the funny name some engineers call vaccum tubes. Digital has pretty much all of the characteristics of analog with none of the drawbacks. And you can also dial in the drawbacks. Many plugins allow you to even go down into the minutia of changing transformer response, tubes and so on. A modern example of that is Positive Grid's BIAS Amp 2.

Which means any amp can do the Trainwreck sound, since "any part can go in there due to the circuit's forgiveness".

If you think in the box simulations such as Bias Amp2 can produce the same response and tone of a Tranwreck amp, then all I can say is it must be nice to not have to obsess over sound and feel like some of us do.  

I love digital recording, but the notion they have fully replicated the analog releam, especially with something as interactive as a a high end super responsive and dynamic tube amp is simply false.  It makes recording general amp tone a lot easier that is for sure, but trying to replicate the full responsiveness and sound as a combination isn't there yet when you are talking about the creme of the crop, we will get there eventually but we are not there yet.  

If your point of reference is some mid range tube amps, I can understand the perspective.  But when you are talking about the most responsive amps ever built it is another matter all together.  

 

And yes, there is also a clear audible difference between Evidence Audio cables in front of an amp of that caliber and a Monster Cable when you are standing in the room.  These differences also fade as you record through digital gear and the lesser quality mic, pre-amp, and playback system you use it on.  Many amps you basically can't tell the difference beccuase they are not responsive enough to the path, but a Trainwreck you absolutly can.    The tone that is recorded is only a fraction of what thing is actually producing.  

 

As for forgivness, you missread and understand Trainwreck amps.  Komet is a different line that is more forgiving to parts...real Trainwreck are not, every part was hand selected and tested in the context of the whole.  The majority of Transformers were literally rejected and not used.  

 

This isn't like a console emulation, EQ, Compressor that at its core is a subtle coloration while trying to maintain the original signal.  A guitar amp (a great one) is designed to truly interact with the player, the conrols of the guitar, the pickups, and becomes an instrument with complicated harmonics.  It is very different than trying to replicate a pass through type of device that most of us are familar with in these "in box" emulations of "rack or console" type of gear

Edited February 5, 2021 by Brian Walton

[jackson white]

43 minutes ago, Brian Walton said:

the full responsiveness and sound as a combination isn't there

Especially at volume. If you only dabble in digital emulations you might be forgiven for thinking that modelling is equivalent to the real thing. There are a few sims that can be quite useful, at least for my purposes, but they are just not the same.

[simon]

Even if you don't buy into the 'exotic' cable stuff (I don't FWIW !) just the inspiration and feeling you get in front of a 4x12 in full song  and the way it interacts with the guitar...... which even depends on where you are stood... Modelling is amazing but it doesn't replace that.  

[Glenn Stanton]

1 hour ago, Brian Walton said:

... A guitar amp (a great one) is designed to truly interact with the player, the conyrols of the guitar, the pickups, and becomes an instrument with complicated harmonics.  ...

to wit: Marshall amps and Jimi - all dials up, all the way 🙂 oh, and fingers, gotta have the fingers (even Django had 2)...

[Brian Walton]

1 hour ago, Glenn Stanton said:

to wit: Marshall amps and Jimi - all dials up, all the way 🙂 oh, and fingers, gotta have the fingers (even Django had 2)...

Indeed fingers are part of the player I mentioned, a really importat part.  

Depending on the amp diming them out can put the control of the response back on the player and gear that come before yet....i.e. actually using the volumne knob to control gain.  

(Jim Marshall would actually call up Kenny from Trainwreck to discuss the finer points of amp design and tone)

People have gotten so used to putting pedals in front of the amp which is fine for low end amps, but those really designed for interaction there is a lost art on that front for sure these days.   Certianly there are exceptions to this these days (Derek Trucks comes to mind).  

[Glenn Stanton]

yeah, there is definite physical-transducer related sounds which can only be partially mimic'd by digital. the sheer randomness of overdriven tube resonances, speakers cones, cabinets and proximity of other similar devices (not to mention any quantum entanglement going on between tubes in these devices).  that said, i'd suggest that 99.99% of people a) can't tell, b) don't care if it's a proper tube amp or a digital simulation... unless of course you're a rock god and your fans discover they've been hoodwinked because a 1500W 16x 12" Marshall stack was not used... @Lord Tim (you know of what i speak... LOL)

[Grem]

I am a guitar player. 

When I went to see Steve Vai, I really didn't care what he played out of. He was great.

When I went seen Eric Clapton and when he played "Wonderful Tonight" the hair stood up on the the back of my neck and my wife's neck, we didn't care what he played through.

That said, my amps I play through are tube. I have played through a FX processor at one time. And would not be beyond me to play through my phone if it served my purpose.

When I play for enjoyment, I prefer Boogie tube amps.

[Joakim]

One reason to why there’s a difference: Guitarist are used to hearing the amp live in the room, which is not what plugins are simulating (i.e a mic:ed speaker).