Have you ever tried using a vst that physically models just one 12ax7 tube? Notice how much cpu it uses???????
Wonder why a Guitar amp modeler does not have the same feel or exact sound?

My contention is.

All modelers are straight up BS. There is not enough horsepower to really model every component.

I believe they manipulate frequency's, compression and such to sound like or mimic a unit, amp, whatever.

Lets see.. Compressors, Eq's, Reverb units and the list goes on.
How many of them have this spiel about yeah we took modeled every component and created this masterpiece.

Someone prove me wrong.

I have never seen this topic anywhere and curiosity made me post.

Voo

 

I believe the clue is in the name

Virtual Studio Technology

 

Some Hardware Modeling VST's are Crap only 3 companies that i think come close UAD Slate Digital and Waves and as far as Horse Power you just need a good computer the New Mac Pro is going to be a Beast even the quad core base model but if some one gets the 8 or 12 core there is nothing you could Not do Music and Video editing

 

i used to feel that same way about modeled vst's until something was explained to me by a dear colleague of mine. it was just his opinion, but it made sense. after all, who was i to challenge it? he's been a studio engineer for 20+ years!...lol

when vst's are made modeling vintage hardware, the software is only being modeled after whatever gear they have during the process. for example, let's say i was making an LA-2A vst, and i'm using the h/w to model it after. the outcome would be the digital version of THAT LA-2A that i used at the time. thing is, from my understanding, one LA-2A may sound different from another LA-2A h/w component. they may have the same internal/external components, but seems to me they may 'wear', or 'break-in' differently. put it like this: we're all human, but none of us are the same.

i've just come to the conclusion that modeled vsts are just the digital representation of the h/w counterpart. doesn't mean they're supposed to sound EXACTLY the same (though i've seen a/b comparisons done b/w some h/w & s/w, and the outcome was identical, but that was rare). does that have to do with analog vs digital? i'm sure someone will disagree, or offer a different point of view on this. just giving some perspective, from what i was told. i could be wrong. one thing i DO know? music is art; use whatever tools you have to create something unique, modeled or not!

 

if so, Softube FET is the best FET compressor ever modeled ...coolbeans i can agree with your friend's opinion but what about skills and what is the process every company use to model a hw? ...not everybody does it same way this is for sure ...for example one may have some modules in synthedit that alow's him to create a modeled behavior of a specific hw but that doesnt mean modeling ...modeling to me is to measure as much as accurate you can every piece of a specific hw and then transcribe it into sw ...i believe these are the ways sw devs are releasing their sw ...

 

And it's even possible that a component sounds different on one day compared to a few months back due to external changes like cables with a tiny bit less resistance. Or more. Or large difference in temperatures. It's all minor in difference of the output, and most people would hardly notice the difference. But to let a software plugin recreate all those different scenario's they have to programmed with A LOT of questions which te software can answer yes or no ( 1's and 0's) and process those in real time to recreate the character of how a piece of hardware would sound. Not an easy task for programmers, not an easy task for most computers used in homes and studios. Guess that's why they charge $10.000 ++ for high end components

 

PLM & Arthur Sprong: thanks for your additional insight. it all makes sense & adds more depth to what i was trying to explain. i believe my colleague even mentioned those possibilities as well. my response was kinda 'long story short'. hell, one can even come to the conclusion that if those things (internal part changes, temperature of environment, or the component itself, etc) were not a factor, the h/w would then sound exactly like the software...but will we ever know that for sure? maybe time will tell.

 

Oh ..... I gotta comment in this for sure !!!

As the original poster recommendz ... itz all BULLSheaut-ski !!

But I offer up ; (from a few years back) ... I read a really intense
article about a PCi card that had been developed by MSI Corp.

'I seen the picture's and couldnt believe my eyez ! ! !"
It had "4 fender pre amp tubez mounted within the pci board itself !!
A cooler fan , that would rival any of these gamer liquid cooled super
cpu fan systems , and it worked as a Tube emulator / platform for all
Analog inputs ; "including and not just only , but ALL Line-6 breakout boxes,
PLUS , ANY ouput from a rack mount delta 1010 , Layla , moto , ect ....
Right into the input(s) of the MSi pci card !!! Plus , it allowed for ASIO
virtual vsti , daws , ect .... to bridge the pci card from its software , to
Your DAWs , or any VSTi synth you were using ! ! ! ! ! ! !

TRUELY, TRUELY .... bringing the analog TRUE tube sound into the digi realm !!

'and then .... (crickets) .... 'nothing' ?? .... I mean it turned into a ghost !!!

I emailed MSi about the card , read more about the developers at the site,
and got no reply back at all !??

THIS , I would truely LOVE to see come out. The possibilitiez would be
endless!!! From True tube / digital - mic pre AMpz , to Amp simulators ran
Directly into the software written for the PCi card itself !!!

Im somewhat completely 'dumbfounded' ; why this hasnt been delveloped yet !!??
No matter what anyone says ... analog / (ie: for REAL musicians needs); in the
bowels of a PC or even a dreaded mac , NEEDz to happen !!!

Beyond belief to me why this isnt here YET !!!???

- 0:1 -

 

in my opinion, if you played recordings made from a real moog synth, a sampled moog synth, and a modeled moog synth, the average listener could not tell you which one was real. in fact i think 95+% of listeners could not tell you which one came from the real thing. and of the 5% who could, at least half would be guessing. to young listeners who have never heard analog recordings made from the real thing, they might even prefer the sound of the modeled instrument.

audio is so subjective, and a lot depends how the sound is being delivered. good music is good music. people will love it whether it was made by hardware instruments or software. and they won't care if it was a freeware synth or the latest $600 sample library. good musicians can make great music with whatever tools they have available to them.

 

An oldie but still valid information.​

Click Read and Learn​

 

LOL I want this.
It could double in use by hooking the cooling system to the vents and heating the house.

THIS one is intriguing
http://www.effectrode.com/blackbird-vacuum-tube-preamp/

voo

 

Dead on +1

 

Many commercial amp simulators claim state of the art modelling techniques inside the product and say things like "every component in the audio path of the original instrument has been accurately modelled". But sentences like this are more like advertising and are not supported by technical papers describing what really happens in the product. Besides, many of the processors have to run all the simulation algorithms on a low cost DSP to keep as low as possible the cost of the hardware. That's why the models they use should be as simple as possible, but... not so close to the real gears they want to emulate.
But of course in the advertisement they have to claim incredible thecnological prodigies to stay competitive with the other products.



What gets me is how many of the software vsts sound the same. Its like rehashing the same thing over and over.
As far as I can tell we are in a endless loop of software developers recreating and hyping there version of the same crap.


That brings me to my next question... What is next?

I see things out there that use proprietary chips like the AXE FX, Hell this is a modeler....
But why cant a modeler on the PC / MAC sound as good? This apply's to all modelers not just guitar amps.

My suspicion is that the vst code itself is very limited in what it can do. In a way we the vst technology has boxed itself in.

BTW I have a 1968 Super Reverb BUT I prefer playing and using vst's. (convenience of recording / variety of sounds etc)
My thoughts are more about technology and the future.

Again What is next?

voo

 

The differences are trivial...convenience and comfort level are the highest priorities in my workflow and composition. Sound quality has come so far along in the software realm that having hardware is insignificant...beyond the essentials, of course. (Comp, controller etc.)

We are a long ways off from hardware INSTRUMENTS being rendered obsolete OTOH. We still need them and their skilled craftsmen to play them. Modeling, while making long strides, ain't there yet.

 

First of all, i don't care if my plugs sound different from hardware.
I just use the ones that give me the result i want.

But why do you think UAD has modelled three La2a´s, the same goes for the 1176.
And then ask yourself how many hardware 1176´s can you have in one studio?

One plugin sounds like one particular piece of hardware.
One piece of hardware sounds like.......one piece of hardware. *yes*

 

I totally agree with 'realitybytez' !! .... makes no never mind what you use to record with.
Great music , is great music !!!

I come from clear back in the 'dark age's' ; 'Two 4-track Skully' reel to reel's runnin together
ta give ya 8- tracks of pure sweetness back in the day !!!

And although , Ive grown with PC since 1981 , when I watch the first 'sphere' 64 channel desk do
automation with the faders thru a proggie called 'master trax' .... I WAS HOOKED ! ! ! !

But yet , to this very day , although I have 4-delta 1010's , and also a Tascam FW1884/with 2 FE-8'z;
I still use my Sony PCM-800 machine's & RM DM800 controller QUITE OFTEN !!! Its a matter of what song
Im doing , or what band Im recording. I can hear it ... I just know after all these years ; analog and
digital have made my entire musical life just 'MAGIC' !!!!

VST's are fine , modelers are fine , but I still use my two real DBX 1066 comp/limiters and my single
Pultec Tube comp. WHY NOT .... I got the real deal sittin right there in front of me , USE'em 'er loose 'em !!

Yes-Yes .... there is a difference between VST/PC anything ; and a REAL piece of hardware.
But it dosent matter ! ! ! ! Its the engineer .... its the band , the room , the mic's !!!

I love all my options in my studio , and I know Im very blessed !!!!
Why do you think I just give away feely , my kontakt builds. "Because its EASY for me to do !!"
well ..... 'and I deeply love creating them too' !!!!!

Just make music , we're ALL musician's in here and thats our goal, right !!??
I dont care if ya record on an old mono GE cassette tape deck, using a pencil mic !!!
If it rocks , hits yer soul , makes people 'move inside' ..... you've completed what you
needed to get done !!!

h3LL y3AH'z !!

- 0:1 -

 

In summary, good shit is good shit no matter what you use, and bad shit is just plain bad for the same reason.

Good tools can make a good craftsman better, but good tools cannot make a bad craftsman better. Just don't get too anxious about the tools you use. I know people who make incredible stuff with plugins that I call utter bullshit. In fact, most of the people I know that make great music don't know shit about plugins and use just whatever their mouse clicks on. You know, people can't hear if you used this or that plugin to do this or that, really. I think it's best to use the loads and loads of the freeware tools that are available. I do. I also do comparisons to expensive tools, and I can rarely justify shelving the money for the expensive ones. The difference is usually in the GUI that looks more pleasing, but it's only a placebo, you have to be aware of that. In the same way like some [many?] people still think some DAWs sound better than the others. It's shallowmindedness and lack of knowledge. They use their eyes to evaluate a product. You think a nicely rendered knobs can make a plugin sound better? right... There are some people who make extraordinarily great plugins for free. Some even look good, or even great. But what matters in the end is the result. Your shit, and your abilities. ;) Differences between the plugins and hardware, too, are becoming sooo minuscule, not worth a mention. I'm more and more finding myself using the plugin instead of hardware. I more and more find myself questioning myself. I don't want to get rid of it, but it's starting to collect dust... same goes for the synths. I simply cannot justify having tons of hardware synths any more. While people spend fortunes on what I can only call toys. These days, there are very few synths worth buying. In the mid 90s I could make you a list of a dozen synths and samplers that were really great and worth buying. Today, it's mostly Dave Smith synths, some Moog, Waldorf... and it's all very boring VA with a keyboard. It's complete and utter crap if you ask me. Crap. Crap because there's no innovation, I mean. Just reiteration. It's like Hollywood is ruling the world.

This is also a note to myself...

 

> Have you ever tried using a vst that physically models just one 12ax7 tube? Notice how much cpu it uses???????
Well, I have recently compared 4 different 12ax7 valves, and to begin with, the difference between the Sovtek, Electro Harmonix, JJ and Groovetube samples I have compared has been MUCH BIGGER than between some Valve versus VST emulations.
No, I would not consider emulations bullsh*.

But why would I try to find proof for emulations being bad at all?
If I want hardware, I buy hardware, be it for the mere fact that it may simply feel more (audio)sexy or inspiring in use than clicking on VST knobs with a mouse.

If I want good sound, I tweak a few good valve emulations and stop tweaking when I like the sound. I may have to chain some VST's but I'm sure that in the end I will have the sound I like.
You can even get great sounds out of the much hated Guitar Rig 4 if you are only ready to take the time to tweak and patch the right modules together.

I'm judging the quality of an emulation rather by its capability to get me the sound I have in my head, my vision of sound so to say.
The faster I get there, the better the emulation serves its purpose ... for me at least.

When I first saw ToonTrack EZmix with its (sorry) dumba** preset concept (or take any other emulation with presets), I had to laugh but hey, sometimes it's admittedly more effective to dumbly browse through a list of presets. You might end up with an even better sound you initially hadn't thought of.
I had to learn to focus on sound and music, not technology, at least not during the creative process.

 

If I understand the idea correctly what a modelling synth aims to do is not to so much 1-for-1 model an existing hardware, but to extend its usefulness and range for the digital domain... it seems that the companies who can, model every component from the oscillators,and filters to individual capacitors and resistors... then they take the things that couldn't be accomplished in the analog domain and make them possible with digital technology... So what you end up with is a piece of software that does everything that the hardware did, plus the "benefits" of it being digital...

Also it depends on who's making the VST, if it's being released for free it most likely wont be very good (there are some exceptions to this rule). From my understanding, modelling the components is very rigorous (lots of testing and capturing of data, and TONS of coding) and with that rigor comes expense, and sometimes from that expense comes quality... One thing is for certain, analog modeling is ALWAYS better than 80Gb of samples for 1000 instruments of which you end up using 50 (if that)...

 

OMG .... LOL !!

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT , and is also my point of view about most of these 'Shiny TURD lookin' GUI'z
Comin out alot in Kontakt !! ( But I still stand by the fact , of Analog/Digital are the BEST way to go !!)

As a kontakt builder myself , for years ; Ive wanted to make nice wallpapers , ect ....
BUT , Im really waaaaay turned off by the old 'vintage stove knob' and 3D slider SH*T !!!
Utterly disgusting , and usually ; most these buildz DO FOOL YOU into thinking they sound
Great ..... , because of the Glossy wallpapers and knobz these builderz are using !!!

Such T U R D z ! ! ! Shiny little TURDz !!


BTW: 'Sinewave' , what synth's ya got collecting dust ?? Seriously , I might be interested
in purchasing a few of them from you !!!

- " Long live the Shiny Wrapped TURD GUI / in kontack & or VST/VSTi'z !!! -




- 0:1 -​