They All Sound the Same, It's About Workflow

when the clips are consecutive, you're always listening as 2 relative to1, 3 relative to 2, 4 relative to 3.
 
deathbyguitar said:
Brand L is Line 6. Brand N is Neural DSP
Click to expand...
Ah ? Didn’t know these were these . Since the beginning we don’t have the name of the others modelers so … but I found the axe, the real and the quad . Hard to play a game without even know which models you should find .

Ok not a t shirt but maybe a cap ? 🤣

I m not young, not old, got 20 years playing metal every week at 150 db without earplug and not deaf yet . I think the 8x12 open my ears 🤣
 
With lower gain, modelers show more they defaults . But in high gain is less easy sometimes .
Here for example I found that the axe sound flat/compressed compared to the 2 others . But with the millions of options you have everywhere … in the end you can find a tone. The important thing for many musicians is to not spent 3 months to have a tone they like, and I have to say that I m lucky I don’t have a tweaking counter in the axe because it’s just mad . With an amp you don’t tweak, with the kemper you don’t tweak, with neural’s plug in 5 minutes you have a cool tone … then you listen to details . It’s cool 5 minutes and then … But many guitarists want something arcade that sound produced . So the UI is very important . They prefer sometimes to have something 15% more synthetic but friendly

 
Last edited:
Listening at faster speeds I can hear the difference better. Maybe cause I'm old? "when I'm sixty-four..."
 
Not even sure why people assume everyone has the same hearing and or $20,000 monitors to listen on. I bet most of us, our hearing is wrecked from years of gigging. But snarkily say “I can’t hear it so it must be bs”. It really is down to splitting hairs given the fact that most people don’t have golden ears.
 
dpeterson said:
Not even sure why people assume everyone has the same hearing and or $20,000 monitors to listen on. I bet most of us, our hearing is wrecked from years of gigging. But snarkily say “I can’t hear it so it must be bs”. It really is down to splitting hairs given the fact that most people don’t have golden ears.
Click to expand...
That's often a problem with listening tests. It's hard to prove that the other person does or doesn't hear something because we can't exactly get into their head. Even if everyone was otherwise listening in the same spot in the same room with the same gear.

A lot of musicians also have hearing damage. It doesn't always mean they can't hear high frequencies or they have tinnitus. For example I blasted Marshall stacks in my youth and have some hearing damage that manifests in having difficulty focusing on sounds in noisy environments (eg. a packed bar with bad acoustics). Like someone can be talking right in front of me but I can't hear them. A lot of this sort of stuff goes undiagnosed as they may still score perfectly on a typical hearing test where you are listening in a silent space with headphones.

Even past that listening tests often have outside factors influence things.
 
H3O2 said:
Listening at faster speeds I can hear the difference better. Maybe cause I'm old? "when I'm sixty-four..."
Click to expand...
I'm honestly not completely sure what this says for testing, but....people do get "used to" sounds pretty quickly.

Listening straight through, I thought they were pretty similar. Skipping through them, they were more different.
laxu said:
A lot of musicians also have hearing damage. It doesn't always mean they can't hear high frequencies or they have tinnitus. For example I blasted Marshall stacks in my youth and have some hearing damage that manifests in having difficulty focusing on sounds in noisy environments (eg. a packed bar with bad acoustics). Like someone can be talking right in front of me but I can't hear them.
Click to expand...
Same, though I have had it measured and the hearing damage that I've suffered is a) very minor, considering my hobbies and b) mostly from a couple of ear infections I got in High School.

But, yeah....I skipped dinner with a couple friends last night entirely because of the restaurant they decided to go to. This one place drives me freaking crazy....it's all hard surfaces and mostly right angles and I absolutely cannot stand the sound of that room. It's strangely popular, and I just plain don't understand it. It seems like even the people walking around don't absorb anything, and the whole room just rings.

Strangely enough, earplugs help most places that happens. That one....I'm pretty sure I could be wearing plugs and a helmet and it would still bother me.
 
After first listen I thought #2 & 3 had this weird fake bottom end, more noticeable at the end of the riff. #4 was not as noticeable. After Cliff said there was a difference between one and two then I knew that #1 had to be the real amp. I thought #4 was somewhere in between #1 and the rest. These tests are hard because I am not playing the riff.
 
The performer is the only one that knows what they intended it to sound like. The listener only know what they heard. To try to assess 'better' from the audience's perspective is a fool's errand IMO. There are obvious tonal, sustain, grit and other subtle differences. But only the player can associate those with what he is doing. I think the appreciation for accuracy, is the player's not the listener's.
 
I would like to know how the test was done. Real amp into X-LOAD and the same speaker sim used for all 4 in a DAW? Speaker sim off on L/N/AFX?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom