Thoughts on Jim Lill’s new video

I think the important takeaway here isn't that he's making fun of modelers, or tube amps, or guitarists, or anything really. He's having a light-hearted exploration into a lot of aspects of guitar that many people take for granted. Some of these ideas are being invalidated, some are validated, and some are being presented in a way that challenges to the viewer to rethink their assumptions. At least, that's how I choose to see it, because to be frank there's just too much negativity these days. Too many people willing to immediately just shit on somebody and/or their work for whatever reason. It's exhausting, so I choose to follow Bob Ross's philosophy:

1665030947761.png

Back to the video, I don't think the conclusion here is that these things don't matter, more that they might matter in different ways and in different amounts than traditional guitar/amp "wisdom" might have you believe. In a lot of ways, it reminds me of what I've learned here about how tube amps work, which is way different than I originally thought when I got into guitar (and for years afterwards).
 
nice video but honestly, he does not prove anything - same as Glenn Frickes "null" test comparing various tube amps on a 2-Notes Torpedo Capture loadbox a few years ago...... ;) Funny for general amusement.
 
Funny how this just keeps coming up. In the end, it comes down to what you can hear. If you can hear a difference, then it matters... at least to you. If you can’t hear a difference, then it doesn’t matter… at least to you.

Where it becomes controversial is when you hear something someone else can’t, or vice versa, and then it becomes a debate over who is right. This guy is saying there’s no discernible difference in many components and, to him, there isn’t. Even on crappy YouTube audio through an iPad, and limited to one riff at one extreme setting, I could hear some differences in places. I can imagine in person and using a variety of settings and playing examples, then testing on amps with a variety of different combinations of these components, it only becomes more obvious. Owning and using a number of these amps types in a controlled environment, I can hear a difference even into the same cabinet.

I’m not upset if others don’t hear it, or hear more than I do. That’s in the ear.

Oh, and by the way… if you’ve ever mixed for gigging musicians, especially if you’ve run the monitor desk, you’d know that, as a group, their hearing is pretty toasted. There are exceptions with quite an articulate ear, but it’s uncommon. Be careful whose hearing you’re allowing to influence your choices.
 
Rick said:
Funny how this just keeps coming up. In the end, it comes down to what you can hear. If you can hear a difference, then it matters... at least to you. If you can’t hear a difference, then it doesn’t matter… at least to you.

Where it becomes controversial is when you hear something someone else can’t, or vice versa, and then it becomes a debate over who is right. This guy is saying there’s no discernible difference in many components and, to him, there isn’t. Even on crappy YouTube audio through an iPad, and limited to one riff at one extreme setting, I could hear some differences in places. I can imagine in person and using a variety of settings and playing examples, then testing on amps with a variety of different combinations of these components, it only becomes more obvious. Owning and using a number of these amps types in a controlled environment, I can hear a difference even into the same cabinet.

I’m not upset if others don’t hear it, or hear more than I do. That’s in the ear.

Oh, and by the way… if you’ve ever mixed for gigging musicians, especially if you’ve run the monitor desk, you’d know that, as a group, their hearing is pretty toasted. There are exceptions with quite an articulate ear, but it’s uncommon. Be careful whose hearing you’re allowing to influence your choices.
Click to expand...

Yup. Music enjoyment and appreciation (and performance!) is an entirely subjective affair,
but let's try and remove the subjectivity from it. 🤣
 
PacoCasanovas said:
nice video but honestly, he does not prove anything - same as Glenn Frickes "null" test comparing various tube amps on a 2-Notes Torpedo Capture loadbox a few years ago...... ;) Funny for general amusement.
Click to expand...
but where are the amusing vids that attempt to scientifically showcase the differences these factors make in isolation, and adeptly explain to those of us excluded from the "oh! c'mon the difference between a 6L6 and EL34 is like night and day!" club (because we can't hear the slightest difference (or never learned to hear it)), how to appreciate the nuances.
 
sprint said:
but where are the amusing vids that attempt to scientifically showcase the differences these factors make in isolation, and adeptly explain to those of us excluded from the "oh! c'mon the difference between a 6L6 and EL34 is like night and day!" club (because we can't hear the slightest difference (or never learned to hear it)), how to appreciate the nuances.
Click to expand...
What an awesome question.
 
PacoCasanovas said:
nice video but honestly, he does not prove anything - same as Glenn Frickes "null" test comparing various tube amps on a 2-Notes Torpedo Capture loadbox a few years ago...... ;) Funny for general amusement.
Click to expand...
I'm wondering about this, actually. I haven't seen that particular video. I don't follow him all that closely because I don't do metal and we disagree about a lot. I do like the mythbusting series he's part of in general, but that's mostly for Ethan Winer.

I'm guessing he ran several high-gain amps through a load box, nulled pairs of them, and found basically high-tilted noise left over. Yes?

sprint said:
but where are the amusing vids that attempt to scientifically showcase the differences these factors make in isolation, and adeptly explain to those of us excluded from the "oh! c'mon the difference between a 6L6 and EL34 is like night and day!" club (because we can't hear the slightest difference (or never learned to hear it)), how to appreciate the nuances.
Click to expand...
I mean....if you're here, you probably have a fractal. You can just change models of tubes, level-match them between scenes/presets with everything else the same, and compare yourself pretty quickly/easily...right?

Whether the difference is there or not, if you can't hear or don't care...why worry about it?
 
My takeaway from his videos is that you can get 95% of the sound and spend 95% less if you wanted to. Or something in between. You do have a choice.

Those videos make obvious how much or how little some things matter so that you can can spend money where it needs to be spent on what matters to you, not the angry corksniffers trying convince you of what to buy.

Really, it's been enlightening to apply what I've learned to my setup which is now shifting to cheaper guitars and cabinets yet expensive pickups, cab speakers, and FX processors. Because each one makes a significant difference on how close they sound when compared to all original and expensive gear.

So that leaves out: expensive guitars, expensive amps, and expensive cabinets. If only I knew then what I know now. :rolleyes:

EDIT: I take it back, I'm using cheap FX processors, not expensive ones. Because spending $2k is a hell of a lot cheaper than $200k on 300+ amps alone.
 
Last edited:
My first thought on seeing the title of the thread was "Who?", and then I didn't bother watching the video.
 
Last edited:
marsonic said:
Whether the difference is there or not, if you can't hear or don't care...why worry about it?
Click to expand...
It's a good question, but "worry" is a bit of a strong word for me since, at the end of the day, it's all gravy - but, how about a slightly different wording to your question: if you don't hear a difference...why care about it?" "Before I answer one note: I've been saying "I can't hear", but I should have been saying "I don't hear" because, even though my hearing is flawed (Tinnitus), I'm not deaf by any means, and I can hear many other small nuances in tone just as well, or better than the average, so I'm not convinced that we, in the "can't/don't hear a difference" club, are incapable of hearing the nuances of tube type changes for example - it's probably more common that we don't hear the nuances because we have not learned to hear them. So, for now (or at least until I've confirmed that my hearing is totally shot) I'm changing from describing this affliction as "I can't hear a difference", to "I don't hear a difference" (small nuance but important I think). So back to the question...: "why care?", "why try to learn to appreciate the differences?" - because:..
  • These elements (Pre/P.A. Tubes, Bias, Rectifiers...) are key basic components contained within almost all guitar amps or models of guitar amps that we use: big, small, cheap, expensive...
  • One of the primary areas of focus for Fractal's work is within the realm of these elements, and many of the Axfx qualities and benefits are tied to these elements. We read Cliff's posts wrt these elements with intense interest because we know he knows what he's doing, and that he's right when he emphasizes the importance of these things.
  • The many who chase tone often cite these components as being key ingredients.
  • These elements are tied repeatedly to sought after tones, by those who study those tones in detail.
  • These elements are tied to the feel of how an amp or amp model plays as well as how it sounds.
  • To say to someone who doesn't hear differences in these elements but who could possibly learn to appreciate them: "well forget about it" is somewhat patronizing imo given the group's overall massive preoccupation with those same elements in almost every other conversation, and the industry's overall agreement that, yes, these things carry weight and are important factors - more so when the person who does not hear differences within these elements individually, might pick up on overall tonal nuances that others who do hear differences in the individual elements may not pick up on.
  • Though one may not hear the differences in these elements individually, he/she may hear cumulative differences, so, even if someone fails to progress toward hearing the differences in the individual elements, that person may still care about the mechanics of these elements in isolation as they can hear cumulative differences when changes in more than one of the elements occur.
marsonic said:
I mean....if you're here, you probably have a fractal. You can just change models of tubes, level-match them between scenes/presets with everything else the same, and compare yourself pretty quickly/easily...right?
Click to expand...
correct!, I do it all the time - set up a patch with duplicate L/R amps set up to emphasize power section, into duplicate L/R IRs, set one to a different tube type and go back and forth trying to hear a difference using guitar tones, white noise, pink noise, sine wave ... - with most common tube types (ie EL34/84 vs 6L6) I don't hear any difference at all. Now here's where I think the "I can hear" folks might be getting some of the "I don't hear" folks wrong - I'm all in on the tube stuff - love my tube amps that I still own, and many I have owned in the past, power amp modelling on = awesome, not on = not so awesome... I'm not a basic elements difference denier!, but I still need to confirm it's there somehow eh! Along with these listening tests I tend to go to the visual - since I don't hear these differences I try to see them in analyzers, but even there I get the big negatory! (maybe there's a tool to see that stuff that I don't have).

I'm no expert but I keep coming back to the same answer whether listening or seeing: these factors are tiny relative to other factors. But since I'm a believer in the importance of these elements, my personal theory of what's happening as an "I don't hear it or see it" person, is that it's a "what she said" kind of a thing: size doesn't matter - I'm guessing that once a person gets attuned to the slight nuance of a tube type for example, however small it is as a factor relative to all other factors, it's hard to ignore it going forward once it's gotten into one's head (and maybe the differences are indeed imprinted in my head even though I can't audibly hear them).

So coming back to my point above, t'would be great if one of the smart people like Jim Lill who make the videos that demonstrate how small these elements are as audible factors in overall tone, could get on with making some videos that demonstrate, highlight, and explain the tonal characteristics associated to what we all already know are the important and significant building blocks of the devices that generate our guitar tones despite them being relatively audibly small in isolation. That seems to be lacking, +, if what he suggests is correct, most of our modelling and amp designs are just bullshit, and even as an "I don't hear it person", I know that's not true - so would be nice if someone could throw us a bone of demonstration on this stuff instead of so often following the formula of our times, which seems to be too often focused on demonstration of some sort of exception that defies established logic.
 
sprint said:
So coming back to my point above, t'would be great if one of the smart people like Jim Lill who make the videos that demonstrate how small these elements are as audible factors in overall tone, could get on with making some videos that demonstrate, highlight, and explain the tonal characteristics associated to what we all already know are the important and significant building blocks of the devices that generate our guitar tones despite them being relatively audibly small in isolation. That seems to be lacking, +, if what he suggests is correct, most of our modelling and amp designs are just bullshit, and even as an "I don't hear it person", I know that's not true - so would be nice if someone could throw us a bone of demonstration on this stuff instead of so often following the formula of our times, which seems to be too often focused on demonstration of some sort of exception that defies established logic.
Click to expand...
I've made a similar point about electric guitars in another thread. It's interesting how the major electric guitar companies don't release videos demonstrating the different sounds that different tonewoods make with everything else being the same to highlight to the buyer what they are getting. I believe it's because the wood hardly makes a difference on identical electric guitars as demonstrated by Jim Lill in another video. But that doesn't help sell guitars. Similarly, you'll never get a fair demonstration from amp manufacturers on the importance of these details. What you're asking for will never happen because it lays bare how little difference most of these details make. No one likes to prove themselves wrong publicly. Even in this thread, with all the grumbling about how backwards a solution Jim Lill cobbled together replicating an amp from 40 years ago, you still won't see those same people put out a video demonstrating the noticeable differences that that small stuff makes. It may be there, but it's embarrassing to try to illustrate it because such a demonstration would actually show how insignificant a difference it is.
 
fuzzydude said:
I've made a similar point about electric guitars in another thread. It's interesting how the major electric guitar companies don't release videos demonstrating the different sounds that different tonewoods make with everything else being the same to highlight to the buyer what they are getting. I believe it's because the wood hardly makes a difference on identical electric guitars as demonstrated by Jim Lill in another video. But that doesn't help sell guitars. Similarly, you'll never get a fair demonstration from amp manufacturers on the importance of these details. What you're asking for will never happen because it lays bare how little difference most of these details make. No one likes to prove themselves wrong publicly. Even in this thread, with all the grumbling about how backwards a solution Jim Lill cobbled together replicating an amp from 40 years ago, you still won't see those same people put out a video demonstrating the noticeable differences that that small stuff makes. It may be there, but it's embarrassing to try to illustrate it because such a demonstration would actually show how insignificant a difference it is.
Click to expand...
yes - definitely a parallel to the guitar woods discussion. As I progress along, I'm less and less likely to think that small details I don't hear or feel are just marketing or meaningless, and I still seek out some sort of evidence of their presence, because when I establish some small barely audible detail of my own, in my own settings / setup etc, it can become very important to me despite how small it is. ie - I've gotten used to having 10% room @ 6600 on all my cab block selections - a small difference really but I've gotten used to having it and I miss it if it's not there. I think we are all cork sniffers in some way - the sound we have or want that gets into our heads is incredibly precise psychologically, and we know even beyond our own abilities to hear it physically, if it's right or not. Maybe the only difference is that the genuine cork sniffer will not play anything but the exact sound in their head where as others will tolerate a gap between what's in their head and what comes out of the speaker.
 
marsonic said:
I'm guessing he ran several high-gain amps through a load box, nulled pairs of them, and found basically high-tilted noise left over. Yes?
Click to expand...

He tested various power tubes......unfortunately, the Capture by TwoNotes is not a true reactive load, yes it does impedance rise in higher frequencies using an inductor.....but for the resonance hump, the inductor needs to be much larger and wont fit into the small enclosure - I told him, but he didn't listen. He had his YT fame......some need this to generate more clicks. ;)
 
PacoCasanovas said:
He tested various power tubes......unfortunately, the Capture by TwoNotes is not a true reactive load, yes it does impedance rise in higher frequencies using an inductor.....but for the resonance hump, the inductor needs to be much larger and wont fit into the small enclosure - I told him, but he didn't listen. He had his YT fame......some need this to generate more clicks. ;)
Click to expand...
So his tests were completely invalid because of the Captor? If it wasn't for that darn'd small inductor, dramatic differences would have shown thru? So common to see this type of poo pooing on his test but I've yet to see anything that adeptly showcases the differences. (and I spend far too much time watching gear vids on YT lol).
 
Last edited:
sprint said:
So his tests were completely invalid because of the Captor? If it wasn't for that darn'd small inductor, dramatic differences would have shown thru? So common to see this type of poo pooing on his test but I've yet to see anything that adeptly showcases the differences. (and I spend far too much time watching gear vids on YT lol).
Click to expand...
Poo pooping?

I guess Cliff is also just "poo pooping" about the very same reasons according to your expertise, huh? https://forum.fractalaudio.com/thre...pedance-curve-comparison.169430/#post-2037247
 
The reactive behavior of the speaker load plays a major role how a tube power amp will sound. A guitar speaker is a complex load and defines the behavior of your power amp. Different Output tube types show different output impedances, therefore different damping factors - "how" the amp will react to the complex load of a speaker. If your loadbox is just resistive, tubes will mostly sound and react the same - so the complex load is the key here - and not every so called "reactive load" matches the load of a speaker ......most cheaper products using just a small inductor to mimic the impedance rise for higher frequencies.
To mimic the speaker resonance hump, a much bigger inductor is needed. This is just basic electronics, not poo pooping.


BBN said:
This.
Click to expand...
Nope! If you would understand electronic theory and amp design, you would know...... ;)
 
if you need such naughty words as "poo pooping", use them on your own opinion first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom