Vai saying Modeling is not there yet :)

I'll add that even analog equipment has some latency, every capacitor and transistor in which the signal goes thru adds a few micro-seconds of latency, considering that you can easily find hundreds of them in a complex chain with various pedals, the total latency wouldn't be that far from a digital device.
Hm, I'm not sure if I agree. Those latencies you mention, they surely affect the tone, don't they? If you model the whole circuit idealized, you probably end up with an inferiour tone. Maybe that's one piece of the puzzle the Axe II and III separates from the Ultra/Standard and the other modellers out there.

I do however agree that latency isn't an issue. Of course it's not. BUT I hear this argument very often when people approach me e.g. after gigs or when I talk with musician friends about gear. The main arguments are "The simulation cannot be as good as the real deal", "The latency is bad for the playing, it doesn't feel right", "I like to see glowing tubes and the warmth in a real tube amp sound". None of them ever wanted to play my Axe. That's just how people are I guess...
 
I have a theory

We all know that when it comes to pure sound quality, tube amps are still on top of any modeller. Why? Well, e.g. there's no aliasing in the analog world. There's a smaller latency. Yes, the Axe's latency is small, but a tube amp reacts faster! Tube amps are more beautiful (subjective of course, but can be an argument). They feel better. And of course: They are, what modellers and especially profilers are based on, they are the original! They are consistent, don't change every month or so. They are simple to use.

Simple to use, yes, just plug and play. Consistent....., beg to differ as I recall countless of rehearsals where one time my tube amp sounded great, and the other I was going 'WTF is wrong with this thing? It's the exact same setting as last week.'

We think we have to defend the digital world, because we are all very experienced with our black boxes. We know how good it sounds and that the arguments for tube amps are hardly audible and feelable. However the benefits are immense! All in all it's cheaper, it's more robust, it allows crazy layouts, you can modify / finetune your sound very easily.

But what if people simply don't want those digital advantages? They have every right!

Oh, I don't mind that at all. I should just really learn not to get defensive when somebody says modeling isn't there yet, tubes are always better. Really learn to smile and nod whatever. And leave it that that. If that makes that person happy, have fun! So what if Vai still likes tube amps. It's a free country.

There's a common ground to all of this: It's all technology. Technology isn't what nature offers, it's what human beings create. They don't create it just so it's created, no, it's to solve a problem. A tube amp + cab solves the same problem a modeller / profiler solves: How do I make my electric guitar sound awesome? The tube amp + cab combination has solved this problem for many years, in the digital world this hasn't been solved until just recently. Fractal Audio Systems LLC provides the state of the art with modellers, Kemper GmbH provides the state of the art with profilers.

So there are several approaches to solve this problem. That's very common in technology. What if somebody prefers a screwdriver over an electric drill? Start a forum post about it in a screwdriver forum?! That would be absolutely ridiculous!

The bizarre thing is to start a thread about someone saying that screwdrivers are still better on an electric drill forum. And then have the electric drill people make fun of the guy for page after page. Silly screwdriver person still prefers screwdrivers, what a dope!
 
Consistent....., beg to differ as I recall countless of rehearsals where one time my tube amp sounded great, and the other I was going 'WTF is wrong with this thing? It's the exact same setting as last week.'

I almost posted the same thing... But I suspect what he meant was the components that make up an amp and the way it works internally doesn't change. Unlike in a modeled Amp where today we have Input Dynamics control and tomorrow we may not (after a FW update). Whereas you're 5 knob amp will have exactly the same 5 knobs and functions every time you turn it on.

As far as consistency of sound, I agree that nothing beats the Axe Fx. If you change nothing, nothing changes!
 
But I suspect what he meant was the components that make up an amp and the way it works internally doesn't change.
Yes, thank you, that's what I meant. The amp is just as it is. Some people like this consistency. It doesn't need an update to be "perfect", it already is.

Crazy enough many analog people like the fact that the sound is NOT consistent but changes over time. It's proof that it's "alive" and not as "sterile" as a digital model. "Nothing beats the sound of a tube amp with good old tubes!" You hear the craziest arguments :D
 
I almost posted the same thing... But I suspect what he meant was the components that make up an amp and the way it works internally doesn't change. Unlike in a modeled Amp where today we have Input Dynamics control and tomorrow we may not (after a FW update). Whereas you're 5 knob amp will have exactly the same 5 knobs and functions every time you turn it on.

As far as consistency of sound, I agree that nothing beats the Axe Fx. If you change nothing, nothing changes!

Yes, thank you, that's what I meant. The amp is just as it is. Some people like this consistency. It doesn't need an update to be "perfect", it already is.

Except they do need to be updated, because tube amps are essentially fragile things. Things break down, tubes wear out. Especially on the road. I know that the favorite Vox amp of The Edge is a Frankensteinian mishmash of various parts and components that bear little resemblance to its original factory condition. There is no consistency to a tube amp. Even after a tune up they still have good days or bad days.

Crazy enough many analog people like the fact that the sound is NOT consistent but changes over time. It's proof that it's "alive" and not as "sterile" as a digital model. "Nothing beats the sound of a tube amp with good old tubes!" You hear the craziest arguments :D

And that is why I say that the gear page is a silly place. Enter at your own peril. :D

As for the good old tubes, those are about as consistent as a fuzz pedal with a dying battery. When you stand on a knife's edge there is no stability. The dying battery is dying for a reason, it's near empty. The good old tubes are old and can go haywire at any moment. Gear that can go haywire any moment is not something to chase after. The sound yes, the conditions that produce it not as they are just not stable conditions. And for every time it sounds glorious, there's an even bigger chance that it won't and then you'll be pissed off and cranky, and generally in such a foul mood that your bandmates want to kill you.

Everybody is free to their opinions, and whatever works for you can never be wrong. That should be my guiding principle. For myself I can only modify Stalin's quote that in war quantity is a quality of its own. Consistency is a quality of its own and for me knowing that my gear will work and will always produce the exact same sound when I want, only goodness can be found there. No more finicky tube amps or catastrophic pedal board failures. If that means taking a barely noticeable dip in my sound cause its digital and not tubes, well, I don't mind. I don't hear it anyway and I know that 99% of any audience I play for won't either.
 
Except they do need to be updated, because tube amps are essentially fragile things. Things break down, tubes wear out. Especially on the road. I know that the favorite Vox amp of The Edge is a Frankensteinian mishmash of various parts and components that bear little resemblance to its original factory condition. There is no consistency to a tube amp. Even after a tune up they still have good days or bad days.
I don't think any of us disagrees... But that was not the intent of the comment.
 
A lot of these discussions remind me of my sister. One afternoon she was trying to take a nap and told me to turn my music down. I was in a good mood so I just turned it off. 5 minutes later she barged in again saying she could still hear it.

Once you've made your mind up about something it's hard to be objective. You will hear or feel what you think are shortcomings regardless of them being there or not.
 
Once you've made your mind up about something it's hard to be objective. You will hear or feel what you think are shortcomings regardless of them being there or not.

I have friends like this that refuse to listen to any music past 1989. They have conceded that music died after 1989.

Those guys now that I think about it have the same viewpoint on modeling and tubes.
 
I'd like to know more about the latency thing, to be honest. I don't have the ears of Vai, but I got some pretty good ones. The only latency I can think of is when we use a pitch block first in line to drop/raise our tuning. The only other thing I can think of is maybe when he gets too far away, his wireless seems to have issues using Fractal more than his amp? Wireless units WILL give you latency as you move further away. I've seen it and heard it a million times. But I've never noticed anything with my Fractal stuff. Trust me, latency of any kind, annoys me and I pick right up on anything that is detrimental to my playing.

The other thing is, I really think amp modeling is in a great place right now. With respect to Fractal, in my personal experience, some of the amps I've tried compared to our amps, sound "different". That doesn't mean the amp I tried was better than the modeled amp, just different. Quite honestly, we have far more amps in the Fractal roster that sound BETTER than the originals in my opinion. Seriously, the modeling options allow us to take amps we may not normally use, and mod them into super amps. I hate older Marhalls in real life, but the 800 mod has been my go to amp since I bought my first Fractal. The real 800 to me, sounds terrible and I hated it when I had the real head.

I'm not one to disagree with someone like Vai, but I wish he would have gone a little more in depth as to what that really meant and how he noticed it. I'd also wonder if he spent any time with the pre-amp part of our processors? If anyone could replicate his tone, I'd love to hear his opinion after someone like admin M@ tweaked his stuff.
 
Wireless units don't have perceivable latency at any distance. Seriously, wireless signals are so fast that they can travel all the way around the world in 140 milliseconds. The "latency" you hear is the time it takes for sound to get from your amp to your ears when you're that far away. ;)

I'd be stunned to learn that anyone can hear or feel the latency in any competent modeler, except, as you say, for pitch shifting.
 
Did anyone see the advert for latest 'Vai-niversity' (or however it's spelt)?

Enter early and win an Axe-FX III!

Oh the irony! ;)
 
Huge respect for Steve but this smells like money. Right after he says he doesn't like modelers he says most of a tube amp's sound is in the preamp... preams are easy to model. Power amp modeling is where some modelers fall short. IMO.

Still I agree with Chris. This doesn't really matter. I use real tube amps with modelers every week and I can make them sound exactly the same:



I know "the truth" from experience. Kind of sad to see an idol say what he did but it's NAMM where everyone is paid to market something.
 
Some guys just can't get past the look or idea that one box can produce any tone they need or want. The tone is most definitely there, just not the coolness factor.

I am mentoring a young guitar player who is in a fledgling band and needed a better amp than his Blues Jr.. I offered him a great deal on an amp and cab I had. When he picked it up he said he almost ordered an AX8 for the same price but....he trailed off. I said something along the lines of 'a pedalboard and amp are just cooler, huh?', to which he just nodded. He knows the tones the AX8 is capable of, we've played live together several times.

I've also had guys approach me after playing and have them say my tone was great and ask what I'm using. I show them the AX8 and then get into the discussion of my journey from the early days of modeling, then to amps and pedals, then finally back to modelling with the AX8. I encourage them to check it out but I get the usual push back that modeling just doesn't feel right to them or some other excuse that doesn't jive with their original reason for approaching me; my tone sounded great....until it was from a modeler. It's as though they think there's some other factor I'm not divulging. I try to reassure them that it's simply the AX8 straight to the FOH but the look in their eyes says 'it's just not cool enough'.

Some are able to get past the visual, some aren't. I have chosen the AX8 for the tones I am able to get out of it compared to what I was able to get with an amp and pedals, and I had and still have some really nice ones. Has nothing to do with convenience, versatility or any other typical "compromises" or "concessions" that are made to justify a modeler. I use what sounds the best to me and the audience. The AX8 simply sounds better than anything I have used, the convenience and versatility are bonuses that come with it. Moving on to the Axe-Fx III, I'm looking forward to even better tones as well as increased functionality and versatility.
 
Vai has also demonstrated how he can knock on the wood of his guitar and hear a different depth and resonance as compared to other Ibanez Jem guitars. Me? I couldn't hear a difference.

Vai has also fasted before solos before. I tried this once ... sounded like me after I ate pizza.

He is incredibly spiritual when it comes to music and tangible, physical things. So it wouldn't really surprise me that he hears something organic ... almost spiritual ... in a tube amp that 99.9% wouldn't even recognize in a modeler. I could see that he would always side with "analog" on various things because it is "real" to him, resonating certain "spiritual" frequencies that a modeler can't quite do.
 
He is incredibly spiritual when it comes to music and tangible, physical things. So it wouldn't really surprise me that he hears something organic ... almost spiritual ... in a tube amp that 99.9% wouldn't even recognize in a modeler. I could see that he would always side with "analog" on various things because it is "real" to him, resonating certain "spiritual" frequencies that a modeler can't quite do.

I hope this is satire, but I doubt it.
 
I wish most guitar players would just pick and chose the equipment based on their own needs and hearing/testing equipment themselves.
 
I hope this is satire, but I doubt it.

Not sure why you would hope this is satire...Vai has alluded to his many times over the years. Same as EJ with being able to hear battery brands. Just because many of us can't perceive the same thing doesn't mean it doesn't exist. We are all the same thing but not at the same levels.
 
Back
Top Bottom