What I Learnt from Pete and the Benefit of Artist Packs (for me)

peteri

Power User
Hi - thought this might be worth sharing:

When the Pete Thorn preset came out I was really shocked at the sound of the IRs he used, dropping them into my presets - they were much, much brighter than I'd ever use. Also as others have commented, settings which I use out of habit (gain enhancer etc.) were left at 0/default.

Looking at the amp settings, it was clear that he'd dialled the amp in to match the IR, so more bass than I'd have used by a long way, less treble but then many a touch of presence etc.

So I started re-doing my main presets, and what a difference!

I think in the past I've been dialling the amp in against a random (but appropriate) IR, and then going back and selecting an IR at the end, this has meant that I've really ended up choosing an IR not dissimilar to the random one I started with. So in many ways the wrong way around and also somehow not critically listening.

Related to this, was a thread on overwriting factory IRs, something I've considered in the past (I'm basically near full) - where people were saying about how good they were.

In redialling my presets, I went the other way - I left the amp at default and went straight to the IR, choosing one with the character I liked - but not worrying if it was too bright or a little dark.

Then back to the amp and adjust the controls to get the amp working with the cab, doing the old trick of turning each knob until you hear it working - and that's the sweet spot.

This ended up with knob settings I'd have never used, in the 'old way'.

Then going back to the cab block and making small tweaks, changing the smoothing at this point and listening to the change. Trying IR length and seeing if that works - and if there's still a bit too much low or high, doing what the amazing Andy Wood suggested and use the high and low cut in the cab, leaving the amp alone.

Again from Andy, using the room reverb in the cab block for 'space', and then the reverb block for 'effect' - and therefore having very low reverb mix levels (3-4%)

At the same time, tending to use Factory IRs more - they're really, really good! In the past I've tended to view them as free, and therefore not 'as good' as ones I paid for - that was a mistake, using the above technique and they all make sense.

My main patches are night and day better now, I loved them before (and in 6 months I'll have re-done them again) - but now I'm much, much closer to a real, true amp experience than I was before - there's just more high end, more low thump than before and it just 'feels' better.

Austin Buddy's trick of adding the neutral boost at 6-8 db on Marshall type amps has been really good for this too, just gives a little mojo.

So the point of this long thread? For me, this is why I love and am excited by the Artist Series - not because I can plug in and sound like Pete Thorn (if only), every single preset I've tried has been a little bit of an anti-climax for me, different guitar, monitors, plectrum, fingers means it's never the same. However by taking a bit of time regardless to look at what a very skilled professional has done - has opened up a whole different approach which I'm very happy with.

Hope this helps someone else too
 
Depends on how you use your device. Pete's presets were designed for recording. I wouldn't want to use them unaltered at high volume levels through my CLRs.

Also stuff like Gain Enhancer may be familiar to us forum members, but the average user probably doesn't even know it exists.
 
Depends on how you use your device. Pete's presets were designed for recording. I wouldn't want to use them unaltered at high volume levels through my CLRs.

Also stuff like Gain Enhancer may be familiar to us forum members, but the average user probably doesn't even know it exists.

This is something many folks get thrown by - why a recorded preset often sounds amazing on YouTube but like complete balls when tried at home through FRFR. Need to tweak as appropriate for your setup and use case.
 
I'm always amazed at how other people's presets don't translate to my set up. Actually, I'm not anymore. I've come to understand it. What seems to be consistent is that these great players may go about dialing in a tone in different ways, but they always result in great tone. And I believe that transcends to all amplification systems or rigs they use. They know what they want to hear and can get there quite quickly. After 40 years of playing, I'm usually pretty good at getting to 'my tone'. Although, what sounds good at that time, usually gets tweaked and when I compare the clips I record, it goes from thin to thick and more importantly, better......which is good.
 
This is something many folks get thrown by - why a recorded preset often sounds amazing on YouTube but like complete balls when tried at home through FRFR. Need to tweak as appropriate for your setup and use case.
I kind of get that, but...
Philosophically, to me, the difference between recorded and live should be smaller now than it used to be. PA systems these days, even at the semi-pro end, are much better than they used to be. And IEM's are much more prevalent, so stage noise is way down. When I'm running sound and doing PA setup, I still have a few favorite tunes that I play back through the system. (Lyle Lovett - North Dakota, Jonatha Brooke - West Point, almost anything off Donald Fagen's Nightfly album)

...and if it's a guitar-centered band, I'll try to make sure I have some guitar-centered music from the appropriate genre in there to help me ensure that the PA is ready to handle a recording-ready guitar mix.

Why? Because I want to be able to replicate in the PA what was recorded.

So why should my own live tone differ drastically from my recording tone? Both have to sit in a larger mix with other instruments.

So much to learn...
 
I agree to some extent with OP. IN fact I always wonder if I am ultimately going after one type of sound in my head and dialing in whatever amp/cab-ir combination I choose to get 'that sound'

Ultimately, Ive auditioned a million IR's and find I still get 'that sound in my head' with just a few, but may tweak the hell out of the amp block to get either the IR or just general sound to be what I want.

Thus I usually want (I think) the elusive MOST OPEN OR FULL RANGE IR (lease colored) I can get, and let my amp block tweaking do the real work.

It is a lot easier to turn some knobs then go through thousands of IR's to match the sound I want.
 
In all my years since the beginning with the Ultra : My Recording and Live sounds are the SAME !!!
And in both cases I know that both the studio engineer & live engineer have the eq set flat most of the times.....if necessary sometimes :Max the low-cut 100hz....they don't dial in / out any mids and stuff.....I will post a song soon with preset which I use live too.....all this works fine for me , might not work for somebody else of course...;)
 
I kind of get that, but...
Philosophically, to me, the difference between recorded and live should be smaller now than it used to be. PA systems these days, even at the semi-pro end, are much better than they used to be. And IEM's are much more prevalent, so stage noise is way down. When I'm running sound and doing PA setup, I still have a few favorite tunes that I play back through the system. (Lyle Lovett - North Dakota, Jonatha Brooke - West Point, almost anything off Donald Fagen's Nightfly album)

...and if it's a guitar-centered band, I'll try to make sure I have some guitar-centered music from the appropriate genre in there to help me ensure that the PA is ready to handle a recording-ready guitar mix.

Why? Because I want to be able to replicate in the PA what was recorded.

So why should my own live tone differ drastically from my recording tone? Both have to sit in a larger mix with other instruments.

So much to learn...


All depends on what you're going for. If you're after the 'balls out amp in the room' sound at home that's fun and inspiring to play, it's not always going to be the same tone that sits well at volume in a band context or in a recording.

Horses for courses and all that.
 
... So the point of this long thread? For me, this is why I love and am excited by the Artist Series ... by taking a bit of time regardless to look at what a very skilled professional has done - has opened up a whole different approach ...

Thanks for sharing this. I enjoyed reading it; and it gave me more to think about in my own approach to working on presets.
 
Always interesting to see what others do. What they don't do doesn't sway me because i assume they are too busy to deep dive. They quickly do what they know and what works for them. Or maybe not, perhaps they deep dive and just don't prefer ceratin things.

Either way, it's eat the meat spit out the bones, as they say. Learn what you can, but don't let it sway you from something you prefer.
 
Back
Top Bottom