Will tubes go away??

Nancy and Harry aren't the only ones (ir)responsible. Politicians on both sides signed on and are far too eager to jump on the green bandwagon IMO. Photographers and managers of art studios and museums are not at all happy about compact fluorescents. CFs are efficient, but many people think they look TERRIBLE. Some people are hypersensitive to them as well. Aesthetics are of no concern to the powers that be.

It can be argued that tubes in guitar amps have value purely for aesthetic reasons. A transistor does the same job as a tube, but is much more efficient. Try to convince Joe Congressman that tubes have a right to exist because they sound better. Joe doesn't care that many people think incandescents look better than CFs, and that professionals that rely on incandescents are now faced with what is in their minds a serious problem.

This is all hypothetical and straying off topic. It's just a bit scary when I consider that it isn't beyond the realm of possibility based on recent events.
 
deadletter said:
of course tubes are on the way out !

the only reason they are still around is because they sound so great

when something digital sounds as good as a tube.... *drumroll* they will be replaced... its really simple. line 6 doesnt sound as good as the real thing..

Just got my Atomic FR and use a POD X3 live with it. Could you describe what about the line 6 sound that is not as good as the real thing?
Cause here at home (haven´t gigged with the Atomic/X3 yet) I can´t say the digital rig sounds worse in any way than my Fender Hot Rod Deluxe with analog pedals.

A difference is that the X3 models the amps played at the levels they sound the best, that means some power tube compression will occur and I can feel and hear that compression. It is of course not present when I plug into the Fender as the volume is far too low. I think some people mistake this for being that the POD´s would have worse dynamics than tube amps.
 
MikeLand said:
Just got my Atomic FR and use a POD X3 live with it. Could you describe what about the line 6 sound that is not as good as the real thing?
Cause here at home (haven´t gigged with the Atomic/X3 yet) I can´t say the digital rig sounds worse in any way than my Fender Hot Rod Deluxe with analog pedals.

A difference is that the X3 models the amps played at the levels they sound the best, that means some power tube compression will occur and I can feel and hear that compression. It is of course not present when I plug into the Fender as the volume is far too low. I think some people mistake this for being that the POD´s would have worse dynamics than tube amps.
I wouldn't know about Fender amps since no one I know has them - they all have Crates, Marshalls, and Peaveys. But...my Line 6 Vetta sounds better than about 95% of the amps I've ever played through, after extensive tweaking. I assume the the POD X3 is capable of roughly the same sounds as the Vetta. Mostly, if you spend enough time tweaking it, you can get it to sound as good as ALMOST any tube amp. It's supposedly "the feel" that isn't the same, not the sound. I wouldn't know since I've never owned (or desired to own) a tube amp. I've used rack gear my whole career. I miss none of this supposed feel since I've never known it.
 
I think the 2 big obstables for the average guitar player are:

1. Getting the sound and feel of a tube amp.
2. Getting the user interface easier/more intuitive.

I started a similar thread on another forum that turned into a pretty good discussion:
http://music-electronics-forum.com/t16075/

Earlier this year, I moved over to a Boss GT-Pro into Mackie/Tapco TH-15A powered PAs. I can't imagine ever going back to amps & stompboxes. I've been lurking here for awhile & you guys are killin' me! :D I think I'm going to wait 1 more generation of the Axe, though, mostly to see if the user interface or hardware changes. I have to admit that the FA sounds VERY tempting....
 
The Axe is a device were you can do things that wont be possible in the analog world! I personally don't care about how accurate the tube simulation is or how close I can dial in Sound XY of band or player ZX, as long it sounds good to my ears. And the Axe does it in it's own way!

At the end, it's just music......

:mrgreen:

Peace to all!
 
jerotas said:
MikeLand said:
Just got my Atomic FR and use a POD X3 live with it. Could you describe what about the line 6 sound that is not as good as the real thing?
Cause here at home (haven´t gigged with the Atomic/X3 yet) I can´t say the digital rig sounds worse in any way than my Fender Hot Rod Deluxe with analog pedals.

A difference is that the X3 models the amps played at the levels they sound the best, that means some power tube compression will occur and I can feel and hear that compression. It is of course not present when I plug into the Fender as the volume is far too low. I think some people mistake this for being that the POD´s would have worse dynamics than tube amps.
I wouldn't know about Fender amps since no one I know has them - they all have Crates, Marshalls, and Peaveys. But...my Line 6 Vetta sounds better than about 95% of the amps I've ever played through, after extensive tweaking. I assume the the POD X3 is capable of roughly the same sounds as the Vetta. Mostly, if you spend enough time tweaking it, you can get it to sound as good as ALMOST any tube amp. It's supposedly "the feel" that isn't the same, not the sound. I wouldn't know since I've never owned (or desired to own) a tube amp. I've used rack gear my whole career. I miss none of this supposed feel since I've never known it.
Here at home, the only difference in feel I get (as far as I´m aware of) is some compression with the X3. Will be very interesting to test my digital rig vs the analog rig at rehersal tomorrow! Cause it is when playing together with other instruments the "truth" about the gear becomes obvious I think.
Anyway, I think that the difference in feel has very little to do with the digital part of the equipment and mostly with the way of amplifying it.
Does that make sense? I haven´t discussed this much so I don´t know of all the opinions on forums. But I´ve begun reading the last week :)
 
Ok... rehersal done! Very good results! The Reactor FR behaved very well and I´m a bit surprised to tell you that the Pod X3 + Reactor are fully capable of delivering both the sound and feel I get from my tube amp.
The only bad thing is that the digital stuff, for some reason, needs a lot of detailed tweaking to sound its best. The tube amp/analog pedals are very much just plug and play.
I asked our base player, a respectable musician, what he thought about the sound from the two setups. The only difference he was aware of was that the sound came from the left with the tube amp, and from the right with the Reactor :lol:
I think that is a good sign... obviously both rigs did their job very well.
But to be honest, there WAS differences in sound. One was that the tube amp did not compress as much as the model in the X3. I can understand that our base player did not hear that. But I felt/heard it I think.

This makes me even more suspicious that the reasons to believe that tubes are better then digital are: Bad tweaking, bad amplification and psychological reasons (don´t underestimate this...) affecting the perceived sound and feel.
I hope I will never experience that tubes are better so I can focus on the digital stuff, because I really like that technology more :mrgreen:
 
MikeLand said:
The Reactor FR behaved very well and I´m a bit surprised to tell you that the Pod X3 + Reactor are fully capable of delivering both the sound and feel I get from my tube amp.
Uhh, this is the "Reviews" section of the Axe-Fx forum. Why are we seeing a review of a Pod? This is 'way OT.
 
Phostenix said:
I think the 2 big obstables for the average guitar player are:

1. Getting the sound and feel of a tube amp.
2. Getting the user interface easier/more intuitive.

Off-topic, I know, but IMHO, the two biggest obstacles for the average guitar player are:

1. sight-reading
2. ear-training

There are too many guitar players and not enough musicians who play guitar.

;)
 
Jay Mitchell said:
MikeLand said:
The Reactor FR behaved very well and I´m a bit surprised to tell you that the Pod X3 + Reactor are fully capable of delivering both the sound and feel I get from my tube amp.
Uhh, this is the "Reviews" section of the Axe-Fx forum. Why are we seeing a review of a Pod? This is 'way OT.

If you read the thread you see that it is about the question "Will tubes go away??" and the thread starter wrote about Pod´s and other stuff. That is why you see my review of a Pod. Wasn´t that hard to find out, right?
The thread should of course be moved.
 
goodwill559 said:
Phostenix said:
I think the 2 big obstables for the average guitar player are:

1. Getting the sound and feel of a tube amp.
2. Getting the user interface easier/more intuitive.

Off-topic, I know, but IMHO, the two biggest obstacles for the average guitar player are:

1. sight-reading
2. ear-training

There are too many guitar players and not enough musicians who play guitar.

;)

lol :lol: That´s so true!
 
Jay Mitchell said:
MikeLand said:
The Reactor FR behaved very well and I´m a bit surprised to tell you that the Pod X3 + Reactor are fully capable of delivering both the sound and feel I get from my tube amp.
Uhh, this is the "Reviews" section of the Axe-Fx forum. Why are we seeing a review of a Pod? This is 'way OT.

It all started with a reveiw of the AXE-FX!!
 
Kriig said:
Jay Mitchell said:
MikeLand said:
The Reactor FR behaved very well and I´m a bit surprised to tell you that the Pod X3 + Reactor are fully capable of delivering both the sound and feel I get from my tube amp.
Uhh, this is the "Reviews" section of the Axe-Fx forum. Why are we seeing a review of a Pod? This is 'way OT.

It all started with a reveiw of the AXE-FX!!

Yeah, I admit I took it way more of topic than the other posters. But it´s a bit sad to see people spreding, what I think is obvious, misinformation about digital products.
My only point of reviewing the pod and Atomic was to try to set a more correct perspective on this. But of course, that´s off topic, but I´m certainly not the one who started it.
 
I don't think the Reactor has its own forum, so if someone plugs in some Fratomic review content, I wouldn't say this is off-topic.

Anyway, great AxeFX review here, and I keep thinking that tube amp simulation is only the tip of the iceberg when exploring software-based sound shaping for guitars. What Cliff has achieved with the FAS models in the axe is already some evolution. Offering users the opportunity to do the same thing, like ReValver does (not discussing sim quality between both), is another leap forward.

But ultimately, we will stop talking about amp models, and talking about sound shaping circuit paths. Obviously, the amplifier names and schematics are ways to get to a "well-known" sound. But we can go a lot further than that. Is it for everyone? Hell no, it isn't. Just like NI Reaktor isn't for none but the geekiest among keyboardists, so will be the software that allows us to do that.

So what about non-geeks? Well, see what Native Instruments has done with Reaktor for a peek into the future: http://www.native-instruments.com/#/en/ ... /?page=674 . Preset packs that contain individual "instruments". In our case, it could be brand new amps, both official and user-created. Software amps. Maybe hardware units with simple knobs, dedicated to only a couple models / channels, with a quality but cost-effective DSP and AD/DA converters.

Will Cliff ever release something like that? Probably not, since he's paranoid about people reverse-engineering his algorithms. It will take a new innovative company, open-minded when it comes to sharing algorithms and code, as well as in empowering the users, to release such a product. Hopefully I'm mistaken, but everything I've seen so far, from Cliff not allowing us to mix and match pre and power amps, to the Axe-PC copy protection scheme, to the non-publication of the Fratomic response curves, points towards that, unfortunatelly.

The one fault I see in every modeler out there, Axe-FX included, is that they try to fit each and every amp simulation into the same control set.

Take for instance a Dual Rectifier. Aside from the tone stack and presence, you have Bold/Spongy, Silicon or Tube rectifier switches.

The Mesa Mark series models have "Pull" knobs for lots of options, changing treble frequency, the bass response, bright switch, adding more brightness in the lead channel, a drive control for the input, and one for the lead channel, that stack, and also the 5-Band EQ, which IMO is impossible to dupe in the Axe.

The ENGL Powerball is a VERY complex beast, with even different frequency ranges for the MID control, and the Axe does NOT model it properly at all. It may model ONE setting of that amp, but not the amp itself.

So where am I going with this? Well, I honestly think that in the future, aside from the "amp building" Reaktor-like software, we will see software amps, both simulation of real tube amps, and also brand new, original ones, with their full control set in dedicated software or hardware forms.

Sorry for the thread hijacking, maybe this belongs in another post altogether!

Best,

Alex
 
Alex EShadow said:
But ultimately, we will stop talking about amp models, and talking about sound shaping circuit paths. Obviously, the amplifier names and schematics are ways to get to a "well-known" sound. But we can go a lot further than that. Is it for everyone? Hell no, it isn't.

I do like it. :cool:
 
Kriig said:
Is the tube on the way out?


No - serious digital amps are on the way out :D
There were digital amps from Line6, Hughes&Kettner, Yamaha, ...
But they are all outdated (Vetta) or not produced anymore (Zentera, DG, ...).

The 'latest invention' are combinations of digital preamps and tube power amps.
(Line6 Spider, Fractomic, ...) - hey, even the 'digital is best' guys include tubes in their latest stuff.

Is digital 'better than tube' ?
Maybe - it's still only the beginning - like the first analog synths trying to sound like a flute or a string - I still wait for the new digital amp sounds from ANY box - until now do they all (the AxeFx as well) only try to replicate the sound of tube gear, traditional speakers and mics - and IMHO is this still FAR from the real thing.

Digital boxes should create NEW guitar amp sounds - NOT possible to create with tube grear - but this seams to be no option now. We have a lot of parameters in the AxeFx amp models - but ALL are to replicate sounds from tube amps.

When will we get something new :?:
 
Back
Top Bottom