How accurate is amp modeling, and....

[pbassnut]

The full title is - How accurate is amp modeling, and why is this not as popular for bass as it is for guitar?

Just looking at a Sweetwater catalog with pages of Line 6 and Helix and other higher-end gear dedicated to modeling, and seeing little to none for bass makes me wonder.

Plus, having an amp sim in a Sansamp is one thing, but surely not as elaborate as the modeling in a Helix, for example.

I am mostly just curious about these things.

My only experience with amp modeling is my Tech 21 VT Bass V2 pedal. I use it mainly for its Ampeg B-15 "fliptop" emulation. I think it sounds pretty darn good (especially given the price point they sell them at). However, I would characterize their sound as "B-15 adjacent" or "inspired by" at best. I think that part of the tone delta between the simulation and the real thing is just the sheer volume I can use it at which adds a degree of girth to the sound that the real deal 30 watt 1x15 combo is simply never going to be able to produce.

 

[Machiavelli]

You can never hear the bass so nobody cares

 

[MVE]

I kinda do that now. I use a high power set up with a full range bi-amped speaker affair and run whatever
modeling gismo modeling mostly comp, limiter, and effect pedals. once in a while an amp model.
I think of the modeling box more as plug-ins.

I remember John Mclaughlin Invalid Link Removed years and years before stand-alone modeling or even talk of using it live. Running his guitar through a laptop running DAW patches straight into the PA and monitors. The man known for loud Marshell amps using just a laptop on stage, revolutionary!

Up until very recently, signal latency has been a giant hurdle to overcome. Nobody wants to play a note and not hear it for half-a-second.
But the latest generation of ADAs latency has become virtually imperceptible.
So we are now on the cusp of this new technology. Fender, Kemper and Bergantino are leading the way of integrating ADA/DSP technology into guitar and bass amps.
In 5 years we will all be talking about witch DSP/Class-D amp is the best.

 

[seamonkey]

Its not about “modeling”

Simulation, Emulation, Cloning, ... all the same really
But YES it doesn't mean you always have to sound like some golden reference amp. Make new sounds there is a huge area of uncharted auditory universe yet to be created and explored.

And there's really do difference how it's done analog or digital. Some brands may spend a lot of time and effort to sell "analog" but it's not any different. Just much more limited.

Waveform in versus waveform out. If the waveform out is the same, it sounds the same. But you can find different waveforms that sound the same to our brains.
The waveform may have different phases in the harmonics and still sound the same to us. It may look different on a scope, but FFT shows the same strength in harmonics. It sounds the same. Scopes are only one way to represent a waveform.

 

[DJ Bebop]

I kinda do that now. I use a high power set up with a full range bi-amped speaker affair and run whatever
modeling gismo modeling mostly comp, limiter, and effect pedals. once in a while an amp model.
I think of the modeling box more as plug-ins.

I remember John Mclaughlin Invalid Link Removed years and years before stand-alone modeling or even talk of using it live. Running his guitar through a laptop running DAW patches straight into the PA and monitors. The man known for loud Marshall amps using just a laptop on stage, revolutionary!

It looks like he's gone back to pedals and pre-amps still, ampless.
The rig...
Invalid Link Removed
John says "As you can see there are three tube Pre-amps. In the rig itself you will see the Zen Drive which is what I recorded with recently, but above you will see the Seymour Duncan Twin Tube which I also like very much, and to the right one of my oldest favorites, the Mesa-Boogie V-Twin. I like them all and it really depends on what mood I’m in which one I use.In the middle of those two, you will see a prototype of the new wireless midi for guitar that was invented by Andras Szalay, and is distributed by Fishman Associates.The rig itself is self evident and needs no commentary from me other than it stays the same whichever pre-amp I use."

 

[MVE]

Simulation, Emulation, Cloning, ... all the same really
But YES it doesn't mean you always have to sound like some golden reference amp. Make new sounds there is a huge area of uncharted auditory universe yet to be created and explored.

And there's really do difference how it's done analog or digital. Some brands may spend a lot of time and effort to sell "analog" but it's not any different. Just much more limited.

Waveform in versus waveform out. If the waveform out is the same, it sounds the same. But you can find different waveforms that sound the same to our brains.
The waveform may have different phases in the harmonics and still sound the same to us. It may look different on a scope, but FFT shows the same strength in harmonics. It sounds the same. Scopes are only one way to represent a waveform.

The point I am trying to make is that A/D/As, like the interfaces we use to record on a computer (MOTU, UA Apollo, Antares, etc...) will be integrated directly with power amps and replace the “pre-amp” entirely.
Everything our pre-amps do, treble, bass, grind, comp, chorus, reverb, etc... will be done digitally and then sent to the power amp.
This is how the Fender Mustangs, Kepler, and B-Amp already work.

 

[DJ Bebop]

The point I am trying to make is that A/D/As, like the interfaces we use to record on a computer (MOTU, UA Apollo, Antares, etc...) will be integrated directly with power amps and replace the “pre-amp” entirely.
Everything our pre-amps do, treble, bass, grind, comp, chorus, reverb, etc... will be done digitally and then sent to the power amp.
This is how the Fender Mustangs, Kepler, and B-Amp already work.

And the Vox VT line does this I believe
Invalid Link Removed

 

[MVE]

And the Vox VT line does this I believe
Invalid Link Removed

Yeah, it also has a 12AX7 in there. Kinda makes you wonder what exactly it’s doing. (Power light?) Lol.
The sweetwater demo video of that amp sounds wonderful.

 

[DJ Bebop]

Yeah, it also has a 12AX7 in there. Kinda makes you wonder what exactly it’s doing. (Power light?) Lol.
The sweetwater demo video of that amp sounds wonderful.

I have a friend that has one. They say it's in the power amp section, not the front end. The 'preamp' section
is all digital. The preamp drives the two triodes in a 12AX7 as if they were a pair of power tubes.
From what I read:
The idea behind the "Valve reactor circuit" is really to emulate the behaviour of a transformer: step down the voltage by a factor, step up the current by the same factor. Or viceversa.

Basically what VOX does here is:

1) take the tube's output voltage, and send it through a voltage amplifier which feeds the load. The load is here the speaker or an analog emulation of a speaker, VOX Valve Reactor circuit.

2) Take the current flowing into the load, send it through a current amplifier and feed its output current into the tube.

If the gains of the voltage and current amplifiers are equal, this means:

Load voltage = Gain * Tube voltage
Tube Current = Gain * Load Current...
Or something like that.

My friend has a collection of various vintage low watt tube amps, Surpros, Monkey Wards and such.
This thing can hang very well with them. It does sound good in real life.

 

[tradernick]

Personally, Im dreaming of an “Amp” from UA that would let me plug in my bass, run 3-4 of my favorite DAW plugins, and then send it out to a 1200 watt class D amp. How awesome would it be to have my bass through a Pultec eq, and a Fairchild comp???

I sort of feel like this thread and a few others like it might be seen as the beginning of the beginning. The future of bass amplification lies down this road to some extent. The use of the Kemper for guitar players proves it. In the studio, more and more guys are doing the entire session 'in the box'.

MVE, I just started thinking the exact same thing about a UA amp. It'll come. First ones will be $$$$ though.

Just check out the sounds this guy is getting out of the UA OX . Scroll down and watch Pete Thorn's video. It's worth listening to the first 3 minutes.

 

[Cantstandsya]

I know it’s probably not considered high end modeling, but I bought a used Rumble 40 Studio on Amazon as a possible replacement for my regular Rumble 40. I got some decent tones out of it, but for me, the regular Rumble just sounds better. Ironically, my favorite models on it were the Rumble v3 amps. Also, the screen on the Studio freezes after about 30 minutes of playing, so it’s going back anyways.

 

[mexicanyella]

Saying I “use a modeler” might be overstating things a bit, but in my case I needed to get a bass rig together to jam with some friends after mostly switching to bass from guitar. I had no real gear budget but I owned a rack power amp and had access to a cabinet.

I needed a cheap way to get a tuner, some preamp gain to drive the power amp, and some tone shaping ability. So I borrowed a friend’s Line 6 Pod 2.0 for awhile.

I found I liked my Squier P through the Pod’s Marshall Plexi emulation best, set almost clean and with a little compression, mids pushed and no speaker emulation. I had no prior experience with Plexi amps; I just used my ears. I have no idea how much that model behaves like an actual Plexi, but I like how it feels and I like how it gets a small amount of upper mid “grit” when I dig in. So for me the actual accuracy of the modeling is of no consequence.

The Pod’s guitar-centric EQ was limited for bass—not much control over the low end, mainly—and when a $50 Zoom B-2 showed up on my local CL I downloaded the manual, saw it had more EQ options, and enough output to drive my power amp, and contained a Marshall Superbass emulation. So I bought it, and it works well.

I still don’t care about the accuracy. I know I like how the Superbass model sounds more than any of the other models, so that one sound is set-and-forget.

So for me it’s about thrift and practicality, first and foremost: that one $50 unit supplies me with a tuner, a good-enough compressor, useful EQ centers and enough output to slam my power amp into DDT. And it can run on four AA batteries if I lose or break my AC adaptor.

Just did my first gig as a bassist with bass>B-2>supplied DI>(EDIT: power amp!)>bass cab. Easy setup, and the post-Zoom DI signal sounded good into the PA without using any of its speaker emulations.

I’ve used it twice to record direct and find that I want a little more compression when I record, plus a little more dirt and one of the more mid-forward speaker emulations. But those are easy and quick adjustments that produce consistent, repeatable sounds.

I guess I define the downmarket end of the “uses modeling technology” spectrum.

 

[pfschim]

I find the profiling/modeling to be interesting. But, my only hesitation is I’m not sure why I would go there when I’m perfectly satisfied with my simpler basic bass amp.

Also, I get it that the Kempers and such are probably most interesting for ampless backlines, where you want to send a bit more sophisticated signal to the board. Here’s what I’m using for that soundstage, and perfectly happy with the result. I send the full preamp signal to the board, and find it to be dead center useful tone.
View attachment 3425941

Not feeling a whole lot of motivation to do more than that. Still, I get why others would go for the profiler/modeler. YMMV

not trying to start an argument bucephylus, but a Demeter and 6 pedals does not seem like a particularly "simpler basic bass amp"

I watch these profiler threads with interest, although I have not made any moves in that direction. I am also pretty happy with my simple bass rig.

 

[bucephylus]

not trying to start an argument bucephylus, but a Demeter and 6 pedals does not seem like a particularly "simpler basic bass amp"

I watch these profiler threads with interest, although I have not made any moves in that direction. I am also pretty happy with my simple bass rig.

Yup, fair enough. Different strokes for sure.

My comment was mainly referring to the Demeter; which I believe you would agree is a simple amp.

Not really being a pedal kind of cat, that board is somewhat of a lot for me. Honestly, I have to put Sharpie marks where all the various knobs should go. The Grizzly, in particular, has a vast array of tone shaping available and is VERY sensitive. The rest are fairly straightforward, even for a curmudgeon like myself. The reason I went into the pedal space at all was pretty much to cope with the loss of an on stage rig; basically the same idea behind the Kemper.

Thumbs up if you decide to look into the Kemper, though I expect your WD is pretty awesome as is. Like you, I've certainly thought about it.

 

[Hundred proof]

Yep ... fake is the new “real”

 

[GreyBeard]

I don't care about amp modeling because all I want is nice clean power with 3 or 4 band tone controls through a full range cabinet. If I need some crunch I have my ampeg pedal with a scrambler circuit that I just add a touch. Years ago I had a Line6 Pod-Pro that I played through a QSC-PLX1202 into a Whappo Jr. I ended up leaving it on a clean setting and forgetting about it. I replaced with a F1-X which sounded much better.

 

[chadds]

Up until very recently, signal latency has been a giant hurdle to overcome. Nobody wants to play a note and not hear it for half-a-second.
But the latest generation of ADAs latency has become virtually imperceptible.
So we are now on the cusp of this new technology. Fender, Kemper and Bergantino are leading the way of integrating ADA/DSP technology into guitar and bass amps.
In 5 years we will all be talking about witch DSP/Class-D amp is the best.

Berg IP

 

[MVE]

Berg IP

The B-Amp is really the trailblazer of this technology.
It has comp, OD, even special EQ compensation to match each individual Berg cab.
I have only demoed one for a few minutes. But the users here on TB rave about it.

 

[seamonkey]

It's a good idea that when you get a signal into the digital domain, leave it there while you transform it. I hoping to see a lot more companies follow the digital signal standards to accept and output digital signals. The FOH side of the house has this, and so do Keyboards.

Latency is not the issue that many seem to argue.

There's really low low latency to do AD and DA. It only takes just a few microseconds. When latency comes in in the coding of the algorithms. This can take it up to a few milliseconds. 1ms is equal to the speed of sound to cover 1ft. Human brains can calibrate very fast to reasonable latency, it's natural. Even a Piano player and drummers deal with latency from their instruments.

 

[two fingers]

They're reasonably accurate, and they have their uses, but I don't at all care for the lazy "I show up with this $1500 digital gizmo and that is my entire sound for the gig" trend we've seen lately. I think they work best if you don't try to give them too many layers to model, ie run through a real power amp and bass cab on stage. Air is what makes sound sound good. You take away all the air and the sound gets less good (unless you're going for certain specific types of sounds, or are using high end studio gear, etc...).

And there are great amps these days that way 15 pounds or less. Hardly a burden to carry to a gig. Get a nice 2x12 for another 45-50 pounds or so. NOW, you can add something like a helix in the fx loop, and use it for effects modeling, which it is much better at than amp modeling, and be able to have all sorts of different presets at the push of a button. That's definitely handy (although I really like my analog pedals like my Octabvre, Q_Tron, Compressore, Hoof Fuzz, etc...

If the band has gone all IEMs, it seems silly to show up with an amp. Never mind that I have a couple of QSC powered subs that seem to move plenty of air for the venues we play.

I'm all for your right to your own opinion. But don't call someone "lazy" when you have NO IDEA what went I to the decision process of choosing his/her sound. That's an utterly ridiculous assumption.