Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Chris Grimshaw]

The purposes are totally different.

I'm not sure you've understood my point.

The purposes are exactly the same: to produce sound that the guitarist likes.
Whether the colouration occurs in a rack unit, at the cones, or a combination thereof, is largely irrelevant. So long as the guitarist likes the result.

I can see that, in theory, the idea is to have the colouration/tonality 100% within the rack, and have a "perfect" speaker reproduce the signals coming out of the rack.
In practice, it ain't gonna happen. We're still waving bits of cardboard around using magnets - there is no perfect speaker, so there will always be some subjective choice at the speaker end.

If a guitarist decides they like a SRX812P and another prefers a DSR112, who are we to say which is right?

Chris

[Justice C. Bigler]

I'm not sure you've understood my point.

The purposes are exactly the same: to produce sound that the guitarist likes.
Whether the colouration occurs in a rack unit, at the cones, or a combination thereof, is largely irrelevant. So long as the guitarist likes the result.

Actually, I think you're missing the point.


The point is to have a  full range, flat response speaker that will work as the speaker for many different types of modelers. The sound of the speaker/amplifier/cabinet and effects comes from the modeler. The modeler may contain dozens or hundreds of different combinations. The only way for the modeler to reproduce an accurate reproduction of all those various combinations is for the speaker itself to be, basically, a PA speaker. If you were to use a guitar cabinet as the speaker, then you would be introducing the sound of that guitar cabinet into the signal chain, which you can't then remove from the modeler.


It's a well known fact that guitar amps and speakers have a specific tuning to them, and only sound good when used for guitars. And they all have a different sound, which become part of the guitar player's sound. But many guitarists these days want to change up their sound depending on what they are playing, and the digital amp/speaker modeler makes that possible. But to get the truest reproduction, you need a speaker that is a full range, flat response speaker to reproduce all those different combinations.


The idea of the digital modeler and using a full rang, flat response speaker (i.e. a PA speaker) has been around for nearly 15 years now. It was a thing when I bought my first guitar back in 2005 along with my Digitech modeler.

[Chris Grimshaw]

Justice,

The part of my post that you omitted shows that I understand the idea behind these modellers, and I also say why the theory is nice, but it can't work in practice.

To re-iterate:
- There is no perfect loudspeaker.
- Therefore, any given speaker will introduce some non-linearity/colouration/tonality of it's own.
- Therefore, the choice of which speaker to use becomes subjective.

From my point of view, so long as the guitarist is happy with the sound coming out of whatever speaker they choose, it's fine by me.


If there was some company selling cheap PA speakers as the perfect guitar FRFR speaker (ie, what goes in is what comes out, zero distortion etc etc etc), I'd have an issue because, again, there is no perfect loudspeaker.

Chris

[Justice C. Bigler]

Even an average PA speaker is many times better than they shitty speakers that guitar amp companies put in their high dollar guitar cabinets.

[Jim McKeveny]

Despite popular myth, guitarists haven't been getting boned in decades. Point of Fact: NOT getting boned is what leads many a youth to adopt the guitar.

[Luke Geis]

Guy: Exactly the more eloquent words I was searching for!

Jim:HA HA

I have been playing guitar for the better part of 27 years. I was an early adaptor to the pedal board style FX units that pretty much had all that stuff built in. I think I got my first Zoom 2020 in the mid-1990s. Followed shortly by a Zoom 3030, then a Digitech RP7 and several others. I was never 100% happy with them, I just really liked the convenience of having everything in one box. I hated having independent pedals even more. Around 2001 I was finally at the point where if I couldn't get the sound I wanted from the amp connected directly to the guitar, then I had the wrong amp. I have been pedal free for nearly 17 years now!

I have always been interested and curious about the newer generations of modelers that are out now. I owned a Line 6 HD500 for a little while but it just didn't quite have IT. Now I am more into building guitar amps that suit my wants and needs. I will likely pick up a Fractal Audio AX8 or Axe FX III before too long just to see how it has changed in the last 10 years.

My driver for the whole Guitarists getting boned bit was mostly because I realize that the vendors are taking advantage of guitarists who are not that privy. The whole FR/FR thing started because a vendor needed a way to sell a product and not sell musicians on currently available PA speakers. It worked because now just about every guitarist refers to their PA speakers as an FR/FR speaker..... The market was pretty hot for a while on the RCF NX12SMA as being the ultimate FR/FR speaker. I am rather lucky enough to own really nice stuff, including 8 of the NX12SMA's and know that the RCF is a pretty good step above much cheaper options. My gripe about guitarists getting boned was that now inexpensive rebranded speakers are being sold as guitar specific high-end units to guitarists who just don't know. They are also sticking with the FR/FR distinction instead of just being straight and calling it a PA speaker.

[Brian Jojade]

I say getting boned because as most of us know, Alto is not exactly the screaming example of audio perfection and performance.

If guitar amps and speakers were about producing audio perfection, then people wouldn't be as particular about the 'sound' that their kit produces.  The whole point is that the combination of gear colors the sound the way they want it to.  If it involves tinfoil and paper towel tubes to get there, that's what you use.

[Bob Faulkner]

hmmm... not being a guitarist, so with all this audio "modeling" these amps can do, is there really a need to have an expensive (or specific) guitar?

Years ago, I mixed for a band where the lead guitarist used a Line-6 amp that had a ton of modeling on it.  I don't recall what the actual guitar was he used, but his amp made some phenomenal tones... I recall thinking that my original Sears electric guitar could have been used.

[Doug Johnson]

At least it looks like they are selling the Headrush version for the same price as the Alto version.  At least they are not price gouging.

[Mal Brown]

hmmm... not being a guitarist, so with all this audio "modeling" these amps can do, is there really a need to have an expensive (or specific) guitar?

Years ago, I mixed for a band where the lead guitarist used a Line-6 amp that had a ton of modeling on it.  I don't recall what the actual guitar was he used, but his amp made some phenomenal tones... I recall thinking that my original Sears electric guitar could have been used.

Absolutely,   In guitars and basses better construction generally translates to enhanced playability and better tone.  There is no making up for starting with good tone to begin with.

I have a couple of utility basses to pass around when running open mic’s, hosting sit ins, etc.  they are OK.  I have them dialed in as well as I think they can be.  As instruments they are simply not inspiring next to either my Lull or Marco basses. My Marco is amazing every time I pick it up...

[ProSoundWeb Community]