Old 01-28-2013, 12:00 PM   #1
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default Realtime effects for guitar

Maybe this topic has been explored on here before. But I couldn't find anything about it. If anybody knows how to point me towards any such posts, let me know, and I'll slink away and read all of them.

What I want to do is plug an electric guitar into a guitar preamp, plug the output of that into my computer's sound interface's input, then run Reaper hosting some plug-ins to do realtime processing effects; primarily, slap-back echo/delay, chorus and reverb.

I'd like to hear from any and all people who are doing this, particularly guitarists (but anybody doing this for any instrument). I strongly gravitate towards clean, noise-free effects rather than to things like pedals/stomp boxes, which is why I want to use Reason/plug-ins in the first place.

Thanks in advance for any thoughts that you might pitch my direction.

Last edited by Gooey; 01-28-2013 at 04:07 PM. Reason: typo
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 12:04 PM   #2
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,684
Default

There are so many amp sims available it's almost funny. Have you Googled them.

I am sure you must know about GTR, Guitar Rig, Amplitube, Revalver, Vox, etc.....no preamp necessary, just plug into your audio interface and rock!
__________________
Please check out my REAPER produced music here: http://soundcloud.com/dea-man
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 04:06 PM   #3
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dea-man View Post
There are so many amp sims available it's almost funny. Have you Googled them.

I am sure you must know about GTR, Guitar Rig, Amplitube, Revalver, Vox, etc.....no preamp necessary, just plug into your audio interface and rock!
Thanks, but I am well aware of all the amp sims, etc. (and strongly dislike the whole lot of them). My question is very specific. I want to go this precise way.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 04:29 PM   #4
Swamp Ape
Human being with feelings
 
Swamp Ape's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Asheville NC
Posts: 1,046
Default

There is no question anywhere in your post, so no it's not "very specific". You strongly dislike all amp sims and yet you want to do the exact thing they are made to do. If you're asking how to do this:
Quote:
What I want to do is plug an electric guitar into a guitar preamp, plug the output of that into my computer's sound interface's input, then run Reaper hosting some plug-ins to do realtime processing effects; primarily, slap-back echo/delay, chorus and reverb.
just do it. What else do you need to know?

Are you running out into a real amp? I can imagine adding all these effect to a dry singal and then amping them would sound very good - reverb, delay, chorus, etc, all generally need to be in a loop between the amp and cabinet to get the desired effect.
Swamp Ape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 04:30 PM   #5
ronmac
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 178
Default

I am assuming you want a clean, no distortion "preamp".

There are a lot of interfaces that have Hi-Z inputs (guitar preamp) built in. Pick one, go to town...

Or, if you already own an interface that doesn't have a Hi-Z input, a good quality DI (eg. Radial ProDi) will do fine connected to a mic input.
ronmac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 04:58 PM   #6
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,684
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooey View Post
Thanks, but I am well aware of all the amp sims, etc. (and strongly dislike the whole lot of them). My question is very specific. I want to go this precise way.
Sorry.

I guess I misunderstood what it is that you wanted.
__________________
Please check out my REAPER produced music here: http://soundcloud.com/dea-man
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 05:10 PM   #7
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default clarification?

Well thanks everybody for trying to answer. But this isn't going in the direction I want to go in. Sorry for whatever confusion factors I have contributed to the discussion.

I was trying to be very clear and specific. But I don't seem to be coming across. Perhaps I need to say more about it. I realize that I haven't posted very much here before, and that this is a newbie category. But in an effort to dissuade people from assuming that I'm a newbie in general, let me say that I am in no way in need of guidance about how to implement the idea of playing guitar through a [fill-in-the-blank-sequence-of-equipment]. I was naively assuming that because this is a Reaper forum, that my "question" would be taken in the context of being something confined to Reason itself, rather than about how to implement the idea in general. I see now in retrospect, how that's certainly not obvious.

I have lots of real amp heads, tube preamps, etc. I have been designing and building analog guitar amp circuits (tube and solid state) for decades. I'm a computer systems guy by trade, and have been writing software for a long time too. So I am not seeking anyone's opinion about choices of things like preamps, or new to the idea of software modeling (which I passionately LOATHE).

What I AM a newbie at is the idea of using a computer as a realtime effects device, specifically using VST delay, chorus and reverb. I haven't even tried it yet. I am hoping that someone here has done that. Because I have Reaper, I figure that I might as well use it to host those VST effects. It seems to me that doing that would probably work, even if I never hit <record>. But it could well prove handy to be able to use Reaper as a scratchpad recorder while I'm at it.

So in a nutshell, I want to interface one or more of my existing guitar amps/preamps to my Reaper-based DAW, and use it to host VST delay, chorus and reverb effects. I don't want to even remember that there are things in the universe like amp sims, etc.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 05:47 PM   #8
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swamp Ape View Post
There is no question anywhere in your post, so no it's not "very specific". You strongly dislike all amp sims and yet you want to do the exact thing they are made to do. If you're asking how to do this:

just do it. What else do you need to know?

Are you running out into a real amp? I can imagine adding all these effect to a dry singal and then amping them would sound very good - reverb, delay, chorus, etc, all generally need to be in a loop between the amp and cabinet to get the desired effect.
I don't want to come across as a pain, or like I want to get into an argument over semantics. What I meant was that my interest is very specific. I should have stated my "question" more specifically (which I now have, in my last post, at least I hope I have). Since I didn't say so, it makes perfect sense that nobody here would have assumed that I was hopelessly addicted to real analog guitar amps, or that I'm such a prickly SOB/curmudgeon about it.

To somebody like me, who's into gourmet boutique guitar electronics, the suggestion that I might use Guitar Rig or some other modeling thing, causes a hackle-raising knee-jerk reaction, because it makes me feel kinda like Pablo Picasso might have felt if he were told that maybe he should get a paint-by-numbers set (because after all, aren't those paint-by-number sets designed to do exactly what he's talking about?)

Your point about having the delay, chorus and reverb ahead of the amp is certainly a good one. But I'd be sending to the computer out of an effects loop output, then bringing the processed signal back to the amp chain. I'm just thinking that the computer-based effects would likely be a lot better (higher resolution and quieter) than say, stomp boxes would be.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 05:47 PM   #9
Swamp Ape
Human being with feelings
 
Swamp Ape's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Asheville NC
Posts: 1,046
Default

Sure, this works fine as long as you can avoid latency. I wouldn't use any of Reaper's built-in reverbs or choruses but there's some interesting delays at least. It ought to work like in an effects loop like pedals would - guitar->preamp or amp head->fx loop to interface into reaper and out->back into amp or cabinet, unless are you looking to record into Reaper at the final stage.

It's kind of unwieldy though - more trouble than it's worth to me after some experiments. It has the disadvantages of both actual amp recording and of simulation while canceling most of out the benefits of either. It's interesting that you have such a distate for amp simulation yet you want digital reverb, as the two are so intertwined.
Swamp Ape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 06:29 PM   #10
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swamp Ape View Post
Sure, this works fine as long as you can avoid latency. I wouldn't use any of Reaper's built-in reverbs or choruses but there's some interesting delays at least. It ought to work like in an effects loop like pedals would - guitar->preamp or amp head->fx loop to interface into reaper and out->back into amp or cabinet, unless are you looking to record into Reaper at the final stage.

It's kind of unwieldy though - more trouble than it's worth to me after some experiments. It has the disadvantages of both actual amp recording and of simulation while canceling most of out the benefits of either. It's interesting that you have such a distate for amp simulation yet you want digital reverb, as the two are so intertwined.
I don't see it that way at all. When compared to normal studio recording, it is basically exactly the same as using a guitar, stomp box delay, chorus, etc. into an amp, except for the necessity of having the computer present. But for anyone who's recording to computer, the computer would have to be there anyway. So where's the difference - what actual disadvantages of actual amp recording and of simulation? Canceling out what benefits of either? I also don't see how digital reverb is intertwined with amp simulation (other than the fact that ones and zeros are involved in both cases). If it turns out that it would be beneficial to utilize a dedicated computer just to do the effects (in addition to the recording computer), I wouldn't care about that either. I'm awash in computers here.

Do you have any reason to expect there to be appreciable latency? It seems to me that there wouldn't be, since delay-based effects seem like they'd only very lightly load the computer (at least compared to say, full-on amp simulation). But I suppose that I'd need to try it, eh? I was just hoping that somebody out there would be doing this (for the same reasons why I want to do it - high resolution and low noise), and that I could benefit by hearing about things that worked out well or poorly, before I go to the hassle of setting stuff up.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 07:40 PM   #11
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,684
Default

It seems very simple to me. Latency would not be a problem with even an older machine. (Unless you were using CPU hogging VST's.)

You could set up FX chains to your hearts desire and switch as needed, or make each track a different set up, for a different song. Just arm the track you want to use. Then you could have all your effects loaded in one "live show" project.

Have you tried it out yet? If you have all the components it wouldn't take more then a few moments to set things up for testing.

I know there are people using Reaper for live situations.
__________________
Please check out my REAPER produced music here: http://soundcloud.com/dea-man
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 07:59 PM   #12
zardoz
Human being with feelings
 
zardoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 103
Default

The short answer is, yes. Reaper works great as an FX rack, and there are no issues with latency: depending on how you set things up you can run multiple plugins with 3ms latency, about the same as you'd get from a real amp if your head was 3 feet away from the speaker. (Mind you I've only ever seen this kind of performance in Linux . . . only recommended if you enjoy headaches.) With a regular D/A box, combined with ASIO4all, you can easily get 6ms on a medium-good machine.

Frankly I barely know how to work Reaper as a DAW, for over a year I used it purely as a practice amp. The Reaper built-in FX chainer is a thing of beauty: you can make custom presets for your plugins, then save the plugin chains. Curious whether the phaser sounds better before, or after the delay? Just click'n'drag them wherever you want; this is a bigger advantage than it might seem because small differences in sound are easily forgotten even in the small amount of time it takes to put the amp on standby and manually unplug/replug/restart the amp.

The JS plugins are much quieter than typical "stompbox" plugins, BTW, very nice.
__________________
MS Windows 8 Pro 64-bit, Intel Core i3 370M @ 2.40GHz, 4.00 GB RAM, Acer Aspire 5742
zardoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 10:00 PM   #13
danfuerth
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,824
Default

I will give some input "SOME"

Since I use Reaper live with Jamvox VST plugin one thing I say is FKIN LATENCY there I said it, as harsh as it sounds what is the point of having real time when your latency sucks ass?

If you want to do this get a nice LOW Latency Firewire interface. I am talking either Edirol, RME stuff maybe Motu and Configure your PC for low latency work, that means doing some work on your behalf.

I am not trying to be an ass to you, I am just pointing out that I use Reaper every weekend and I am running the Jamvox VST plugin as a live Effects Box.
I have done many weekends shows with no AMPS Period!!!

I use an Edirol Fa101 with an MSI AMD triple Core laptop with a TI based Firewire bus card.


Like I said I have walked in with the Laptop, Edirol Fa101 and the guitar that is it and ran the show fine.

Reaper was doing all the work, controlling the lights with midi, controlling the Jamvox VST with the backing tracks with Automation for Jamvox program switching

Very simple setup, but Laptop is tweeked to hell for low latency work and the Edirol FA101 has some reg settings mods to make it even lower latency.

Laptop is running Windows 8, setup with the Windows 8 Super batch ( I posted this on the forum look for it please) and the Edirol Fa101 Registry Mods.

Overall I can tap guitar van halen tunes all night and the latency is preety good even for my ears, and I hate latency!! It is around 1.5 ms that is good for backing tracks + running the Jamvox VST plugin, I dumped all the other bloated ones and do not use them that much anymore.
danfuerth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 10:03 PM   #14
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,684
Default Low Latency, no problem whatsoever........

This is the reason i will only use firewire interfaces.
__________________
Please check out my REAPER produced music here: http://soundcloud.com/dea-man
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 09:15 AM   #15
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dea-man View Post
It seems very simple to me. Latency would not be a problem with even an older machine. (Unless you were using CPU hogging VST's.)

You could set up FX chains to your hearts desire and switch as needed, or make each track a different set up, for a different song. Just arm the track you want to use. Then you could have all your effects loaded in one "live show" project.

Have you tried it out yet? If you have all the components it wouldn't take more then a few moments to set things up for testing.

I know there are people using Reaper for live situations.
First of all, thanks much for your thoughts! I am going to try this pretty soon (right after I finish slaying some dragons, rescuing some maidens, and doing a couple of things having to do with my plan for total world domination). In my case, even though I do have (probably) all the components (even half a dozen or so dual-core and quad-core computers) just sitting around, it will take me more than just a few moments to set it up. But yeah, you're right. I should just set it up and play around with it, then after that go about finding the cosmically greatest plug-ins for the job.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 09:24 AM   #16
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zardoz View Post
The short answer is, yes. Reaper works great as an FX rack, and there are no issues with latency: depending on how you set things up you can run multiple plugins with 3ms latency, about the same as you'd get from a real amp if your head was 3 feet away from the speaker. (Mind you I've only ever seen this kind of performance in Linux . . . only recommended if you enjoy headaches.) With a regular D/A box, combined with ASIO4all, you can easily get 6ms on a medium-good machine.

Frankly I barely know how to work Reaper as a DAW, for over a year I used it purely as a practice amp. The Reaper built-in FX chainer is a thing of beauty: you can make custom presets for your plugins, then save the plugin chains. Curious whether the phaser sounds better before, or after the delay? Just click'n'drag them wherever you want; this is a bigger advantage than it might seem because small differences in sound are easily forgotten even in the small amount of time it takes to put the amp on standby and manually unplug/replug/restart the amp.

The JS plugins are much quieter than typical "stompbox" plugins, BTW, very nice.
You seem to have pretty much exactly the perspective of the person who's brain I want to pick about this (as do others here). I'm glad I stumbled in here and asked. I'll try to be less lazy, and try some things out before I ask any more of your time.

By the way, I don't use any USB- or Firewire-connected I/O. And latency is the main reason why. I'm using an RME Multiface II on the computer that I'll be using to try this idea out. I have some Linux-based boot drive images for the machine too. So if it turns out to be worthwhile to do so, I can run Linux. But I understand what you mean by headaches.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 09:34 AM   #17
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zardoz View Post
...Frankly I barely know how to work Reaper as a DAW, for over a year I used it purely as a practice amp. The Reaper built-in FX chainer is a thing of beauty: you can make custom presets for your plugins, then save the plugin chains. Curious whether the phaser sounds better before, or after the delay? Just click'n'drag them wherever you want; this is a bigger advantage than it might seem because small differences in sound are easily forgotten even in the small amount of time it takes to put the amp on standby and manually unplug/replug/restart the amp.

The JS plugins are much quieter than typical "stompbox" plugins, BTW, very nice.
I'm even less schooled in the use of Reaper. I've only been using it to digitize lots of old analog recordings (straight archiving, no effects or editing), and have barely scratched the surface of what it can do.

I just looked at the JS plugins for the first time. That looks like a fun thing to play around with.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 07:32 PM   #18
zardoz
Human being with feelings
 
zardoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 103
Default

Hey, just a couple of thoughts:

Re. effects, the beauty of recording in Windows (and Linux) is the sheer number of free plugins, many of which are much better than the paid ones. Check out KVR Forums, it's overwhelming what's out there.

Re. Linux, in your case I can see it working well. There's a project called KXStudio that has Reaper preconfigured in WINE to work with Jack, so all the tedious setup is done. VSTs work fine, and the latency is just unreal. KX is available as a distro, but most people just apply the PPAs to their fave OS (Just Ubuntu derivatives and Arch for now.)JACK is frankly a real bitch to deal with, but the routing possibilities and latency are incredible, especially when you throw a realtime kernel into the mix. Check out the discussion at LinuxMusicians forum if interested.

Re. latency, I feel it's overrated as a potential problem. My machine is only average but I often have multiple guitars going, each with multiple plugins, and my CPU doesn't come close to maxing out. If I ever run out of headroom it won't kill me to freeze a track or two. And as I say, if 2ms latency is a problem, just step 2 feet closer to your amp. When using headphones, computer latency actually beats reality, so I can't figure out why people make such a big deal about it.
__________________
MS Windows 8 Pro 64-bit, Intel Core i3 370M @ 2.40GHz, 4.00 GB RAM, Acer Aspire 5742
zardoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 08:09 PM   #19
Swamp Ape
Human being with feelings
 
Swamp Ape's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Asheville NC
Posts: 1,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooey View Post
So where's the difference - what actual disadvantages of actual amp recording and of simulation? Canceling out what benefits of either? I also don't see how digital reverb is intertwined with amp simulation (other than the fact that ones and zeros are involved in both cases). If it turns out that it would be beneficial to utilize a dedicated computer just to do the effects (in addition to the recording computer), I wouldn't care about that either. I'm awash in computers here.

Do you have any reason to expect there to be appreciable latency?
1) Speaking from my own experience, the disadvantages of "real amp" recording are mostly related to the fact that I can't make noise after certain times of the day - I tend to work late into the night often and can't have an amp blasting away. There's also space issues, and budgetary issues, etc. I would love to have a wide variety of heads and cabinets to mix and match to achieve certain sounds, but I'm broke and record out of my bedroom.

Conversely, I can use any of the amp sims I have any time of day or night without dragging out a bunch of gear, rearranging my room, waking up the neighbors, etc. The primary disadvantage of sims isn't tone or quality - rather it's the lack of physical speakers pushing air, and the fact that the unpredictability and distinct character of live amps is absent. I don't feel like your "paint by numbers" metaphor is very accurate - the wide array of available amps, effects, cabinets, impulse responses, etc makes possible tons of things I wouldn't be able to do otherwise. That said, I tend to use them more for boosting tone behind my "real amps" or late night experimentation than as a default mode of working.

2) Are you planning on using this setup in live situations, or is this purely for recording purposes?

3) Picasso was a wild experimenter with new technologies, more interested in unique effects he could achieve through burgeoning mediums like cinema and various types of printmaking than being worried about how this newfangled stuff would supplant oil paint and brushes. It might be wise to follow his example and look at advances in amp simulation as a tool you can use to expand your palette, not as some kind of affront to your sensibilities.

If you're genuinely interested in the ways that digital reverb and digital amping are related, do a bit of reading about impulse response and cabinet modeling vs room modeling. It's too much to get into in this thread.
Swamp Ape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 08:13 PM   #20
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zardoz View Post
Hey, just a couple of thoughts:

Re. effects, the beauty of recording in Windows (and Linux) is the sheer number of free plugins, many of which are much better than the paid ones. Check out KVR Forums, it's overwhelming what's out there.

Re. Linux, in your case I can see it working well. There's a project called KXStudio that has Reaper preconfigured in WINE to work with Jack, so all the tedious setup is done. VSTs work fine, and the latency is just unreal. KX is available as a distro, but most people just apply the PPAs to their fave OS (Just Ubuntu derivatives and Arch for now.)JACK is frankly a real bitch to deal with, but the routing possibilities and latency are incredible, especially when you throw a realtime kernel into the mix. Check out the discussion at LinuxMusicians forum if interested.

Re. latency, I feel it's overrated as a potential problem. My machine is only average but I often have multiple guitars going, each with multiple plugins, and my CPU doesn't come close to maxing out. If I ever run out of headroom it won't kill me to freeze a track or two. And as I say, if 2ms latency is a problem, just step 2 feet closer to your amp. When using headphones, computer latency actually beats reality, so I can't figure out why people make such a big deal about it.
Well, Windows-specific plug-ins aren't the way I want to go. Right now I AM running a couple of Windows machines - one as my main DAW, another as a secondary one, mostly for MIDI stuff (like keyboard and drum pad controllers). But I spend a lot more time with Reaper, running on a Mac Mini that I use mainly for e-mail. I find that to be the most convenient spot to ingest (mostly mono and stereo) recordings into the LAN server for archival purposes. I spent many years wrangling Windows systems. But when I quit that business, I swore them off. OS X has been my easiest-to-live-with OS since, though I'm not all that thrilled with it either. Back in my youth, I was an EE/CS major at the University of California. In that environment, I lived in a Unix world. So I've long thought that transitioning to Linux would be fairly easy. But so far, the Linux world has seemed pretty opaque to me. What I'd like would be for some Linux-savvy person to come out here (where I live in the country) and immerse me in it for awhile.

To tell you the truth, I'd be happy to wash my hands of Windows entirely, and keep Macs around mainly for running mainstream apps like Adobe stuff, do media creation work, iPad/iPhone UI design, etc. But do everything else (programming for embedded system product design, etc.) on Linux. But I'd need to get very deeply steeped in Linux to feel entirely comfortable with that. And basically, life is too short. Which brings me back to why I came here in the first place - to figure out a way to make a Reaper DAW replace stomp boxes for my rockabilly (and other) guitar antics. Delay-based effects being used in realtime like I want to do, are probably the least vulnerable things in all the software universe, in terms of having latency matter.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 09:08 PM   #21
zardoz
Human being with feelings
 
zardoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 103
Default

So we're agreed, computers suck. ; )

- I only mentioned Win-specific plugins 'cause there are so many of them.

- Life is, indeed, too short to use Linux for music production. It's funny, for the average PC user it's probably easier than Windows now, and virus-proof to (pardon the pun) boot.

- Rockabilly, really? I still don't understand what you want from plugins that you can't get already. If not the vast ocean of Windows-specific freeware, then what?

- Linux-users hate people, they're not gonna move to your place and show you around. But if I can figure out some of it, then you can certainly figure out what you need to know.

- It's my understanding that Mac runs smoother and more logically than Windows, at least for very demanding applications. Sorry to hijack the thread, but I've been having real problems getting Reaper to, you know, not crash every time I click on a totally unrelated app. Is this the kind of thing Mac does better? Personally I'd use a fucking dead dog as an OS if I could get it to work, couldn't care less. They're all great, but more to the point, they all suck.

Cheers.
__________________
MS Windows 8 Pro 64-bit, Intel Core i3 370M @ 2.40GHz, 4.00 GB RAM, Acer Aspire 5742
zardoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 10:05 AM   #22
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zardoz View Post
So we're agreed, computers suck. ; )

- I only mentioned Win-specific plugins 'cause there are so many of them.

- Life is, indeed, too short to use Linux for music production. It's funny, for the average PC user it's probably easier than Windows now, and virus-proof to (pardon the pun) boot.

- Rockabilly, really? I still don't understand what you want from plugins that you can't get already. If not the vast ocean of Windows-specific freeware, then what?

- Linux-users hate people, they're not gonna move to your place and show you around. But if I can figure out some of it, then you can certainly figure out what you need to know.

- It's my understanding that Mac runs smoother and more logically than Windows, at least for very demanding applications. Sorry to hijack the thread, but I've been having real problems getting Reaper to, you know, not crash every time I click on a totally unrelated app. Is this the kind of thing Mac does better? Personally I'd use a fucking dead dog as an OS if I could get it to work, couldn't care less. They're all great, but more to the point, they all suck.

Cheers.
It's not that I want functionality from plug-ins that surpass what I can get already. It's that I don't have any idea of what I can get already. I've never once used a plug-in of any kind. I want to start playing with the idea, particularly in the way that I'm describing here - "effects pedals" virtualized in a computer. I just don't want any cheesy stomp boxes in my signal path. I was hoping to hear from people here, what delays, reverbs and chorus effects (out of all the zillions that are available) they liked. But I can see now that asking that doesn't make much sense, because everybody is going to be into these things for different reasons. My concerns about things like conversion quantization resolution, etc. are not likely to matter to most people.

Thanks very much everybody though, for taking the time to answer me.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 12:27 PM   #23
gofer
-blänk-
 
gofer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 10,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooey View Post
I was hoping to hear from people here, what delays, reverbs and chorus effects (out of all the zillions that are available) they liked.
Ah Why didn't you ask?

I don't know how comes and why, but somehow for guitar delay/chorus/phaser/flanger and the occasional auto filter I still happen to like the old Kjaerhus Classic series plugs. Somehow they remind me of handling and sound of my old guitar FX rack.
Myself I plug directly into the audio interface and normally use Guitar Rig for amp and cabinet simulation, but still, more than occasionally, - if the guitar sound is clean to crunchy - I'll rather follow it up with one/some of those instead of using the GuitarRig inbuilt FX.

But, if I were in your shoes - just wanting to play and use the FX - I'd probably opt for a hardware FX rack instead of using a computer and all its technical overhead. Stuff to grab and cables to plug. And something solid to kick if things don't work out .
gofer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 12:46 PM   #24
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,684
Default

I have GTR 3.5 which comes with a virtual effects floorboard.

It's called GTR Stomp and it comes in 2 stomp, 4 stomp, or 6 stomp flavors, where you can load any of the 26 different stomp boxes, which they have lovingly re-created.

You don't have to use the virtual amps (though I think you'd be pleasantly surprised, if you did).

For a couple hundred buck or so, I find it a very sweet deal.

Check it out here........

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/deta...FSXZQgod6HoAww
__________________
Please check out my REAPER produced music here: http://soundcloud.com/dea-man
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 03:21 PM   #25
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swamp Ape View Post
1) 1) ...1a) I can use any of the amp sims I have any time of day or night without dragging out a bunch of gear, rearranging my room, waking up the neighbors, etc. The primary disadvantage of sims isn't tone or quality - rather it's the lack of physical speakers pushing air, and the fact that the unpredictability and distinct character of live amps is absent.

1b) I don't feel like your "paint by numbers" metaphor is very accurate - the wide array of available amps, effects, cabinets, impulse responses, etc makes possible tons of things I wouldn't be able to do otherwise. That said, I tend to use them more for boosting tone behind my "real amps" or late night experimentation than as a default mode of working.

2) Are you planning on using this setup in live situations, or is this purely for recording purposes?

3) Picasso was a wild experimenter with new technologies, more interested in unique effects he could achieve through burgeoning mediums like cinema and various types of printmaking than being worried about how this newfangled stuff would supplant oil paint and brushes. It might be wise to follow his example and look at advances in amp simulation as a tool you can use to expand your palette, not as some kind of affront to your sensibilities.

If you're genuinely interested in the ways that digital reverb and digital amping are related, do a bit of reading about impulse response and cabinet modeling vs room modeling. It's too much to get into in this thread.
1a) Having to be quiet in the middle of the night (or at any other time) isn't a concern for me. I live in the middle of nowhere, and can scream like Sasquatch trying to emulate Eddie Van Halen playing through 10 Marshall stacks cranked to "11" if I want to.

The disadvantages of sims are matters of opinion. If sims work for you, then far be it from me to try to change your mind. That would be like telling you to use coffee that's from a different country of origin. Of course it works the other way around too. And my opinion is that it is not simply a matter of being able to push air with speakers (though I agree that that's one way in which real amps are superior to sims). I also disagree with the idea that unpredictability is an advantage, at least for me it isn't.

1b) I stand by my paint-by-numbers metaphor. It may not be perfect. But it conveys an adequately accurate picture of my reaction to the suggestion that I use sims. I don't really want to engage in any more exploration of it. But to try to make my perspective clear, your points about how sims make things available to you that wouldn't be available otherwise (while being a good, valid point) doesn't have any bearing on my situation. I don't want to have any of those things made available to me. You're speaking as a guitarist. I am speaking as an equipment designer, which brings us to -

2) I'm not planning to use this personally, for playing live OR for recording. Well, I should probably say at least not mainly for doing things like that.

3) Picasso was a wild experimenter (or maybe practitioner) of sorts, but in the realm of creative expression more than in using new technologies (at least I'd say so, not being all that educated about Picasso - I should have used a different artist as an example). But again you're missing my point (perhaps because of my inadequate metaphor). You sound like you think that you're talking to a guitarist. But my inclinations and perspective have much more in common with say, Jim Marshall and Leo Fender than they do with Jimmy Page, and Eric Clapton. And I don't give a damn about whether or not sims have supplanted or will supplant point-to-point wired tube amps. What it is that I consider to be an affront to my sensibilities is your suggestion that I SHOULD embrace sims because I should see advances in amp simulation as a tool that I can use to expand my palette. Such is absolutely not the case.

No, I'm not "genuinely interested" in (pursuing) the ways in which digital reverb and digital amping are related. I've read practically everything ever written on the subjects of impulse response, and how it pertains to cabinet and room modeling, and DSP in general.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 03:23 PM   #26
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dea-man View Post
I have GTR 3.5 which comes with a virtual effects floorboard.

It's called GTR Stomp and it comes in 2 stomp, 4 stomp, or 6 stomp flavors, where you can load any of the 26 different stomp boxes, which they have lovingly re-created.

You don't have to use the virtual amps (though I think you'd be pleasantly surprised, if you did).

For a couple hundred buck or so, I find it a very sweet deal.

Check it out here........

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/deta...FSXZQgod6HoAww
Actually, that sounds like a lot of fun for only a couple of hundred bucks. I might really enjoy having it. But it wouldn't help me with doing what I'm talking about here. Thanks though. That's a very interesting point. I may get one.

Last edited by Gooey; 01-30-2013 at 03:33 PM. Reason: typo
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 03:30 PM   #27
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gofer View Post
Ah Why didn't you ask?

I don't know how comes and why, but somehow for guitar delay/chorus/phaser/flanger and the occasional auto filter I still happen to like the old Kjaerhus Classic series plugs. Somehow they remind me of handling and sound of my old guitar FX rack.
Myself I plug directly into the audio interface and normally use Guitar Rig for amp and cabinet simulation, but still, more than occasionally, - if the guitar sound is clean to crunchy - I'll rather follow it up with one/some of those instead of using the GuitarRig inbuilt FX.

But, if I were in your shoes - just wanting to play and use the FX - I'd probably opt for a hardware FX rack instead of using a computer and all its technical overhead. Stuff to grab and cables to plug. And something solid to kick if things don't work out .
Thanks for your thoughts. But I'm going to bow out of asking about things like this. Everybody seems to assume that I'm a guitar player who'd be better off doing effects a different way than hosting them in computer. But what I'm specifically interested in is doing that. It isn't for the purpose of playing guitar through them on a regular basis. I probably should have given all the background from the outset. But I wanted to avoid the trouble of explaining why I wanted to host VSTs in Reaper. I definitely should never have said anything about playing guitar through them, suggesting that that was my end objective. You can see where that got me.

Last edited by Gooey; 01-30-2013 at 03:31 PM. Reason: typo
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 04:12 PM   #28
hwhalen
Human being with feelings
 
hwhalen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 583
Default

I don't think you need to look much further than

http://www.eventide.com/AudioDivisio...20Factory.aspx

Combined with the RME Multiface II and a tube amp signal this should sound fantastic.
__________________
My Music--------------------------My Themes
Noise From My Head---------------Final Frontier---BBS
On The Links----------------------Big Icons-------M1608-ThinTcp
hwhalen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 05:13 PM   #29
gofer
-blänk-
 
gofer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 10,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooey View Post
Thanks for your thoughts. But I'm going to bow out of asking about things like this. Everybody seems to assume that I'm a guitar player who'd be better off doing effects a different way than hosting them in computer. But what I'm specifically interested in is doing that. It isn't for the purpose of playing guitar through them on a regular basis. I probably should have given all the background from the outset. But I wanted to avoid the trouble of explaining why I wanted to host VSTs in Reaper. I definitely should never have said anything about playing guitar through them, suggesting that that was my end objective. You can see where that got me.
I think you should just have put your questions more direct and specific from the get-go. What got you "there" is that you said you wanted to use FX plugins in a DAW for your guitar setup and asked people to give you any thoughts on that. That's what you got, honest thoughts of the people around about using a DAW as guitar FX rack.
Now that folks know that what you actually wanted was plugin recommendations they start giving you that, so all is cool, no?
gofer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 07:22 PM   #30
BenK-msx
Human being with feelings
 
BenK-msx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 2,593
Default try it.

satisfying your own exact requirements is the easiest thing to do in reaper, almost ever. don't rely on us chumps..

insert an fx or ten on a track - start with reapers own, reaN - and the myriad JS (that include the trad fx )as suggested before. adjust parameters, try out presets as starting points, generally noodle.

arm track for your required input, monitor arm that track.
adjust parameters...

see if you like the result!

ctr-M shows up the mixer, enlarge it vertically and the insert slots appear there. click and experiment.


after doing that perhaps future q's and our answers will better align...
BenK-msx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 07:29 PM   #31
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gofer View Post
I think you should just have put your questions more direct and specific from the get-go. What got you "there" is that you said you wanted to use FX plugins in a DAW for your guitar setup and asked people to give you any thoughts on that. That's what you got, honest thoughts of the people around about using a DAW as guitar FX rack.
Now that folks know that what you actually wanted was plugin recommendations they start giving you that, so all is cool, no?
I've been trying like hell to backpedal my way out of having put my foot into my mouth here. Henceforth, I shall try to resist the temptation to post questions like this at all. My intention was to ask something that might elicit some responses that I'd find helpful, but by posing a "question" that didn't require an undue amount of elaborate study on the parts of members gracious enough to answer me. Unfortunately, my attempts at framing the question in a simple way, left out lots of aspects that are important in regards to narrowing the scope. I find absolutely no fault on the part of anybody here. Thanks to everyone. My problem stems from the fact that this is simply something that I should play with myself, without trying to get input from others who won't have any reason similar to mine to have ever thought about it.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 07:47 PM   #32
zardoz
Human being with feelings
 
zardoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 103
Default

What a great forum; I can think of many places where a discussion like this would have degenerated into a flame-war.

All you really need from a DAW is an FX chainer, and Reaper's chainer is very, very good. It'll remember your settings, let you try different combinations easily, and doesn't try to force you to use proprietary plugins (listening, ProTools?) You also have the option of changing effects within a single track, using envelopes or by splitting the track.

IMO, this is the wrong place for a discussion about FX/engineering. I suggest GearSlutz and KVR.
__________________
MS Windows 8 Pro 64-bit, Intel Core i3 370M @ 2.40GHz, 4.00 GB RAM, Acer Aspire 5742
zardoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 09:04 PM   #33
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zardoz View Post
What a great forum; I can think of many places where a discussion like this would have degenerated into a flame-war.

All you really need from a DAW is an FX chainer, and Reaper's chainer is very, very good. It'll remember your settings, let you try different combinations easily, and doesn't try to force you to use proprietary plugins (listening, ProTools?) You also have the option of changing effects within a single track, using envelopes or by splitting the track.

IMO, this is the wrong place for a discussion about FX/engineering. I suggest GearSlutz and KVR.
Yeah, you're right about it being great in that this didn't degenerate into a flame war. If it had, it would have been largely my fault though. And I don't want to get into any conversations about FX/engineering, which was why I was trying (lamely) to ask simpler questions than what I was really wanting to ask. Again, I have no use for tracks or recording in conjunction with these effects.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 09:09 PM   #34
Gooey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenK-msx View Post
satisfying your own exact requirements is the easiest thing to do in reaper, almost ever. don't rely on us chumps..

insert an fx or ten on a track - start with reapers own, reaN - and the myriad JS (that include the trad fx )as suggested before. adjust parameters, try out presets as starting points, generally noodle.

arm track for your required input, monitor arm that track.
adjust parameters...

see if you like the result!

ctr-M shows up the mixer, enlarge it vertically and the insert slots appear there. click and experiment.

after doing that perhaps future q's and our answers will better align...

Yes, indeed. I should have just tried it in the first place. I was just skittish about it because I've never loaded a plug-in in my life. That's kind of funny, given how electronic music and recording have always been among my top interests in life, and because of the fact that I've been a career software guy.
Gooey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2013, 11:18 AM   #35
BenK-msx
Human being with feelings
 
BenK-msx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 2,593
Default

I think the phrase is 'don't fear the reaper'. :-)
BenK-msx is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.