PC amp sims that sounds as good as axe fx and kemper?

[bulevardi]

You want a great guitar amp?
Use Vandal:
https://www.kvraudio.com/product/van...r_amp_by_magix

It's a very pro sounding amp, I loved using it and have some presets to share if you want.
I think Sascha Evermeier helped developing this beauty.
Anyway, worked well under Windows, but since I changed to Linux I can't fire it up anymore.

So if you're interested (it's not cheap), I can always sell you the license for a reduced price.

[jinotsuh]

IMO Vandal is crap, I've owned it for years, never use it, it sounds foul, I'd even use Thermionik before using Vandal, well I'd pretty much use anything before Vandal, perhaps not Amplion Pro though

[mschnell]

Originally Posted by bulevardi

worked well under Windows, but since I changed to Linux I can't fire it up anymore.

In theory, Reaper for Linux can use Windows plugins. Did you discuss this in the Linux subforum over here ?

-Michael

[hwhalen]

I'm curious as to what people think about the Quilter 101 mini head...it's not an amp sim and it's not a kemper or an amp fx, but it could be considered...

[EvilDragon]

Originally Posted by jinotsuh

IMO Vandal is crap, I've owned it for years, never use it, it sounds foul, I'd even use Thermionik before using Vandal, well I'd pretty much use anything before Vandal, perhaps not Amplion Pro though

How do you mean you'd "even use Thermionik before anything else"? Thermionik is the best of the lot, really. It's pretty much the only thing I use nowadays. Shane nailed it.

[bulevardi]

Originally Posted by mschnell

In theory, Reaper for Linux can use Windows plugins. Did you discuss this in the Linux subforum over here ?

-Michael

Yes, I installed the VST under Linux and tried to run via Wine or PlayOnLinux but nothing worked.

[pepe44]

Incredible for me is looking at this large amount of words an none mean great value. ( Some do) Everyone is trying to take his point and forgetting that music is music no matter how is made and with what tools is made. everyone loves their Amp sims, some love their amps....and so on so on..you´re just measuring penis size, that´s all.


Guys, in the end what it counts is a great song...no matter how it was created.

[bulevardi]

Originally Posted by pepe44

Guys, in the end what it counts is a great song...no matter how it was created.

No matter how you play the guitar,... do it safe !

[enroe]

Originally Posted by pepe44

Incredible for me is looking at this large amount of words an none mean great value. ( Some do) Everyone is trying to take his point and forgetting that music is music no matter how is made and with what tools is made. everyone loves their Amp sims, some love their amps....and so on so on..you´re just measuring penis size, that´s all.


Guys, in the end what it counts is a great song...no matter how it was created.

Absolutely!

That said - there are many many amp-sims which sound
extremely good. Also Kemper sounds extremely good.
What anybody chooses as "his" or "her" amp sim is
purely a matter of taste.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by pepe44

Guys, in the end what it counts is a great song...no matter how it was created.

I agree sort of but in the "beginning" what counts is a great song and everything after that is useless without it. If we have the great song, what comes after and how we present it does matter but only to a point. IOW, threads like this are usually far beyond that point and great songs with great arrangements are much easier to record, mix and sound good - even with non-perfect guitar tones.

[Stews]

You can get enjoyment from a great song with a portable cassette recording of a guy singing.

A great song isn't the only enjoyable aspect of music though, if it was then there would be no point using any plugins ever or buying anything but the cheapest mic.

I get a lot of pleasure from hearing the lovely subtleties of great timbre and that's largely separate to the song.

[xpander]

Originally Posted by Stews

I get a lot of pleasure from hearing the lovely subtleties of great timbre and that's largely separate to the song.

Same for me. Actually about 99.9 % of my guitar playing never even ends to recorded media. I play guitar mostly just for fun and thus want to enjoy it as good as I can. But I don't need a computer or hw sims for that, so any talk about those is moot for me especially when the focus of discussion is about what people can or cannot hear in recordings.

Funny thing is that if I'd have to prove how much "better" guitar sound I get from my rig, I'd have to record it and once there to be compared, it would be just a matter of preferences. But only I know what was the difference with the touch and feel, if nothing else...I guess that's a long winded way of saying that while the sounds might be all but the same, it didn't feel like it when playing.

[pepe44]

Originally Posted by Stews

You can get enjoyment from a great song with a portable cassette recording of a guy singing.

A great song isn't the only enjoyable aspect of music though, if it was then there would be no point using any plugins ever or buying anything but the cheapest mic.

I get a lot of pleasure from hearing the lovely subtleties of great timbre and that's largely separate to the song.

IF that is what makes you happy, great! For some just a cassete witha guy singing a GREAT song is enough

[Stews]

Originally Posted by xpander

Same for me. Actually about 99.9 % of my guitar playing never even ends to recorded media. I play guitar mostly just for fun and thus want to enjoy it as good as I can. But I don't need a computer or hw sims for that, so any talk about those is moot for me especially when the focus of discussion is about what people can or cannot hear in recordings.

Funny thing is that if I'd have to prove how much "better" guitar sound I get from my rig, I'd have to record it and once there to be compared, it would be just a matter of preferences. But only I know what was the difference with the touch and feel, if nothing else...I guess that's a long winded way of saying that while the sounds might be all but the same, it didn't feel like it when playing.

I totally get you - like comparing some aftermarket pickups - listening to demo clips online really gives no idea to how they will sound when you play it yourself.

[Stews]

Originally Posted by pepe44

IF that is what makes you happy, great! For some just a cassete witha guy singing a GREAT song is enough

It's not that I like the subtle timbres instead of great songs - they're both things I get a lot of enjoyment from in music.

I've heard lo-fi recordings of great songs that give me pleasure but also get pleasure from hearing all the harmonics interact on a great guitar tone.

Often the two come together like Pink Floyd for my taste.

Point is - even when you're recording a great song, there's very much point in agonising over the subtleties of the guitar tone and those kind of details because it will increase the enjoyment for some (a lot of?) people beyond what the song itself is already providing.

[jinotsuh]

Originally Posted by EvilDragon

How do you mean you'd "even use Thermionik before anything else"? Thermionik is the best of the lot, really. It's pretty much the only thing I use nowadays. Shane nailed it.

Just because it's pretty much the only thing 'you'd' use, and you think it is the best, doesn't mean it is, or are you the first and final word in all things Amp Sim for people everywhere?.

I personally think it sounds like crap for the most part(Yes I actually own the whole package)it certainly looks like crap (no biggie I guess, but true none the less) and is quite cumbersome to use having umpteen different individual vst's/.dll's to choose between as apposed to everything in one nice neat package with easy access. I pretty much have all the Amp Sims in the software realm, I never really use Thermionik, every now and then I will fire it up, but quickly remember why I don't really bother.

As to Shane 'nailing it' I'm guessing only people who agree with you would ever be able to 'Nail it'? lol

I agree with your praise for Mercurial products, I have been with them from the start, very good indeed, but as far as Thermionik goes . . . Sorry dude . . . but thanks for playing.

[brainwreck]

Originally Posted by Stews

It's not that I like the subtle timbres instead of great songs - they're both things I get a lot of enjoyment from in music.

I've heard lo-fi recordings of great songs that give me pleasure but also get pleasure from hearing all the harmonics interact on a great guitar tone.

Often the two come together like Pink Floyd for my taste.

Point is - even when you're recording a great song, there's very much point in agonising over the subtleties of the guitar tone and those kind of details because it will increase the enjoyment for some (a lot of?) people beyond what the song itself is already providing.

I just spent near the whole day eq'ing my monitors (by ear), for pleasure listening. When I listen to them as is, I feel nothing from the music coming out. When I got the eq dialed in, carving away wide chunks centered around 500 hz and 6k hz, every track I play sounds, fat, harmonic, more dimensional, just gorgeous, and I feel the music. Sound matters. Music is about manipulating sound. Anyone saying that sound doesn't matter in music is a dope.

[Stews]

Originally Posted by brainwreck

I just spent near the whole day eq'ing my monitors (by ear), for pleasure listening. When I listen to them as is, I feel nothing from the music coming out. When I got the eq dialed in, carving away wide chunks centered around 500 hz and 6k hz, every track I play sounds, fat, harmonic, more dimensional, just gorgeous, and I feel the music. Sound matters. Music is about manipulating sound. Anyone saying that sound doesn't matter in music is a dope.

Interesting to see people at both extremes.

For me it depends on the music how much more I'll enjoy it with good sound quality.

Some music like the Beatles or Neil young, I'd enjoy almost as much from a cheap radio as a good sound system. Others, govt mule as an example off the top of my head, I'd still enjoy on the cheap radio but on the good system I'd get a lot more out of the timbre of the sounds.

I'd imagine everyone cares about timbre to some degree, even a casual radio listener would likely prefer to hear the music played well on a guitar than if every instrument was played on an 80s kids Casio keyboard.

[Nathannn]

The answer to this question can only be made subjectively by people who own or use both a Kemper Or Axe Fx.

There are a lot of great recommendations of amp sims that sound like another amp but none that sound like a Kemper or Axe FX.


That said, the closest thing that I can think of to axe fx or kemper in software is bias amp and line 6 helix. I have no idea if they sound like a kemper or axe effects because I have never used either.

Now for recommendations on amp sims that sound like the amp:

I feel Mercuriall Spark is fantastic.
Mecuriall spark imo is the equivlent of U-he's Diva when it comes to an emulation of a real world piece of gear.

Dont just download the software and use the presets. It will be rare that a preset is going to work for any recording. Use the mic emulation how you would in the real world.

I place one mic on the cone and another about 6' away from the cone. This ends up sounding like a real mono amp recording. place the amp in a room reverb that is used on every track to make it sound like all the instruments are in the same room and there you go... sounds great.

[brainwreck]

Originally Posted by Stews

For me it depends on the music how much more I'll enjoy it with good sound quality.

I think pleaure in sound isn't really so much about 'quality' per say, as it is about 'qualities'. I can listen to plenty of lo-fi and get alot of pleasure from the sound, just the same as a hifi recording, but it really does depend on the 'qualities' of the sound in question. If the sound is undynamic, icepicky, harsh, hashy, as some examples, I don't want to hear it. I don't enjoy my ears ringing, whatever the frequency.

Any way, some people in these conversations seem to always want to lump together audio with composition/performance, as if they are the same thing. I wonder why those people aren't all playing kazoos into the micrphones of their phones, if sound doesn't doesn't matter and is the same thing as composition/performance. Those people are full of shit. That's why.

[Nathannn]

Originally Posted by brainwreck

If the sound is undynamic, icepicky, harsh, hashy, as some examples, I don't want to hear it. I don't enjoy my ears ringing, whatever the frequency.

.

The video or the Bassman that you posted sounded like the mic was clipping and there was too much treble. What did you hear in there that you enjoyed?
When I overlook the clipping and the treble I could hear a sound that was very familiar. It sounded like a guy playing a bassman in a room and it sounded great. But it did not sound like a guy playing with a band in a studio mic'ed up and mixed.

I feel you can get the same sound with something like Mecuriall Spark using the bassman model going through flat studio monitors and then recording that sound with a phone.

Im just wondering What do you think of this sound https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQk2a4wc0UQ

I think the sound sounds fucking great! but the quality is not polished studio quality. You can get this sound within the box it is totally possible if you know what you are doing but is it the sound that fits a recording?

[pipelineaudio]

I didnt like the thermionik stuff either, for me to play personally, but I see how perfectly easily it fits in a modern kind of pushed midrange metal mix. Right out of the box it works perfectly for that

[Stews]

Originally Posted by Nathannn

Im just wondering What do you think of this sound

I think the sound sounds fucking great! but the quality is not polished studio quality. You can get this sound within the box it is totally possible if you know what you are doing but is it the sound that fits a recording?

I'm quite surprised that it sounds really good, wasn't expecting it!

Can't imagine it would fit in a recording really but in its own right it sounds amazing even miles away on a phone mic.

[Steviebone]

I wasn't familiar with kemper until I read this thread. I searched and couldn't find a VST and then I realized you are talking about a $2,200 piece of modeling hardware. For that kind of $$ it should give me a hand job while I play. I'm sure it sounds great. Maybe I need to start a gofundme page? lol I don't understand why we are comparing hardware with software. I'm confused. :~

[pipelineaudio]

Because its also software. There is no technical reason it should be any better than any other software

In practice though, the idea that it has a nearly uncrackable dongle means that a business director won't bust their balls for developing it. Its often hard to justify doing software otherwise

[Lokasenna]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

I wonder if they are using something like Electron, which is damn cool outside of using it for Audio. That whole "bring your web app skills to native cross-plat desktop apps" is the new sexy hotness.

Electron is awful, awful, awful. It runs a full browser instance for one app, so even a simple chat app like Slack is painfully slow and takes hundreds of MB of memory.

Progressive web apps (read: Electron minus the browser) seem like the better way to go. You're basically just downloading a website and then letting your Chrome or whatever run it.

[Lokasenna]

Originally Posted by Steviebone

I wasn't familiar with kemper until I read this thread. I searched and couldn't find a VST and then I realized you are talking about a $2,200 piece of modeling hardware. For that kind of $$ it should give me a hand job while I play. I'm sure it sounds great. Maybe I need to start a gofundme page? lol I don't understand why we are comparing hardware with software. I'm confused. :~

The big draw for Kemper is "copy any tone anywhere anytime", which nobody else had in 2012 and they've only caught up in the last year or two, AFAIK. IMO they've dropped the ball on feature updates and the user base is starting to get pretty cranky, but the sound and ease of use are well worth the $1500 I paid for a used one.

One big advantage of hardware units over plugins - you don't ever need to care about latency and buffer sizes. Even better, I can monitor with whatever ungodly stereo widening and reverb I want to sound like John Sykes but still record just a dry, mono track.

[Jack Ruston]

Agreed. There’s an advantage to simply getting a sound, hitting record and that’s that. The ability to change things later is so rarely of true benefit, and comes with a cost attached. Aside from the decent result, I find that to be a favourite aspect of the Kemper, and indeed the reason why I use relatively ‘ancient’ technology in the form of hardware sound modules like the Roland Integra.

J

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by Lokasenna

Slack is painfully slow and takes hundreds of MB of memory.

And VSCode that you enjoy is Electron. It think as an audio app, that would be generally terrible but other stuff it will and does work well for. I'm got quite getting the "downloading a website" part other than the semantics, meaning it's all local code running in chromium. I've already written some POC code with it and will likely build a sizeable MV+ LOB app with it in the next couple of months.

It might also be cool for some reaper related config app (outside of reaper) since it would run on linux/win/mac.

[Stews]

Originally Posted by Steviebone

I wasn't familiar with kemper until I read this thread. I searched and couldn't find a VST and then I realized you are talking about a $2,200 piece of modeling hardware. For that kind of $$ it should give me a hand job while I play. I'm sure it sounds great. Maybe I need to start a gofundme page? lol I don't understand why we are comparing hardware with software. I'm confused. :~

It's the same price as an amp and does the same thing but with infinitely variable sound.

[Lokasenna]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

And VSCode that you enjoy is Electron. It think as an audio app, that would be generally terrible but other stuff it will and does work well for.

Code is the only Electron app I've seen that wasn't cripplingly slow to use - I tried Atom earlier, and both the Github desktop app and Git Kraken. All of them were clunky. The consensus from what I can tell is that the Code team are just trying a lot harder to avoid that.

For example, Slack takes several seconds to let me type when I switch to it, and has to think for a good second before letting me edit a message I just typed.

I'm got quite getting the "downloading a website" part other than the semantics, meaning it's all local code running in chromium. I've already written some POC code with it and will likely build a sizeable MV+ LOB app with it in the next couple of months.

As I understand it, Electron takes your web app, bundles it into a dedicated browser shell, and installs that. PWAs (again, I think?) just bundle the web app and let your existing browser run it rather than opening an entire browser for that one thing. Since it's local you get offline capability, faster speeds, etc.

It might also be cool for some reaper related config app (outside of reaper) since it would run on linux/win/mac.

Agreed. If PWAs and/or WebAssembly take off the way folks are expecting, they'll essentially give you a way to write cross-platform apps in JS that are almost as fast as native stuff.

[Steviebone]

Originally Posted by Jack Ruston

The ability to change things later is so rarely of true benefit, and comes with a cost attached. J

I respectfully disagree with that sentiment. Capturing a performance that can be reamped and remxed as well as recalled accurately is EVERYTHING in recording or writing. Not as much for performance/gigging. And it's cheaper. The COST attached here is the $2000 price tag for what is essentially software in a box as a form of copy protection. Me thinks you are justifying your $$ purchase (nothing wrong with that).

Although theoretically latency is definitely improved, as a practical matter, for recording I have NOT found this to be an issue if your system is setup properly. Even if I had a Kemper I would likely still record dry signal and reamp it when recording. Why lock yourself in to anything?

As for Positive Grid I agree that the coding is lazy and wonky. But I don't hear that in what is recorded. And in the end it's about the sound not the interface. There are other plugs that take the opposite approach in that their interface is almost too simple, unattractive and/or un-intuitive. But again, if they get the sound you can use who cares?

At the end of the day, use whatever. My choice isn't better, it's just better for me. But using plugs IS more creative and efficient for recording IMO for those reasons - reamp, remix and recall.

[Steviebone]

I wasn't familiar with kemper until I read this thread. I searched and couldn't find a VST and then I realized you are talking about a $2,200 piece of modeling hardware. For that kind of $$ it should give me a hand job while I play. I'm sure it sounds great. Maybe I need to start a gofundme page? lol I don't understand why we are comparing hardware with software. I'm confused. :~

Originally Posted by Stews

It's the same price as an amp and does the same thing but with infinitely variable sound.

I was being sarcastic.

[Steviebone]

Originally Posted by Lokasenna

Agreed. If PWAs and/or WebAssembly take off the way folks are expecting, they'll essentially give you a way to write cross-platform apps in JS that are almost as fast as native stuff.

I think you just hit the nail on the head - easy cross platform development. To developers, being able to write a single set of code across platforms means lower development and maintenance costs overall.

[AudioWonderland]

Originally Posted by EvilDragon

I wish Mike would get on with v2.9 already... No matter, though, I still find Thermionik overall better (although not by a lot) than S-Gear.

I just picked up Thermionik myself. What speaker sims are working for you? I do more "classic hard rock" and I am not having a lot of luck getting a good cab match. Mostly working with the Psycho3, Damage 120 and the Friedman amp. The Ownhammer V30 freebie is the best match so far.

As far as the discussion, I am a purist inclined type and like to use amps where I can. I use sims when I need to track quietly which is most of the time these days and then re-amp the tracks. It really maximizes my time to work.

I also use those Mooer Preamp pedals into the power amp in on my Legacy 3 and mic the cab. This works really well. I get the flavor of the amp from the pre with real tubes/speakers moving air and mics capturing it all without needing thousands of dollars in amps in storage to accomplish it

As much of a purist as I can be, I have reached the point where time and getting things done is a bigger challenge/enemy than any real/perceived benefits of tracking strictly old school

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by Lokasenna

As I understand it, Electron takes your web app, bundles it into a dedicated browser shell, and installs that. PWAs (again, I think?) just bundle the web app and let your existing browser run it rather than opening an entire browser for that one thing. Since it's local you get offline capability, faster speeds, etc.

I think part of the attraction is taking those years of web app/javascript experience (that so many have) and allowing it to be used in a desktop environment. I've done a good bit of both but anytime I've wanted HTML type styling/convenience on the desktop, I've always had to use some type of "browser control" and getting through the DOM and back is just terrible and restricting. XAML is OK in .NET but for fluid text layouts it becomes a PIA too when using something like Flow Documents. Ugh.

I'm testing some now, but I'm not 100% settled on using Electron - I am attracted to the ease of cross-platform and GUI fidelity... I don't like all the tedious wiring of events etc. between the main process and renderers and some other stuff so we'll see how long before I keep it, bail, or just use C# or similar like I have been the last 10 years.

Anyway when I saw your Bias/HTML comment I was like "no they didn't"

[Lokasenna]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

I think part of the attraction is taking those years of web app/javascript experience (that so many have) and allowing it to be used in a desktop environment. I've done a good bit of both but anytime I've wanted HTML type styling/convenience on the desktop, I've always had to use some type of "browser control" and getting through the DOM and back is just terrible and restricting. XAML is OK in .NET but for fluid text layouts it becomes a PIA too when using something like Flow Documents. Ugh.

I'm testing some now, but I'm not 100% settled on using Electron - I am attracted to the ease of cross-platform and GUI fidelity... I don't like all the tedious wiring of events etc. between the main process and renderers and some other stuff so we'll see how long before I keep it, bail, or just use C# or similar like I have been the last 10 years.

Anyway when I saw your Bias/HTML comment I was like "no they didn't"

That was Evildragon, but yes, yes they did.

HTML layouts are way easier now than they used to be, especially with CSS Grid being supported pretty much everywhere. I remember taking a course in the late '90s and all we had were tables, frames, and inline styles.

[bulevardi]

Originally Posted by Lokasenna

HTML layouts are way easier now than they used to be, especially with CSS Grid being supported pretty much everywhere. I remember taking a course in the late '90s and all we had were tables, frames, and inline styles.

Those were the days... I grew up making webpages the wrong way too.
I still love those old school stuff... the flexible web 2.0 style is not my cup of tea.

+ animated gif's showing the page is under construction. How awesome were these !!

Getting nostalgic too? We're getting old

[karbomusic]

That was Evildragon, but yes, yes they did.

OMG, I was half kidding. I suppose it is remotely possible if they code all the native C++ modules for Node.

Originally Posted by Lokasenna

I remember taking a course in the late '90s and all we had were tables, frames, and inline styles.

Tell me about it. I coded all CSS and JavaScript by hand back in the late 90s/early 2000s - Now, pull down a basic MVC scaffolding + jQuery, Angular et al (insert favorite), bootstrap CSS of choice and it's thousands of files before you write your first line of code.

I do see value there, and have always hated the disparity between browser and desktop; I do use the newer technologies for fun and profit, but when I'm doing something small, I still hand roll it.

[bulevardi]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

OMG, I was half kidding. I suppose it is remotely possible if they code all the native C++ modules for Node.

Tell me about it. I coded all CSS and JavaScript by hand back in the late 90s/early 2000s - Now, pull down a basic MVC scaffolding + jQuery, Angular et al (insert favorite), bootstrap CSS of choice and it's thousands of files before you write your first line of code.

I do see value there, and have always hated the disparity between browser and desktop; I do use the newer technologies for fun and profit, but when I'm doing something small, I still hand roll it.

Same here. I still code the stuff by hand because I want to have full knowledge about what I'm actually doing, and full control.
But never did a large project.
I also quit that hobby years ago after having a conehead from it.

Anyway, didn't like the fact that you made something looking good in browser X, and when testing in browser Y didn't work out, even if you believed you were coding in the standards.


Other hobbies now, guitar and photography ^^