Pursuant to recent discussions pertaining to the “good”-ness of amplifier modeling technology, technicians in the Rock Town Hall Labs have undertaken a side-by-side comparison, in order to illustrate the innate differences between “real” and modelled amplifiers.
Following is an .mp3 file with four separate “takes” of the same simple riff — in this case, taken from the chorus of Deep Purple’s “Into the Fire”, off of In Rock. The drums and bass are the same in all four takes; only the guitar tracks are different. The first two takes feature (though not necessarily in this order):
- A Line 6 “Pod” set on “Brit High Gain” — a euphemism for a modern Marshall JCM 2000, set on “Ultra Gain,” or such like, and
- An actual Marshall JCM 2000, set on “Ultra Gain.”
The second two takes feature (again, not necessarily in this order):
- A Line 6 “Pod” set on “Brit Classic” — a euphemism for a classic, late ’60s Marshall Plexi or such like
- A Marshall JCM 2000, set on “Classic Gain” — i.e., modern-day Marshall’s attempt to provide as close to a vintage Plexi tone as possible.
Both “real” amp takes were played through a Marshall JCM 900 Lead 1960B cabinet (4×12), miked close with a Shure SM57.
Here’s what the RTH Labs need from you:
This is *not* an effort to see whether RTHers can tell the difference between “real” and “fake” amps — though if you want to hazard a guess as to which is which, you can do so for extra geek credit. Rather, this is an effort to determine which of each pair of takes is preferable, which in turn may lead us to make conclusions about the overall acceptability of modelling technology.
Note also that this is not an effort to determine which of the four takes you like best, though you’re welcome to share that tidbit as well, if you like. Again: Choose your preference between the first two “high gain” takes, then the “classic gain” takes.
Thank you for your assistance in this effort.
I could better make my choice if I had pictures of each device used for the recordings. This listening exercise you want me to do is a trap! 🙂
Let me think about this later today. Nice work, RTH Labs!
OK – I’ll jump in and be brave. I listened to them in a row – just once, and my first impression is to say I liked take 1 and take 4. The only one I didn’t like was 2.
My thoughts on all this stuff is that while I might have a geek interest in the gear behind a particular recording, most folks don’t and will listen to see if they like the way it sounds and if they like the song. I’ve had this discussion with many a gear freak…I say – make music with what you have on hand and be creative. Get better gear when you can afford it. The goal is to get folks to like your music – not your gear.
I prefer the second of the high gain takes and the first of the classic gain takes. Each is a little less harsh than its alternate.
In the coke vs. pepsi challenge, I take number 1 out of the first two takes and then the 2nd out of the last two.
I preferred the second of both pairs. However, I also had to listen five or six times to tell enough of a difference to have an opinion. (Not “to tell ANY difference,” I hasten to add – to tell enough difference to venture a loosely held opinion.) Really what I think is that all four sound fine, and it depends what you want it to sound like. I think you have to go a lot higher on the neck for the amp to start making a big difference.
What do I win?
I hear few significant differences between the 2 sets of takes. I know the 4th version sounds more midrangey to my ears. They all sound adequate for playing this journeyman riff that makes me think of Aerosmith’s version of “Walking the Dog” – not to beat that dead dog but to suggest that RTH Labs has proved that a Line 6 can sound as adequate and thoroughly decent as real amps. Nevertheless, you’ve skirted all issues of morality and aesthetics, but that’s cool. I could live with any four of these takes, and the rhythm track sounds good too.
Excellent use of technology, Townsman Hrrundi! With sincere thanks…
1 and 4 sound fakey.
They all sound pretty much the same to me.
Townsman Hrrundi, can you let us know the results of your analyses? Thanks.
Well, I kept waiting for General Slocum and Art’s takes on the issue. But if they prefer not to weigh in with an opinion, I’ll share.
Noting for the record that there were some among us who refused to play by “the rules” on this task — I’m looking at YOU, Mr. Moderator, BigSteve — the “in favor of” votes (Including my own, which were for the Pod Ultra Gain and the Marshall Classic Gain) break down as follows:
Ultra Gain (Marshall): 3
Ultra Gain (Pod): 3
Classic Gain (Marshall): 3
Classic Gain (Pod): 3
The votes that flummox me are the ones in favor of the truly awful Pod “Classic Gain” sound, as opposed to the warm, organic crunch of the “real thing.” But, to each his (or her) misguided own.
For the record (and so’s you don’t have to figure it all out on your own), the “real” sounds in the Classic and Ultra pairs were #2 and #1, respectively.
It should also be geekily pointed out that this test was far from thorough — I mean, shoving an SM57 in front of a speaker cone in my kitchen doesn’t come close to the close/far dead/bright mic’ing freakout that would certainly take place in a studio. Really, you can probably make a “real” Marshall sound just as awful — or as great — as you want. Lord knows the Pod People obssessed about getting the *perfect* sound out of their box.
C’mon, Slokie, Art and others — vote and break the tie!
I should say, in the interest of clarity:
Take 1: POD
Take 2: Marshall
Take 3: Marshall
Take 4: POD
I declare myself the winner!
Awesome. Thanks for the work involved in setting up this experiment. I think the real result is that they sound close enough that I, for one, reckon it’s worth saving the the $800 (based on a quick eBay comparison).
So tell me RTH: Over the weekend, I, at age 42, bought my first electric guitar. (A pawnshop Epiphone Les Paul Jr.) My personal circumstances dictate that roughly 98% of my playing will be in headphones-only situations. So I’m interested in this Pod thingy. What exactly is it called, and what should I expect to pay? They’re showing up on eBay for $100-$150; should I look for cheaper?
Or is there something else that’s better?
It’s called a Line 6 Pod, and used ones go for about $100 on eBay. You might also try craigslist.org.
This is the version I used for the test:
http://cgi.ebay.com/LINE-6-POD-VERSION-2-0-L-K_W0QQitemZ280113163652QQihZ018QQcategoryZ41419QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
BTW, if you want to do the amp modelling gadget thing, for my money, the Pod is the way to go.
Did anyone else guess right?
Oh yeah, me, the guy with a Squire strat, cheapy Fender amp and a VORG effects gizmo.
hrrundivbakshi – thanks for the test. As you say – there are many variables involved getting sounds onto tape (or hard drives as it were…)
Rick – the Pod gets good marks as mentioned but I would really suggest you take your headphones and your guitar to a store and try the Vox Valvetronix amps. The 15 Watt version is what I have and has a headphone out…
hi gang….i’ve been in the desert, doing peyote, finishing my dissertation.
i’ve zoomed right to the bottom of the page, so as to not be influenced by any comments.
being a recording / sound junkie, it’s going to be hard for me to comment without questioning alot of things…but i’ll do my best to maintain restraint.
only one listen:
i know what dean means when he says he doesn’t like the 2d one. it’s too cock rocky and heavy. i don’t like it either. but that’s the one that sounds best for this riff. so i’d say that’s the one that’s preferable. take 1 sounds awkward to me.
and i didn’t like takes 3 or 4 all that much for this riff. but i liked take 3 better than 4. this time, it was but for a different reason: it changed what that riff meant to me. it almost became like pink panther cartoon soundtrack music.
my choices, then: take 2 and take 3.
in a geek fit, i’m also guessing those are the “real” amps, but since i’m a fender twin guy, not a marshall guy, i’m probably wrong wrong wrong.
cool idea fritz! it was fun, too!
Can I comment on the drums 🙂
I prefer takes 2 and 3. I like take 2 becuase you can hear the overtones slightly better on the last note and it just sounds “realer”
3 and 4 are closer sounding to me but there is just *something* about 3 that I like better.
Like Saturnismine, I’m a fender man much more so than a Marshall man.