What do we do when we want to sound raw and roaring but can't afford to play at high levels? Modeling solutions and small amplifiers may be the way to go. Since the arrival, or rather the evolution, of home recording systems, guitarists who have set up their gear in spaces where not much noise should be generated have run into new needs.
We all know that the most desirable amp sound for a guitarist is the warm, roaring one that good tubes produce. In many cases we've already chosen the amp that pleases us perfectly, but it's hard to play it at home to practice or record, because it will most likely make quite a “racket.” Even with amps that aren't very big, we find it impossible to play at certain hours or to get certain sounds because it's hard to play at the volume we need.
Given these circumstances, we can choose between:
a) Setting up our gear only in the rehearsal room
b) Soundproofing the room or space
c) Looking for decent options that don't require so much volume to get a good sound.
Using the Rehearsal Room
The first option is good considering we can record and play there as we please. The less attractive part is that we'll always have to travel to that place, which can kill our inspiration at a given moment. Being able to play at any time, right when you get out of bed or at any hour of the night, has its charm.
Soundproofing a Space
The second seems the most suitable since it eliminates the problems of the first option, the commute, and lets us play with whatever gear (amps, processors, speakers, etc.) we want, whenever we want. The less attractive part is the price: what it can cost to set that up (professionally, effectively, and with truly effective isolation), and the loss of space that such isolation may entail.
Alternatives to the Guitar Amp
Well, that leaves the third alternative. It's surely not the most professional or the most perfect in terms of sound, although the options various manufacturers keep bringing to market are increasingly complete and satisfying. There are plenty of cases where guitar processors are used even on professional recordings. Modeling is already the order of the day.
Amps, Modelers, Software
Small Amplifiers
What better way than not having to simulate and actually using an amp? One that doesn't require big doses of volume. There's a line of small, very low-wattage amps designed precisely for this purpose. If we go this route, we have to choose carefully what we buy, since it must meet two requirements: sound the way we really like, and be able to produce warm, genuine tones without requiring big doses of volume.
As you might guess, if we play through an amp we'll need a decent mic to capture the speaker's sound and record whatever guitar vibe the unit puts out. This option would bring us closer to conventional sounds and traditional recording techniques. Mic'ing the amp and therefore capturing the sound of a real amplified guitar. Bear in mind that, depending on the amp selected, we will or won't achieve our goal. A low-end small solid-state amp is very likely to deliver much less satisfying tones than a good high-end modeler.
You can suggest in the ISP forum any options in this type of amp (small tube amps) that you know of and that sound decent.
Software Modeling
The newest option. Since many home recording systems are computer-based, this route seems “convenient.” I initially ruled out this possibility because the quality they offered was limited. As time goes by and manufacturers and designers rack their brains, things are getting better.
From plug-ins that slot easily into our sequencer software and deliver warmer sounds than going direct, to more complex software developments that give us abundant options.
We could mention Guitar Rig in this section, for example. With the arrival of version 2 of this software, guitarists were given a tool that includes, in its physical pedalboard, a higher-quality audio card and a MIDI interface.
With the software we can edit and set up different kinds of sounds, with emulations of eight amplifier sections, fifteen guitar cabinets, six bass cabinets, four rotary speakers, nine types of mic, or thirty-five effects.
This alternative combines the editing flexibility of the computer with physical hardware (in pedalboard format) that invites us to enjoy a more “real” way of working. On the other hand, the cost, as usually happens with software versus hardware options, is really lower than if we bought all the physical artillery.
There are other options along these lines, such as the Waves GTR 2.0 “guitar tool rack.” With ten types of virtual amplification, 23 effects, and a physical interface endorsed by the Paul Reed Smith brand. This tool is also supported on TDM systems (Pro Tools TDM 6.7), RTAS & AudioSuite (Pro Tools LE 6.9), VST (Cubase and Nuendo), and Logic Audio for Apple.
Another development in this direction is AmpliTube 2 with its A.Stomp IO USB hardware controller. The advance of this version is the fusion or integration of hardware (pedalboard) with software. It tries to deliver a traditional working feel, benefiting from the computer's editing capability without losing the real “touch” of our everyday work.
Besides the cost reduction compared with traditional devices, we have an enormous number of presets and possibilities. Now all that's left is to weigh up what sounds better and consider what's better: having 4 good effects or 400 bad ones. However, since I haven't physically tried this gadget, I can't make any claims about it. Let's wait for the test benches.
Modeling via Rack Units, Pedals, or Processors
This is the best-known system and one whose good performance I can vouch for. In some cases more realism and warmth have been achieved than in others, but I find it a very valid option.
There's a good share of guitarists who are reluctant to use modelers, though fewer and fewer. The truth is that there are various units that deliver powerful results. We've already talked about this subject in other issues. We've even tested units like Rocktron's Voodoo Valve, modelers from Vox, Line 6, Zoom, Oberheim, and Digitech, or Yamaha's Magic Stomp. I also had the chance to put the BOSS GT-Pro through its paces at Comusica, on Roland's stand, with very appealing and realistic results. I know that more reviews of this type of product will arrive for this issue and you'll see them published next, such as M-Audio's option, its Black Box.
The fundamental advantages of this type of device are:
1. Versatility. You can give your guitar plenty of sounds through different amp and cabinet models, plus the appropriate effects that usually come built into this type of unit. It's handy to have very different sounds (by era, style, amp brand, etc.) when you need some flexibility in your studio, or simply when you want a wide range of timbres and “colors.”
2. Compact format. It may sound silly, but being able to carry all those tools, sounds, amp types, and effects in a compact format that takes up little space and barely weighs anything is a real plus.
3. Recording direct. The sound (with limited resources) is easier to control. We don't need a microphone (some units even offer different simulated mics), so we'll have less noise and an easier recording.
4. Playing quietly. Yes, yes, I know that the basic essence of a very high percentage of guitarists (especially when starting out) is playing with a huge amp bigger than the player himself, with the sound from its eight speakers blowing back the player's mane. As a rock-and-roll, guitar-hero image, that idea is legendary. In practice, though, when you do exercises, when you try to compose, when you feel like playing or calmly working through ideas, when you want to record at any hour, when you don't want to or can't disturb anyone...
It seems clear that the perfect place for the amp is the rehearsal room or the gigs. So being able to play in all those circumstances I mentioned a few lines ago without disturbing anyone, and with a certain warmth of sound, is an advantage very much worth considering if there are devices that allow it.
In Defense of the Amp
After all this talk about processing, this article would lack realism if it didn't conclude with a defense of the tube amp. It's obvious that nothing sounds like a good amp and that, at least to date, nobody has managed to improve on the warmth and power (thickness, force) of this kind of amplification system. Clearly I'm no detractor of tubes or of the amp. It's without a doubt my preferred system.
On many occasions I've been forced to postpone a practice session or a recording because my amp made too much noise in the place where I wanted to do it. For these reasons, and without losing my loyalty to amplification in those places where I can use it, I feel an affinity for modeling and processors, ever since they solved some “tough spots” for me that I couldn't solve any other way.
