Guitar plugins thoughts

I don’t own or tried Tonex or NDSP and I don’t claim to be an expert (other than have good ears ;)) but there are many videos of trusted names with a deeper understanding than mine who claim NAM is the most accurate of them all. As of recently, it seems anti aliasing has been “solved” on the NAM platform by a new method of creating profiles. At least that is the claim and Steve Atkinson didn’t disagree.

Apparently that isn’t the case. Here is a quote from neutron studios website:
“Quantum Speaker represents the natural evolution of speaker and microphone simulation, advancing beyond the limitations of Impulse Responses (IRs) by capturing the full dynamic behaviour of real speakers and microphones. Rather than relying on static snapshots as an IR does, or augmenting them with algorithmic estimates, Quantum Speaker uses advanced non-linear profiling to authentically capture all the complex tonal behaviour, dynamics, and breakup that occurs across all volume levels, giving you a true-to-source sound that is staggeringly accurate to reality.”

I can tell you I was the biggest skeptic of them all! I really didn’t want to like it more b/c I took forever selecting those IR’s, but I couldn’t deny the obvious improvement in my sound. I now have redone all my rackspaces, swapping all my IR’s with quantum speaker. To your point, there are a lot of people who can’t tell the difference. To me its huge!

In the MIKKO review at 2:45 he claimed that positioning the mic anywhere around the speaker or put multiple mics is not something you can do in any other plugin. I saw very similar features in literally almost in every plugin that does amp / cab sim.

Here’s my real life anecdote about chasing tone and being irritated by things…

I grew up playing a real piano in my parents’ house when I was a kid. I have that piano in my house now (50 years later). That was the piano I knew, and sitting at that keyboard, in that small carpeted living room, with a sofa and chairs nearby, is what a “real” piano sounded like.

Nothing electronic from the 80’s to the early 2000’s in my experience was even close. I’m not sure exactly when things started getting “good” but I think most people would agree that Pianoteq today (and certainly a number of deep sampled pianos earlier) are “good enough.”

But there was one thing that drove me nuts for years. Across almost all my sampled pianos, and even in many of Pianoteq’s models today, I hear this “ringing” “artifact” that drives me nuts. To my ears it is very present in the Pianoteq Steinway models. In a mix I can’t hear it. Playing solo, especially with headphones, I can’t stand it. I can eq it out, but I don’t want to have to, and doing so cuts out a lot more.

Maybe three years ago, give or take, I sat down at a friend’s Steinway in his house. Holy crap. That same “ringing artifact” is there. I probably only noticed it because it’s the thing that drove me nuts for years. It’s burned into my brain.

Nobody else I mention it to hears it. Maybe it’s my ears. My Kawaii doesn’t do it. Many of the Pianoteq models don’t do it. But it’s really strong on the Steinways, and it’s there on certain notes in many others. I can hear it on studio piano solo recordings of other Steinways.

I imagine some variation of that happening when I listen to guitarists argue about tone.

Related, I play guitar (badly) and my brother plays guitar (well).

He comes to my house and plays my guitars through my system (GP-based) through my speakers (mostly through CSC PA speakers) and it just sounds completely different to me. He’ll mess around with one of my guitars and play something and say, “hey, that’s kind of cool Mark Knopfler tone.” Then I’m like, “dude, that’s totally a Sultans of Swing tone.”

Then he’ll bust out Sultans of Swing and I think “man, that’s totally f’d. It just doesn’t sound like that to me when I’m playing.” And I don’t mean the quality of the playing. It just doesn’t sound the same as a listener as it does when I’m playing.

So I just don’t go down the “this is the best” and “this sounds horrible” stuff. What I love about all my guitar amp and pedal sims is that if I ever feel unsatisfied with a tone I’ve got 400 others that at some point I loved.

And if I try five or six of them and they all irritate me, then I know it’s time to put down the guitar for a while, or at least unplug it.

But somehow I can sit at that 1974 Kawaii grand in my living room any time, day or night, as long as I want, and it never gets old. It’s somehow become like family. In tune, out of tune, doesn’t matter. Cracked soundboard and all. It’s mom’s meatloaf, mashed potatoes, and gravy for me. Comfort sound. Wouldn’t trade it for my friend’s $170K Steinway. (Well, of course I would. Then I’d sell the Steinway and buy a Shigeru. Then buy back my Kawaii, too. And maybe get buried inside it. Lord knows my kids don’t want it.)

7 Likes

Well sure there are videos. And I’m not even arguing that their profiles are accurate, maybe they are.

What I’m saying is that profiling as a method has limitations, and you need to either profile an amp you need yourself or be lucky to have someone do it for you, with knobs roughly around where you’d set them.

Do you see master volume control in the NAM plugin? One of the most important controls of a guitar amp? I don’t. This means that whatever settings the amp was captured with is what you get. Some other profilers do have such controls, but the further you move them from the original position the more of an approximation they become.

It doesn’t mean the plugin is bad. It simply means that profiling doesn’t always work. If it works for you - by all means, use it. It didn’t work for me when I tried it, with the profiles I tried, and the very process of browsing through profiles isn’t something I enjoy a lot. That’s why I prefer physical modeling.

They don’t contradict what I said. Note how they talk about speaker and microphone combination. That is indeed non linear (probably that’s what they mean by “dynamic”. But you know what’s also “dynamic”? Power amp transfer function depending on what speaker is connected to its output. And unless your cabsim can somehow control the amp model upstream, it is not fully “dynamic”.

Some modelers like Axe-FX do it all, some have nothing in this regard, maybe there’s something in between. But you can’t fully do it in the cabsim alone.

I’ll certainly try it out, so thanks for pointing me in that direction.

Their claims may be marketing BS but it doesn’t mean the sim doesn’t sound good. :slight_smile: I’ll give it a try. And since I have cabsim sitting as a separate block in the global rackspace, I don’t even need to redo anything.

Not every plugin, and typically you need a special file instead of a simple IR, but yes, most cabsims do it these days.

I never use this feature though. It is useful if the IR is too harsh, for example, but then why use it to begin with.

Their speaker profiles do contain power amp as well (I do believe). So it’s really power amp+ speaker+ mic.

I don’t think you understand my point.

The amp sim upstream has a poweramp simulation. The sound it produces should depend on the cab downstream.

You can have some poweramp simulation in the cab block, but it’s not the same thing, you can’t replace what’s happening upstream.

You very eloquently and accurately described the experience, yes, that’s pretty much how it works.

However, there’s an important difference when we’re talking about amp simulations. It’s aliasing. Aliasing is never pleasant or ok, and it’s an exclusively digital artifact, it doesn’t exist in the world of analog gear, be it amps or pedals or what not. And it’s not possible to get rid of it completely, you can only decrease it to levels where it is irrelevant, but the techniques to do it aren’t super easy, and they consume a lot of CPU (and in the case of ML modeling they are tricky to do, as far as I understand).

Aliasing is basically a kind of noise, and it’s not easy (or even possible) to point your finger to it and say, here, notice that thing at 4K, it doesn’t work like that. It’s just some unpleasant crap in the sound. When it’s in a mix that someone else did, it’s harder to notice, unless it’s at some insane levels. Cheap processors like Digitech RP, Boss GT, plugins like TH-U or Guitar Rig will have a ton of it, and there’s a reason - hardware manufacturers have hard CPU limits, high end DSP chips are expensive, plugin developers also need to worry about users with lower end computers, etc. Most ML based profilers have a lot of aliasing, too, for reasons I don’t quite understand (it’s some complex math), and there oversampling isn’t the solution - but here again, you need tons of CPU power to run more complex models. NDSP Cortex was very bad at least initially when I tried it, I hear they improved it though.

And that stuff is objective, i.e. aliasing can be measured, albeit not very easily, and it’s always bad. So there are bad and good simulations.

You can hide the unpleasant stuff in a well crafted mix, which is what a lot of people are doing when showcasing plugins in Youtube videos. Good old frequency masking works not only to make an instrument be heard well in a mix, it works the other way, too. So yes, you can sort of get a good result with almost anything. Most often people hide it by applying a lot of low pass (and a generous amount of high pass) filtering, so you get that muffled sound like a speaker is under a blanket or something. You may not notice a problem because low passed sound can fit in a mix well, but plugin makers know it (and certainly Mikko from ML sound knows it, he’s been capturing amps for years for a living), so when you hear that kind of recording technique from them you immediately know they’re hiding stuff. You can still produce a good sounding mix with that though.

However, there are two problems that aren’t just a matter of preference.

First, when you play yourself, your mind focuses a lot more on your sound, and picks even smallest nuances which you otherwise would miss, and we get to the situation you described so well. It is very annoying and unsettling.
Second, if there’s a lot of this unneeded crap in the sound and you filter it all out, then at some point you aren’t left with much, and here we get to the problem of using plugins live. When plugin developers make the factory presets, they target a typical bedroom player who will most likely listen to the sound in headphones and in isolation. So factory presets are typically very wideband, with wide stereo effects, very full. That of course never works in a live mix. So you start adjusting the sound, and there comes the issue - as you narrow down the spectrum to what you need, it starts sounding weird, doesn’t work in a lot of rooms, you either get lost or stick out, etc. To a degree, some adjustments are always needed with any sound, but somehow there’s a huge difference between amp sims in this regard. The video I posted above isn’t meant to show my sound crafting abilities - I have very little - but the fact that you can hear the guitar well, and that’s a first song in a venue where I never played before, we’re playing after another band, and the FOH engineer doesn’t know or care what it is we’re playing. And that’s the thing with good equipment - when I started using Axe-FX, it became a set once and forget thing (and the audience, even people who don’t know anything about sound, noticed the change immediately). It’s not the case with plugins at all for me. Something is off with most of them.

So yes, there are good and bad plugins, and no, it’s not all a matter of preference. There are real objective problems like aliasing, but even with more subjective stuff it’s sometimes possible to see where things go wrong - i.e. in the samples of mixes I posted above I can point to mistakes in how I did it, like I shouldn’t have used presets meant for live in a recording mix.

I am wondering if any in the audience can hear that there is aliasing etc.
When you have a bad FOH or the band is not well balanced then nobody will notice what you notice.

You didn’t read my last comment until the end, did you

No, the audience won’t hear aliasing. More likely it just won’t hear the guitar at all, or it will be turned down by FOH so that it doesn’t annoy the engineer. That’s not just due to aliasing, it’s one of the biggest problems with bad plugins, but not the only one.

In a recording, you will hear aliasing whether you can consiously realize it or not. The metallic kind of sound that we got with early digital processing is where it’s super pronounced and obvious, it’s much better now, but still audible with cheap processors/bad plugins. You may not discern it and point to it, but the sound will just tire you over time, you will want to switch to something else.

BTW, here’s aliasing in NDSP plugins: https://www.youtube.com/watch?si=dTOLaQs5Z6V7bFXY&v=jxZDXJedhNY&feature=youtu.be

Sine sweeps of course make it very obvious, since it is lower level than the main signal it’s kind of hidden in a real distorted guitar sound, but you can see in this demo that it’s not negligible at all.

The bad part about it is that it’s all over the spectrum, and it’s harmonically unrelated to what you’re playing, so it’s some kind of ear tiring dissonance that’s always present, whether you realize it or not. And it’s impossible to unhear when you do realize it.

In high end, it will be perceived as harshness, which everybody using bad plugins will low pass out, and you can see in the demos that they do it. In the low end, it will work as if your guitar is a bit out of tune, so you high pass it out. With mids you can’t really do much, you sort of have to keep them no matter what, but in different venues it can manifest itself as pronounced unpleasantness which FOH will often remove by turning your fader down. If you have a completely controlled environment such as a recorded mix, as in those YouTube demos, you can of course sculpt it in a way that works. If you have time and are able to hear what the audience hears in a gig, you can also do some tweaking to make it all sound acceptable.

But with a good amp sim you just don’t need to worry about it. That’s the difference.

Oh, and by the way

There are two more problems with playing through plugins

One is latency, the other one is noise

Modern computers allow to run plugins with fairly low latencies, but no matter what you do, dedicated realtime hardware with powerful DSP chips will have lower latency. Now, for me personally what I get currently on my Mac is fine, but latency does disorient some people and throws them off balance, so this is an issue for many.

Noise isn’t a problem with plugins as such, but rather with audio interfaces. There’s a common sense misconception that guitar itself produces more noise than an audio interface can, but it’s wrong, and I even tested it and recorded some samples which I can find and post here if anyone is interested. Guitar signal with distortion is amplified, clipped and compressed to such insane levels that input noise is a big deal. This makes you set your noise get more aggressively, which eats the attack and makes the sound mushy unless you can use look ahead, which of course introduces latency, which isn’t good for live playing and only works in recording scenarios/post processing.

And here’s the catch. For guitar with distortion, you need super high end input noise specs. But simultaneously you need high input impedance (1M at least), or the input will filter out your high end. And simultaneously you need very high maximum signal amplitude the input can handle, otherwise the signal will hit the rail voltage, and you’ll get clipping. Satisfying all three criteria is difficult and expensive, and audio interface manufacturers typically don’t have dedicated instrument preamps, they just adapt either the mic input or the line input for high impedance sources.

So it is in fact quite difficult to find a good interface for guitar. Good ones are expensive. Cheap ones are bad (although I hear that last gen Scarletts are better, they used to be horrible in this regard, and the MOTU M series ones are good as well, but most are just bad). And worse even, it’s often even hard or impossible to understand since manufacturers hide or disguise this data in their spec sheets. Sometimes it’s not provided at all, sometimes they’ll provide specs for converters while it’s the analog part before the converters that matters, etc.

I currently use an Apogee Duet that has decent noise specs but can’t handle my pickup output, it clips occasionally. You can lower the pickup but then it will also change the sound.

Good dedicated hardware is typically way better in this regard, and you don’t need to worry about any of that no matter what pickups you use.

So there’s that as well.

Here’s a video that instructs how you can overcome the aliasing issue with some plugins: ALIASING is the worst enemy of our tone: How to hear it & how to fight it in NAM, Neural DSP plugin

Of course the cost is CPU, you need to have plenty to spare.

And it doesn’t work with all plugins, some ML based ones like NAM have aliasing for different reasons, if I understand it correctly (which I’m not sure I do).

Also, it shows how low passing helps mask the problem.

Yeah, even Mikko says that nothing can compare to a real thing.

That gets to the area of subtle nuances, and for some things like his point 3 he’s extrapolating a bit deficiencies of his plugin to all modelers :wink:

Speaking as someone who does not play guitar seriously, this conversation feels very similar to the conversations I see from audiophiles debating the the quality of the sound of their system, analog vs digital, always tweaking/changing stuff, etc., or from purists arguing about the accuracy of a plugin compared to a vintage synth.

Meanwhile, the pros just get on with performing and don’t seem to be bothered at all by concerns such as aliasing, latency or any of these other issues. They just get on with the show.

My 2 cents!

6 Likes

If you watched the video, at the end there was a “plot twist” - everything was recorded using plugins and it sounded great!

(sorry for the spoiler)

In my book, nobody could convince me that modern technology and the flexibility it offers is not better than traditional amps.

I just tend not to watch videos……I have things to do, promises to keep, miles to go before I sleep, etc

I’d rather read something, it is a far more efficient use of time

Oh really :joy:

The pros carry tube amps and pedals because no modeler is good enough, just listen to them.

And very few use plugins for playing live.

You couldn’t be further from reality with this.

I agree there, just not any plugin is “modern technology”, some are much better than others.

Uhm, I think he mistyped, he mean to say,

nobody could convince me that modern technology and the flexibility it offers is not better than traditional amps.

1 Like