Momentum Secret Mixter Signups
skip
Home » Forums » DIY » Re-amping and Guitar Processing

Re-amping and Guitar Processing

go1dfish
admin
.
permalink   Mon, Jul 12, 2010 @ 3:55 PM
Are any other mixters using reamping or guitar processing software/hardware setups?

If your not familiar with it, the general idea is you record your clean signal straight from the guitar (and selected effects pedals like wah maybe) while your playing.

You can then take the clean unaffected guitar signal, and apply one of the many guitar effects packages on it, or play/re-record it through an amp.

Cutting/rearranging guitar parts can much easier this way.

Just curious how many people do such things and would be interested in posting or receiving unaffected guitar signal tracks in addition to effected ones.
Admiral Bob
admin
.
permalink   Tue, Jul 13, 2010 @ 5:56 AM
I do this occasionally. I actually do the whole gamut of recording techniques… I mic up amplifiers, use amp modeling pedals, or sometimes just plug straight into the board, and post-process all of the sound onto a plain track.

Shoogie (Live at Shakey’s Pizza Parlour) was recorded straight into the board, as was the ending guitar solo on Logic in Harmony.

I don’t tend to do it a lot as there are only a handful of software guitar amp sims that are any good. They’re just really bad at getting good crunchy tones.

The one software amp sim I really am a fan of is the Simulanalog suite. Those actually sound like the amplifiers they claim to sound like! I have a Fender Twin, and the Rednef Twin VST really captures the sound it makes, including some of the flaws of the amplifier. I’m really impressed that they took the trouble to model the bad crackly sound it sometimes gets!

As to posting unaffected signal tracks, I don’t think I’d do that. If I may offer a blunt, personal, and possibly not even correct opinion: a lot of people (including not a few guitar players) do not know how to coax good tones from a guitar. I try to take care of that, so the remixer doesn’t have to.
 
.
permalink   spinmeister Tue, Jul 13, 2010 @ 9:59 AM
Quote: admiralbob77As to posting unaffected signal tracks, I don’t think I’d do that. If I may offer a blunt, personal, and possibly not even correct opinion: a lot of people (including not a few guitar players) do not know how to coax good tones from a guitar. I try to take care of that, so the remixer doesn’t have to.
lol - vocalist could say exactly the same thing. :-)

When I uploaded vocal tracks, I often upload two versions: one with basic FX chain to make it easier for less experienced remixers and one totally dry one so more ambitious and/or experienced remixers can do more.

That being said, wet vs. dry isn’t as simple as all or nothing. For example, posting a guitar track with the crunch/dirt/overdrive/distortion/fuzz already in the signal chain doesn’t limit remixing flexibility as much as posting one with reverb, delay, chorus, tremolo, phase, etc. already in. For example changing the tempo (BPM) of a track can become problematic in some circumstances with those effects already in. And pitch shifting can get even messier. Both, tempo as well as pitch shifting are integral techniques in remixing allowing to match many more tracks into a cohesive work.

So I’m not trying to talk you into something you’re not comfortable with - what you upload is entirely your call. I’m just trying to mention some of the nuances and implications.

p.s. I like Guitar Rig 4 quite a bit. In the context of a full mix it sounds quite credible. In my case I can compare a real VOX AC30 with the Guitar Rig emulation.

However when listening in isolation, I find most software based amp simulators (I’ve also tried Line 6 stuff as well as some of the builtin amps of Cubase 5) have a rough time competing with the real thing when using just the amp’s natural (over)drive. To me it sounds like the software amps don’t do as well on the break-up in the lower parts of the frequency spectrum, so the crunch sounds a bit tinny compared to the real tube amp. However, the more other FX are part of the signal chain, the less the difference seams to matter. And in the context of a fuller pop/rock mix it seems to matter even less.
 
.
permalink   Admiral Bob Tue, Jul 13, 2010 @ 10:12 AM
Quote: spinmeister
However when listening in isolation, I find most software based amp simulators (I’ve also tried Line 6 stuff as well as some of the builtin amps of Cubase 5) have a rough time competing with the real thing when using just the amp’s natural (over)drive. To me it sounds like the software amps don’t do as well on the break-up in the lower parts of the frequency spectrum, so the crunch sounds a bit tinny compared to the real tube amp. However, the more other FX are part of the signal chain, the less the difference seams to matter. And in the context of a fuller pop/rock mix it seems to matter even less.


I tend to agree - digital overdrive lacks organic warmth and smoothness, but you can bury the bad overdrive in other effects. I tried to turn a spinningmerkaba acoustic guitar part into an electric sounding part, and found that with phasers, delays, and a virtual tube screamer, all that processing does tend to hide or diminish the weaknesses of digital distortion.
 
.
permalink   go1dfish Tue, Jul 13, 2010 @ 11:59 AM
Yeah, I’ve found the same issue with my pod x3 and the vst, high gain stuff just doesn’t sound right straight up through the ‘amp’. You can obfuscate things behind a lot of effects, and this (or eq tricks) seem to be how most modelers get by on crunchy sounds.

I’ve found, that running your effect rig into the FX return on a tube amp, can do wonders to make this kind of tone feel and sound right and less ‘digital’. (but I haven’t tried micing this setup yet)

Your obviously not going to get that “wow this sounds just like X” with this approach, but you get a lot more versatility out of your gear, and I think thats the real benefit of this sort of tech, not any sort of 100% accurate copy of any given piece of gear.

I’ve had my eyes on one of these for a while: http://www.fractalaudio.com... as they are built for this exact purpose.

But for now, I do this with a Carvin Nomad, and the speaker/cab from a gutted Roland Cube 60 I got off ebay. Been pretty happy with the results so far.
 
.
permalink   spinmeister Tue, Jul 13, 2010 @ 2:26 PM
I ended up getting one of these to complement my AC30 for power tube distortion at lower volumes. Quite a nice overdriven sound. One of these days I want to build a larger sound-proof box for it with a mic inside, so I can get power tube tube distortion at headphone levels.
 
.
permalink   go1dfish Tue, Jul 13, 2010 @ 2:34 PM
Yeah I wouldn’t mind having a little amp like that, or a little champ.

Presently I’m blessed with extremely forgiving neighbors and highly directional cabinets.
spinningmerkaba
admin
.
permalink   Wed, Jul 14, 2010 @ 6:33 PM
The only time I’ve ever used the re-amping technique is on snare hits.

I put the solo output of the snare track through a little marshall amp which was placed on the floor with the speaker facing directly up, and placed a gretsch snare directly on top of it, upside down, and miked it with a 57. Then we mixed that in with the original snare sound to get a warmer crack with some sizzle. It worked! it made the snare cut a bit more in the mix.

Oh, and I’ve re-amped samples through my pedal board and Line 6 to process the sound for certain mixes too, I just remembered while typing.

And while we’re on the subject of amps we love—I had this travel amp, a 9v Mountain Amp that was baddass! Check these travel amps out too—for a good pavlovian reaction ;-)

http://www.jedistar.com/travel_amplifiers.htm

The Mountian Amp I so loved is at the bottom of that page.

btw-liked the processing of the acoustic gtr in your mix Admiral!
 
.
permalink   Admiral Bob Thu, Jul 15, 2010 @ 5:23 AM
I recently bought a VOX VT-30. I was tired of lugging around monstrous cabinets or the 110 watt Twin for gigs where they put a mic on the amp anyways. Not “travel amp” small, but a nice reduction in size for me!

The only battery amp we have is my daughter’s Danelectro. It can actually get pretty loud.
texasradiofish
.
permalink   Mon, Sep 13, 2010 @ 2:23 AM
We never record guitar, keys or bass using a mic. Always straight into a tube preamp. Sometimes the guitar is run through a guitar processor in stereo with one side dry and one wet to give the session player the desired feel.

Delay and reverb are a large pain when it comes to tight cutting and pasting pasting. Dry signals come in very handy.

As needed, we apply amp and cabinet modeling, and guitar effects using plugins.

Wrt guitar tracks posted, prefer dry to wet.

Wish more pell posters would post dry pells. All the verb, chorusing, etc severely limit the possibilities.