![]() |
Every amp in one
JustMe wrote:
For performance rather than reproduction, I believe that Marshall do a range of amps which have 'valvesound' simulators built in. OTOH, I'm informed that they don't really sound the same as a classic valved Marshall (shrug). So then, from what you and others would say, the "filters" or "DSPs" used now, are NOT able to accurately emulate other amps with accuracy and the technology to do so may be some way off and/or be too expensive? The POD I mentioned is a world apart from the "valvesound" ideas, but still not perfect, but better than lugging 15 different amps around. I haven't looked for some time, but the makers web site has assorted sound clips of the different effects it can do. I don't think you can make a guitar sound like its being played at loud volumn, through a amp and speakers that are compressing the tops of the wave without clipping them, without actually doing it, all three parts the guitar (strings, body and pickup's), amp, and speakers are intereacting to produce the result. If you DI a guitar, and then replay that through a amp, you get quite a different effect. And for that matter, its quite a different feeling playing a (say strat) guitar on the edge of feedback, there is so much life in the strings, you are as much keeping it on a leash as playing it. Listen to some of the small sounds at the back of the mix in something like Electric Ladyland, and consider how loud they must have actually been played, esp as that was before amps with three controlable gain stages (or even two) were about. -- Nick |
Every amp in one
"Nick Gorham" wrote in The POD I mentioned is a world apart from the "valvesound" ideas, but still not perfect, but better than lugging 15 different amps around. I haven't looked for some time, but the makers web site has assorted sound clips of the different effects it can do. I don't think you can make a guitar sound like its being played at loud volumn, through a amp and speakers that are compressing the tops of the wave without clipping them, without actually doing it, all three parts the guitar (strings, body and pickup's), amp, and speakers are intereacting to produce the result. If you DI a guitar, and then replay that through a amp, you get quite a different effect. And for that matter, its quite a different feeling playing a (say strat) guitar on the edge of feedback, there is so much life in the strings, you are as much keeping it on a leash as playing it. Listen to some of the small sounds at the back of the mix in something like Electric Ladyland, Hmmm, you'd need valve amplification and a decent vinyl rig to be able to do that for a start! |
Every amp in one
JustMe wrote:
So then, from what you and others would say, the "filters" or "DSPs" used now, are NOT able to accurately emulate other amps with accuracy and the technology to do so may be some way off and/or be too expensive? Not necessarily. The main difficulty is in generating a suitable *model* not in actually building hardware to implement it. |
Every amp in one
Keith G wrote:
"Nick Gorham" wrote in The POD I mentioned is a world apart from the "valvesound" ideas, but still not perfect, but better than lugging 15 different amps around. I haven't looked for some time, but the makers web site has assorted sound clips of the different effects it can do. I don't think you can make a guitar sound like its being played at loud volumn, through a amp and speakers that are compressing the tops of the wave without clipping them, without actually doing it, all three parts the guitar (strings, body and pickup's), amp, and speakers are intereacting to produce the result. If you DI a guitar, and then replay that through a amp, you get quite a different effect. And for that matter, its quite a different feeling playing a (say strat) guitar on the edge of feedback, there is so much life in the strings, you are as much keeping it on a leash as playing it. Listen to some of the small sounds at the back of the mix in something like Electric Ladyland, Hmmm, you'd need valve amplification and a decent vinyl rig to be able to do that for a start! In fact thats a example of the damage that can be done by looking at scopes. When the first masters were made of Electric Ladyland, the engineers looked at the tape, and found all sorts of odd out of phase signals on it, so they decided to fix it. When the resultant pressing was heard by Hendrix, he was less than impressed, they had spent a lot of time creating all the out of phase effects in the first place. Thats why its the second pressing is the one to have, not the first. -- Nick |
Every amp in one
In article , Mike Gilmour
writes "tony sayer" wrote in message ... e God made the *807* Does he still make them?.... -- Tony Sayer Nay verily nay he's gone ss (and if needed sources them from China :-) I like the 807 as an audio valve and because many of the early marine transmitters like Oceanspan etc. used the 807 for RF output, drivers/modulators etc. Recall having shelves piled high with them...now they are £40++ a shot )-: We used to get thro them like they were going out of fashion years ago on a medium wave pirate rig;)) -- Tony Sayer |
Every amp in one
In article , Nick Gorham
wrote: Keith G wrote: Listen to some of the small sounds at the back of the mix in something like Electric Ladyland, Hmmm, you'd need valve amplification and a decent vinyl rig to be able to do that for a start! In fact thats a example of the damage that can be done by looking at scopes. When the first masters were made of Electric Ladyland, the engineers looked at the tape, and found all sorts of odd out of phase signals on it, so they decided to fix it. When the resultant pressing was heard by Hendrix, he was less than impressed, they had spent a lot of time creating all the out of phase effects in the first place. Thats why its the second pressing is the one to have, not the first. I enjoy Hendrix a lot. Didn't know about EL being altered as you describe. Interesting. These days I listen to his work on CD-A, though. (Or DVD-V). Some of the phase effects, etc, seem to come over well using ESL's. :-) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Every amp in one
Nick Gorham wrote:
In fact thats a example of the damage that can be done by looking at scopes. When the first masters were made of Electric Ladyland, the engineers looked at the tape, and found all sorts of odd out of phase signals on it, so they decided to fix it. When the resultant pressing was heard by Hendrix, he was less than impressed, they had spent a lot of time creating all the out of phase effects in the first place. Thats why its the second pressing is the one to have, not the first. I call BS. looking at a scope with simple waveforms on you may be able to see out-of-phaseness. I challenge you to do so on a complex musical source. |
Every amp in one
JustMe wrote:
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:11:51 +1100, Tat Chan wrote: isn't the 8000LX just a "stripped down" version of the 8000S (no remote, and no configurable operating mode)? No, it has a compromised power supply, which IME is audible on tough speaker loads. I believe the on-paper spec was 60 watts as opposed to 75 watts for the "S" which, I assume, is an effect of the lower-spec power supply. The manual for the Tag 60iRv (Tag's version of the S) states the following "rated output power - 60W into 8 ohms" "typical output power - 72W into 8 ohms" |
Every amp in one
On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 17:28:11 -0000, "JustMe" wrote:
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 15:16:22 -0000, "JustMe" wrote: "Ian Molton" wrote in message ... JustMe wrote: Many of you chaps believe that the Peter Walker(?) "straight-wire" ideal is that which any "hifi" designer should aspire to construct. Do you think that this is attainable? To all intents and purposes it has been attained in all good SS amps (And a handful of exceptional valve amps) Please can you suggest some examples? (Hopefully I will know at least one!) Audiolab 8000S, and the 8000P power amp. Common enough, and essentually 'blameless', as Doug Self would say. Well I know these amps very well and used to own an 8000S, so I'd find that to be a useful reference. So, who's going to build me an Alchemist Kraken APD6aII filter for use with an 8000S then? That depends what was wrong with the Kraken! If it's not a simple FR difference, then a filter isn't going to do it. From your description, it sounds more likely that it was a combination of weak bass and high distortion, either crossover or HF IMD. You could likely synthesise this with a good DSP unit (and a good programmer!), but wouldn't it be simpler just to buy another amp? There's nothing wrong with the Kraken - I love it, it sounds better than the Audiolab (see thread "Amp swap disappointment" for more). Of course, there's something wrong with the Kraken, otherwise it would sound like any other good amp! Please don't use terms like 'sounds better', when what you mean is that *you* prefer some particular nonlinearity. I don't want to buy another amp - I'm going to flog the Audiolab shortly and continue to enjoy the pleasures of the Kraken. If you were to apply any simple description to the sound, it wouldn't be weak bass, in my opinion, but rounded-off HF. Fine, so that's your preference, no problem. So then, from what you and others would say, the "filters" or "DSPs" used now, are NOT able to accurately emulate other amps with accuracy and the technology to do so may be some way off and/or be too expensive? As noted, it depends what's wrong with the Kraken. It might be easily simulated, or it might take a serious box of DSP tricks. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
Every amp in one
On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 17:30:34 -0000, "JustMe" wrote:
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message .. . On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:11:51 +1100, Tat Chan wrote: Stewart Pinkerton wrote: On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 15:16:22 -0000, "JustMe" wrote: "Ian Molton" wrote in message ... JustMe wrote: Do you think that this is attainable? To all intents and purposes it has been attained in all good SS amps (And a handful of exceptional valve amps) Please can you suggest some examples? (Hopefully I will know at least one!) Audiolab 8000S, and the 8000P power amp. Common enough, and essentually 'blameless', as Doug Self would say. The OP has an Audiolab 8000LX. Shouldn't it be in the list as well? After all, isn't the 8000LX just a "stripped down" version of the 8000S (no remote, and no configurable operating mode)? No, it has a compromised power supply, which IME is audible on tough speaker loads. I believe the on-paper spec was 60 watts as opposed to 75 watts for the "S" which, I assume, is an effect of the lower-spec power supply. And it's *much* worse into low impedance loads, which was a particular strength of the 8000S. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:55 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk