I just said this to a friend the other day. Guitarists love to complain about a modeler not sounding like an amp in the room. If the modeler has any kind of mic'ing, then it shouldn't sound like the amp in the room. Great video as always!
You are 100% right. The first generation of modelers, like POD, V-Amp and such, gets a lot of heat for not sounding miced. But that was never their intention. They never mention anything in their manuals about mics being used or their placement. What they was trying to do was to capture the sound of different cabinets. And even to this day I can get just as good clean and hi-gain tones from my V-Amp2 as I can get from my BOSS GX100. Especially if I put a TS-9 in front of the V-Amp.
Great video as always!Thanks!The one thing missing from guitar modelers, is "Holistic Thinking Modeling", so that guitar players can take a distance from their guitar playing role and see the whole picture of the music/song they're playing, in order to serve and compliment it and not trying to feed their ego.That goes for other musicians and singers too.
For me I think the most important missing feature in all pedals and modelers is a Digital Interface protocol so we can combine them without extra A/D/A conversions, those degrade the sound and produce extra latency, in the late 90's/early 2000's there were several units with SPDIF and now not a single one offers this
Totally that. The only one that has good implementation is Fractal and maybe helix. I was really disappointed when the quad cortex came out that it had no digital IO at all.
great points Leo, the post processing aspect can definitely make a big difference to the tone and how it sits in a mix , i'm using a Fractal FM3 , it probably has the most flexible grid + post processing tone options that you talk a bit about here (mic preamps on cab with drive/saturation for mic preamps if you want / multi band compressor (absolutely huge for metal tones and add to that a whole host of various EQ/filter options/compressors etc..) something else which i'm not sure is always modelled is the 'speaker impedance curve' , when you plug into different cabinets this information changes, but since on some units we interface mainly with IRs, there's no way of adapting specifically to those cabs which is understandable, again Fractal has options for this within the amp block, I'm not sure how other modellers deal with this information
Thank you for sharing! Yes, the impedance curve is pretty important and Fractal was among the first one (if I remember it well) to introduce it in their simulations...good point!
It's interest idea, Leo. From by perspectiveI it would be great to see: 1. MIDI-based synth in each processor. More and more guitars and special pickups support MIDI. We can go further: MPE or MIDI 2.0 support. 2. LFO in each processor. FractalAudio has it and it's very basic thing, that give a LOT of movement in sound. It's like a layer of automation in DAW. 3. Core-hardware processors format. Full I/O without almost all controlls except touchscreen and volume knob. Like HX Stomp but without knobs and FSs. Anyway you'll able to use MIDI foot controller or 2xFS controller using TRS cable. It's just best table-top and board-friendly format I can imagine. Fractal Core, Quad Core-tex, Line6 HX Core etc.
This is an interesting topic. I also see enormous potential for live usage. A mix-ready sound to give to the FoH engineer, so he just could take your signal and ride the fader - done. With software like NAM you can train a full rig model, but normally, you might want to insert reverb and delay AFTER IR/cab and before console/EQ/Compressor. If the chain is with both before the amp, you can train the amp rig including the mixing chain and get a mix-ready guitar model. I tried that a few times and it works for me.
A feature I'd like to see is digital ins and outs for digital pedals. Imagine a pedalboard with 4 digital pedals, but each one sends a digital signal to the next. Yes, it opens a discussion of formats, such as bit depth & sampling rate, but also which physical connections and transmission protocols (such as AES/SPDIF) would be standardized.
I’ve been telling my friends this for years. If a unit is digital it should always have digital ins and outs to minimize the AD/DA conversions. Standardize the protocol like on midi devices and let’s make it happen. 👍👍
This would be cool obviously since there are specific frequencies that can completely alter the sound of your guitar when cut or boosted and a studio compressor on a clean tone would be so nice, maybe even a some studio preamps for that DI sound
It's funny, because I thought guitar players wanted their digital models to sound more like the raw amps, rather than a finished sound. But you raise a good point. For example, the Helix has mostly guitar-pedal type EQs - no Neve/API/SSL-style EQs. They do have an LA2A, but no 1176 comp.
I don't want a produced guitar sound. That's my biggest complaint with all the modelers and plugins. They are all designed for re-amping, and the tone stack never behaves like a real guitar amp. The best out of the bunch atm is ToneX. I have a Kemper which as so so but I recently purchased a RedSeven, so I can use my tube amps again, which was working out well but I am pretty impressed with ToneX because the tone stack is very much like a guitar amp. If I want to tweak my tone in the mix I much prefer to do that after. Most important for me is my tone and how it feels. Placing a guitar tone in a mix is not rocket science and is easily achieved. Getting a great signature sound from your amp is a must.
Hi, thank you for sharing! I wouldn't do it for recording....but for live use, once I understood the tonal characteristic of API, Neve etc....I would like to have the possibility to colour my sound with those processing...but it's just me obviously.... Thanks!
Very interesting. I preferred the Neve compressor tone as well. I had never thought of this being in the pedal board. I always struggle with how the PA mix colors my modelers tone and if this post processing compression could solve that? Keep up the great work. God bless and rock on 😎🎸👍
Fantastic video Leo - thank you! I would go even further, now that we have this level of guitar/amp/speaker/mic modeling the next hurdle is the post processing as you have said. I would like a Tonex Pedal equivalent for the recording pres, comps and eqs. That way we could use them when recording vocals/synths/acoustic instruments and we can bring that 'recorded' sound to the stage. Thank you again!
It will take some time to debunk all guitar myth like 'Amp in a Room' sound. When more guitarist learn how to record and mix music they will understand how their favorite tone they are chasing was produced. The main part is definitely EQ and compression.
I don't have the ear to get the subtles differences. As i play live, i don't care for a very accurate mix. I understand your point though, thank you for pointing this topic ❤🙏
Thank you Leo. I also think serious analog pedal mixing mixers like Radial Stereo EXTC stereo are needed. Why not use the pedals for actual analog mixing whilst using them with ourt guitars. I would love to pass the recorded guitar through another layer of tube preamp. Thanks again for great content.
Great video Leo. Could you try the M- Wave Tank G multi effects? It is very popular in Brazil since it is affordable and has great sounds. The last updates added amp and pedal profiles. We can actually run NAM profiles after conversion
Leo! Great Video, and a very interesting point, i would have 2 comments on this, putting my self in a manufacturer's roll, for one i would say this is probably a job for something like a Profiler, not necessarily a modeler, and i also believe this functionality would more than likely be reserved for a much higher priced bracket of gear, something along the lines of Fractal and maybe Kemper, as the lower priced gear would probably never implement this sort of thing. And 2nd, most people would be able to have a proper DAW to apply these changes to their recordings, dont you think? Thanks for another great vid as always!
The most insane thing missing on all modelling units is a Noise Extractor that can take away 60 cycle hum and single coil noise! ISP tech has made an algorithm that do this in the Hum Extractor - why does nobody else make the same for modellers? It's the most crucial thing missing in the market for single coil guitars on the entire electric guitar market, and nobody delivers!
They all include expander-based noise reduction and, you’re correct that the focus is on broadband noise. The fact is, most guitarists work hard getting hum and buzz out of their instruments and end up needing only broadband reduction. Even dedicated hardware noise reducers focus almost entirely on broadband. Hum and buzz, the source of which is the same line-frequency, are harder (more DSP) to deal with in real time, and they absolutely MUST be real time. I often use software to remove line-freq noise in post-production and have noted that process is more computer-intensive than is broadband.
A bit out of this great video - I been wanting to ask you about your guitars in a related video but you’re more concentrated on other interesting gears. Which you do really well. Anyway if you don’t mind me asking about what is your opinion between Suhr and American strats . Built qualities, sound, feel of fretboards etc? If you wish not to answer it could be an additional video comparing guitars when playing and recording etc.. 🙏 THANKS
Thank you! Yes, a video comparison between Fender and Suhr would be interesting. I think that Suhr compares more to custom shop Fender rather than American Standard. I found Suhr very very consistent and with an high quality...All the Suhr I have tried where always sounding great...where Fender custom shop are not always so consistent. Furthermore I really love the Suhr neck....they really fit with hands....and this is of course very personal. Nonetheless....a video comparison would be interesting!
You make a good point, Leo. But, (you knew that was coming) very, very few guitarists have any idea how those hardware pieces sound while virtually all know the sound of guitar processors which are, in fact, far more numerous. Like you, I am both player and music mixer. As a result, I actually prefer keeping the two strictly separate, if for no other reason than time management. The ease of achieving a sound is super important to me and the very nuanced tones of studio hardware no guitarist will ever see are a big time-suck. Just my opinion, as you always so kindly say.
Thank you for sharing! Yes, I think I understand what you mean....I would not use these type of post processing unit for recording purposes, but for live use I think they could add a final touch....in my opinion :) Thank you!
On the Boss Gt1000, in the FX 1 and FX 2 blocks, you can choose MASTERING FX. In this case, you must place the FX block after the Main Speaker Simulator
very interesting point, but I think that is for another step of the producing process of a performance and it belongs to the mixing section/engineer. of course we in our room we are called to do it all nowadays, but for me it's better to have things separated and have those post processors in the daw or mixing desk, and not on the pedal board. otherwise it would be to much of a stress for the guitarist alone!
@@LeoGibsonGtr yeah but how could you do a good job when you are not foh at the mixing desk? and given that there will be an audio guy he will anyway make his own moves processing your signal.
Fractal Axe FX kinda lets you do this. It has different preamp sims but not different EQs. I have always thought it would be nice to have an API style in there to choose.
I don't think those are needed, as eventually we plug the modeller into a DAW at home or a Mixer/Front of house that nowadays have tons of plugins plus more. There's enough analysis paralysis with all the stuff in these modellers, let alone add more things that will stop you from actually playing … or, god forbid...practicing!
Thank you for sharing! For recording purposes probably they are not needed....but I would really like to have such simulations for playing live....of course it's just a personal opinion
@@LeoGibsonGtr 11 types of Mastering FX are available and recommended in the end of the chain. 1 type = a combination of post processing effects chain. So there are no namings like API / Neve/ SSL (not sure why we need to stick with brand naming) , but tools are definitely there and do the same thing you are mentioning in the video
Hi, here you can find the video where I have explained how I have created the IRs with a demo song: ruclips.net/video/aIjuF6k5xXs/видео.html Thank you!
For me, the feature that is often missing in Modelers is "auto-sensing" so the Looper will start recording when it senses a loud enough signal. I think a Looper rivals Distortion, and Reverb/Delay as must have Effect.
So you don´t want a pedal board. You want a full studio solution. But where do we draw the line? The pedal board all ready has a soundcard. What more can we ask for? Should we really spend more CPU resourses on on-board postmixin when all the studio job should in fact be done in the studio. It´s like buyin a car but saying "It would be nice if it could fly!" Well then, buy an aeroplane!
Well, while playing live, in my opinion, these post effects are important, where they could less important for recording. I would really like to have API, NEVE or SSL flavours at my disposal, or to be able to choose a vari-mu compressor or a FET one. To me these things are important to shape my tone....of course, it's just my opinion.
I love the channel but regarding this topic/video: Why do we always need to copy stuff so PRECISELY? This level of detail is of no consequence to the vast majority of players including beginner to intermediate players yet the youtube guitar community seems to obsess on this stuff and emphasising it's importance.
Thank you for sharing! Of course, we are not obliged....but the more I progress in mixing my music and understanding Neve, API, SSL colours...the more I would like to have those colours in my pedalboard....it could be just me. Thank you!
@@LeoGibsonGtrLeo, i hadn’t thought about eq, comp, etc modeling, and now that you pointed it out, it totally makes sense! Imagine having Neve, SSL, EMI emulations on a HX Stomp, or in the BOSS GT-1000… It would definitely be a game changer. If eq, comp, console weren’t important, no studio would have 12 racks of equipment… Love your videos Leo, you are the best!!
I just said this to a friend the other day. Guitarists love to complain about a modeler not sounding like an amp in the room. If the modeler has any kind of mic'ing, then it shouldn't sound like the amp in the room. Great video as always!
Thank you so much and I'm really happy that you like the video!
Yes, good point!
You are 100% right. The first generation of modelers, like POD, V-Amp and such, gets a lot of heat for not sounding miced. But that was never their intention. They never mention anything in their manuals about mics being used or their placement. What they was trying to do was to capture the sound of different cabinets. And even to this day I can get just as good clean and hi-gain tones from my V-Amp2 as I can get from my BOSS GX100. Especially if I put a TS-9 in front of the V-Amp.
@@charlieandersson424they were already simulating miked cabinets... (But very poorly I guess)
"We guitarist are very nerdy about our tone" True words Leo!!!!!!!!!
Yes, absolutely! 😀
E.g. Hx stomp has optical compressor. I use it after cabs or irs to simulate a la2a compressor in post-productiin
Thank you for sharing!
Great video as always!Thanks!The one thing missing from guitar modelers, is "Holistic Thinking Modeling", so that guitar players can take a distance from their guitar playing role and see the whole picture of the music/song they're playing, in order to serve and compliment it and not trying to feed their ego.That goes for other musicians and singers too.
Hi, interesting point! This looks like an A.I. functionality....
@@LeoGibsonGtr 😉
For me I think the most important missing feature in all pedals and modelers is a Digital Interface protocol so we can combine them without extra A/D/A conversions, those degrade the sound and produce extra latency, in the late 90's/early 2000's there were several units with SPDIF and now not a single one offers this
Hi, interesting point, thank you for sharing!
Totally that. The only one that has good implementation is Fractal and maybe helix. I was really disappointed when the quad cortex came out that it had no digital IO at all.
The Kemper, Fractal, Helix all support SPDIF 👍🏻
@@whiteroom2773 those are the only ones, I meant smaller pedals like ToneX, Strymon, HX Stomp, Meris, etc
great points Leo, the post processing aspect can definitely make a big difference to the tone and how it sits in a mix ,
i'm using a Fractal FM3 , it probably has the most flexible grid + post processing tone options that you talk a bit about here (mic preamps on cab with drive/saturation for mic preamps if you want / multi band compressor (absolutely huge for metal tones and add to that a whole host of various EQ/filter options/compressors etc..)
something else which i'm not sure is always modelled is the 'speaker impedance curve' , when you plug into different cabinets this information changes, but since on some units we interface mainly with IRs, there's no way of adapting specifically to those cabs which is understandable, again Fractal has options for this within the amp block, I'm not sure how other modellers deal with this information
Thank you for sharing!
Yes, the impedance curve is pretty important and Fractal was among the first one (if I remember it well) to introduce it in their simulations...good point!
It's interest idea, Leo.
From by perspectiveI it would be great to see:
1. MIDI-based synth in each processor. More and more guitars and special pickups support MIDI. We can go further: MPE or MIDI 2.0 support.
2. LFO in each processor. FractalAudio has it and it's very basic thing, that give a LOT of movement in sound. It's like a layer of automation in DAW.
3. Core-hardware processors format. Full I/O without almost all controlls except touchscreen and volume knob. Like HX Stomp but without knobs and FSs. Anyway you'll able to use MIDI foot controller or 2xFS controller using TRS cable. It's just best table-top and board-friendly format I can imagine. Fractal Core, Quad Core-tex, Line6 HX Core etc.
Thank you for sharing...interesting points!
This is an interesting topic. I also see enormous potential for live usage. A mix-ready sound to give to the FoH engineer, so he just could take your signal and ride the fader - done.
With software like NAM you can train a full rig model, but normally, you might want to insert reverb and delay AFTER IR/cab and before console/EQ/Compressor. If the chain is with both before the amp, you can train the amp rig including the mixing chain and get a mix-ready guitar model. I tried that a few times and it works for me.
Thank you, I'm happy that you find the topic interesting!
Thank you also for sharing your experience!
A feature I'd like to see is digital ins and outs for digital pedals. Imagine a pedalboard with 4 digital pedals, but each one sends a digital signal to the next. Yes, it opens a discussion of formats, such as bit depth & sampling rate, but also which physical connections and transmission protocols (such as AES/SPDIF) would be standardized.
That's a good one!
I’ve been telling my friends this for years. If a unit is digital it should always have digital ins and outs to minimize the AD/DA conversions. Standardize the protocol like on midi devices and let’s make it happen. 👍👍
This would be cool obviously since there are specific frequencies that can completely alter the sound of your guitar when cut or boosted and a studio compressor on a clean tone would be so nice, maybe even a some studio preamps for that DI sound
Yes, I do agree. Thanks!
It's funny, because I thought guitar players wanted their digital models to sound more like the raw amps, rather than a finished sound. But you raise a good point. For example, the Helix has mostly guitar-pedal type EQs - no Neve/API/SSL-style EQs. They do have an LA2A, but no 1176 comp.
Hi, thank you for sharing!
Yes, it's a good point...to sound like a real amp or to sound like a record?...interesting question!
I don't want a produced guitar sound. That's my biggest complaint with all the modelers and plugins. They are all designed for re-amping, and the tone stack never behaves like a real guitar amp. The best out of the bunch atm is ToneX. I have a Kemper which as so so but I recently purchased a RedSeven, so I can use my tube amps again, which was working out well but I am pretty impressed with ToneX because the tone stack is very much like a guitar amp.
If I want to tweak my tone in the mix I much prefer to do that after. Most important for me is my tone and how it feels. Placing a guitar tone in a mix is not rocket science and is easily achieved. Getting a great signature sound from your amp is a must.
Hi, thank you for sharing!
I wouldn't do it for recording....but for live use, once I understood the tonal characteristic of API, Neve etc....I would like to have the possibility to colour my sound with those processing...but it's just me obviously....
Thanks!
Very interesting. I preferred the Neve compressor tone as well. I had never thought of this being in the pedal board. I always struggle with how the PA mix colors my modelers tone and if this post processing compression could solve that? Keep up the great work. God bless and rock on 😎🎸👍
Yes, exactly what I mean!
Thank you for sharing!
Fantastic video Leo - thank you! I would go even further, now that we have this level of guitar/amp/speaker/mic modeling the next hurdle is the post processing as you have said. I would like a Tonex Pedal equivalent for the recording pres, comps and eqs. That way we could use them when recording vocals/synths/acoustic instruments and we can bring that 'recorded' sound to the stage. Thank you again!
Thank you so much, I'm really happy that you appreciate the video!
Interesting points!! Thank you for sharing!
It would be just amazing, but by manual Tonex can't do dynamics. So no compression from predals, from consoles or even power amp sag :(
It will take some time to debunk all guitar myth like 'Amp in a Room' sound. When more guitarist learn how to record and mix music they will understand how their favorite tone they are chasing was produced. The main part is definitely EQ and compression.
I do agree. Thank you for sharing!
I don't have the ear to get the subtles differences. As i play live, i don't care for a very accurate mix.
I understand your point though, thank you for pointing this topic ❤🙏
You are welcome!
Thank you Leo. I also think serious analog pedal mixing mixers like Radial Stereo EXTC stereo are needed. Why not use the pedals for actual analog mixing whilst using them with ourt guitars. I would love to pass the recorded guitar through another layer of tube preamp. Thanks again for great content.
You are welcome and thank you for sharing!
Interesting points!
Great video Leo. Could you try the M- Wave Tank G multi effects? It is very popular in Brazil since it is affordable and has great sounds. The last updates added amp and pedal profiles. We can actually run NAM profiles after conversion
Thank you! I have to check them out..
Leo! Great Video, and a very interesting point, i would have 2 comments on this, putting my self in a manufacturer's roll, for one i would say this is probably a job for something like a Profiler, not necessarily a modeler, and i also believe this functionality would more than likely be reserved for a much higher priced bracket of gear, something along the lines of Fractal and maybe Kemper, as the lower priced gear would probably never implement this sort of thing. And 2nd, most people would be able to have a proper DAW to apply these changes to their recordings, dont you think? Thanks for another great vid as always!
Thank you so much, I'm happy that you like the video!!
Yes, it's a feature more oriented for playing live rather than recording....
Thank you!
The most insane thing missing on all modelling units is a Noise Extractor that can take away 60 cycle hum and single coil noise!
ISP tech has made an algorithm that do this in the Hum Extractor - why does nobody else make the same for modellers? It's the most crucial thing missing in the market for single coil guitars on the entire electric guitar market, and nobody delivers!
They all include expander-based noise reduction and, you’re correct that the focus is on broadband noise. The fact is, most guitarists work hard getting hum and buzz out of their instruments and end up needing only broadband reduction. Even dedicated hardware noise reducers focus almost entirely on broadband.
Hum and buzz, the source of which is the same line-frequency, are harder (more DSP) to deal with in real time, and they absolutely MUST be real time. I often use software to remove line-freq noise in post-production and have noted that process is more computer-intensive than is broadband.
Interesting point!
A bit out of this great video - I been wanting to ask you about your guitars in a related video but you’re more concentrated on other interesting gears. Which you do really well. Anyway if you don’t mind me asking about what is your opinion between Suhr and American strats . Built qualities, sound, feel of fretboards etc? If you wish not to answer it could be an additional video comparing guitars when playing and recording etc.. 🙏 THANKS
Thank you! Yes, a video comparison between Fender and Suhr would be interesting. I think that Suhr compares more to custom shop Fender rather than American Standard. I found Suhr very very consistent and with an high quality...All the Suhr I have tried where always sounding great...where Fender custom shop are not always so consistent. Furthermore I really love the Suhr neck....they really fit with hands....and this is of course very personal. Nonetheless....a video comparison would be interesting!
Good points
Thank you!
Boss added in an update a mastering effect to Gt 1000 core. Is that what you are talking about?
NUX MG-300 should add the TC Electronic PEQ 3000 Dt to the modeler. That would be a killer equalizer.
Thank you for sharing!
You make a good point, Leo. But, (you knew that was coming) very, very few guitarists have any idea how those hardware pieces sound while virtually all know the sound of guitar processors which are, in fact, far more numerous.
Like you, I am both player and music mixer. As a result, I actually prefer keeping the two strictly separate, if for no other reason than time management. The ease of achieving a sound is super important to me and the very nuanced tones of studio hardware no guitarist will ever see are a big time-suck. Just my opinion, as you always so kindly say.
Thank you for sharing!
Yes, I think I understand what you mean....I would not use these type of post processing unit for recording purposes, but for live use I think they could add a final touch....in my opinion :)
Thank you!
On the Boss Gt1000, in the FX 1 and FX 2 blocks, you can choose MASTERING FX. In this case, you must place the FX block after the Main Speaker Simulator
Hi, thank you for sharing!
As far as I remember you can not select the type of processor...I mean API, Neve, SSL, ect...right?
@@LeoGibsonGtr you are right. The gt1000 give’s you options according to style of music or situation
very interesting point, but I think that is for another step of the producing process of a performance and it belongs to the mixing section/engineer. of course we in our room we are called to do it all nowadays, but for me it's better to have things separated and have those post processors in the daw or mixing desk, and not on the pedal board. otherwise it would be to much of a stress for the guitarist alone!
Thank you for sharing!
Interesting point...to me it would be interesting to have these features especially when playing live.
@@LeoGibsonGtr yeah but how could you do a good job when you are not foh at the mixing desk? and given that there will be an audio guy he will anyway make his own moves processing your signal.
Nice! But what about mixing guitar for live gig?)
Fractal Axe FX kinda lets you do this. It has different preamp sims but not different EQs. I have always thought it would be nice to have an API style in there to choose.
Yes, I do agree! The preamps sim in the Fractal are nice...it would be nice to have also API or NEVE eq in post...
Thanks!
I don't think those are needed, as eventually we plug the modeller into a DAW at home or a Mixer/Front of house that nowadays have tons of plugins plus more. There's enough analysis paralysis with all the stuff in these modellers, let alone add more things that will stop you from actually playing … or, god forbid...practicing!
Thank you for sharing!
For recording purposes probably they are not needed....but I would really like to have such simulations for playing live....of course it's just a personal opinion
Boss gt 1000 and core model give you an opportunity to post process your guitar effects chain. So once again boss is the one who does it
Hi, thank you for sharing!
As far as I remember you can not select the type of processor...I mean API, Neve, SSL, ect...right?
@@LeoGibsonGtr 11 types of Mastering FX are available and recommended in the end of the chain. 1 type = a combination of post processing effects chain. So there are no namings like API / Neve/ SSL (not sure why we need to stick with brand naming) , but tools are definitely there and do the same thing you are mentioning in the video
I want tu buy your impulse response pack, but im not shure if i will like it, do you have some one "test" impulse response?
Hi, here you can find the video where I have explained how I have created the IRs with a demo song: ruclips.net/video/aIjuF6k5xXs/видео.html
Thank you!
My fractal has these tools po post tone shaping
For me, the feature that is often missing in Modelers is "auto-sensing" so the Looper will start recording when it senses a loud enough signal. I think a Looper rivals Distortion, and Reverb/Delay as must have Effect.
Interesting point! Thank you for sharing!
So you don´t want a pedal board. You want a full studio solution. But where do we draw the line? The pedal board all ready has a soundcard. What more can we ask for? Should we really spend more CPU resourses on on-board postmixin when all the studio job should in fact be done in the studio. It´s like buyin a car but saying "It would be nice if it could fly!" Well then, buy an aeroplane!
Well, while playing live, in my opinion, these post effects are important, where they could less important for recording. I would really like to have API, NEVE or SSL flavours at my disposal, or to be able to choose a vari-mu compressor or a FET one. To me these things are important to shape my tone....of course, it's just my opinion.
This Is the Key on that i'm waiting sidechain compressors on quad Cortex in 3.0 update
For sure it would be an interesting feature!
I love the channel but regarding this topic/video: Why do we always need to copy stuff so PRECISELY? This level of detail is of no consequence to the vast majority of players including beginner to intermediate players yet the youtube guitar community seems to obsess on this stuff and emphasising it's importance.
Thank you for sharing!
Of course, we are not obliged....but the more I progress in mixing my music and understanding Neve, API, SSL colours...the more I would like to have those colours in my pedalboard....it could be just me.
Thank you!
@@LeoGibsonGtrLeo, i hadn’t thought about eq, comp, etc modeling, and now that you pointed it out, it totally makes sense!
Imagine having Neve, SSL, EMI emulations on a HX Stomp, or in the BOSS GT-1000…
It would definitely be a game changer.
If eq, comp, console weren’t important, no studio would have 12 racks of equipment…
Love your videos Leo, you are the best!!
That's exactly what I mean!!!!
Thank you so much!!!!
Yeah, I bought a Les Paul and a Marshall to sound like Jimmy Page, but I ended up sounding like myself.
Before I even watch....is it...Digital In/Out?
😀...no it is not....
Hai studiato l'inglese dalle suore?
Thank you for your feedback. More details here: ruclips.net/video/jOAVAGODX98/видео.html