Part II of above post...
The "mushing out" problem, the problem of three dimensionality and movement, the problem of aural feel, and the problem of papery sound, are the areas I think guitar amp emulations have difficulty. It finally occurred to me that instead of trying to emulate something with software, or a blend of software and hardware as with things like the Kemper or Axe FX, things that still have the imperfections I've outlined (to my ear/brain), the best thing to do is use real amplifiers. I do think, however, that the Kemper technology works better than the algorithm based technology of most modelers.
And other than the fact that real amplifiers are loud, why wouldn't you use a real amplifier if you have good sounding ones at hand, and what you want is the exact sound of a real amplifier (I realize of course that you might not have the amp you want for a given thing, or you might prefer modeled sounds, but that's another story and isn't the question I'm asking).
Real amplifiers are the best way to emulate real amplifiers, right? There aren't any questions or issues, they're real. Just as real vocalists are the best way to emulate vocalists (and yes, of course I have software that does vocals, but not very well).
Drums? Well, drums are easier to emulate, though the emulations are far from perfect. But at least the sounds are shorter, and they go past the ear pretty quickly. So they mix a little better unless you're picky, which I am, but budgets often don't let me use real drums. I live with that, and it vexes the crap out of me. I like booking studios and hiring drummers.
Unfortunately, as wonderful and powerful as soft synths are -- and I love what you can do with them -- I also don't like what you can't do with them very easily. At least to my taste. And that is mix them with live instruments. This is not a matter of digital v analog synths -- DX7s mixed perfectly with real instruments back in the day. My D-50 cut just fine. I deployed 3 Kurzweil K2000s, digital synth/samplers that were not a problem to mix. And nearly every film score in the 80s and 90s had some Fairlight blended in with the orchestra. My Microwave XT was something I used on every project, and all were digital running out of hardware systems.
So my plan is to use the best sounding soft synths, that are closest to the sound of hardware (and there are quite a few that are really good at it) and run those through hardware to make them sit better in the mix.
So why'd I order a hardware synth? Because it sounds great and will save me some steps in my workflow. And it'll just be more fun to use.
I hope this explains where I am with this. I am not against digital. I'm not a "has to be on tape" guy. I don't use tape any more, and haven't since the 90s. I am not using a traditional console, though I will invest in another summing mixer when I add more channels of D/A conversion, not because it sounds "better" but because it adds something to the sound that I want to hear.
Digital isn't worse than analog, it's just different from analog. Ultimately, however, anything digital has to turn into analog at some point in order to hear it. I think it's how that's accomplished that makes or breaks a mix.
The "mushing out" problem, the problem of three dimensionality and movement, the problem of aural feel, and the problem of papery sound, are the areas I think guitar amp emulations have difficulty. It finally occurred to me that instead of trying to emulate something with software, or a blend of software and hardware as with things like the Kemper or Axe FX, things that still have the imperfections I've outlined (to my ear/brain), the best thing to do is use real amplifiers. I do think, however, that the Kemper technology works better than the algorithm based technology of most modelers.
And other than the fact that real amplifiers are loud, why wouldn't you use a real amplifier if you have good sounding ones at hand, and what you want is the exact sound of a real amplifier (I realize of course that you might not have the amp you want for a given thing, or you might prefer modeled sounds, but that's another story and isn't the question I'm asking).
Real amplifiers are the best way to emulate real amplifiers, right? There aren't any questions or issues, they're real. Just as real vocalists are the best way to emulate vocalists (and yes, of course I have software that does vocals, but not very well).
Drums? Well, drums are easier to emulate, though the emulations are far from perfect. But at least the sounds are shorter, and they go past the ear pretty quickly. So they mix a little better unless you're picky, which I am, but budgets often don't let me use real drums. I live with that, and it vexes the crap out of me. I like booking studios and hiring drummers.
Unfortunately, as wonderful and powerful as soft synths are -- and I love what you can do with them -- I also don't like what you can't do with them very easily. At least to my taste. And that is mix them with live instruments. This is not a matter of digital v analog synths -- DX7s mixed perfectly with real instruments back in the day. My D-50 cut just fine. I deployed 3 Kurzweil K2000s, digital synth/samplers that were not a problem to mix. And nearly every film score in the 80s and 90s had some Fairlight blended in with the orchestra. My Microwave XT was something I used on every project, and all were digital running out of hardware systems.
So my plan is to use the best sounding soft synths, that are closest to the sound of hardware (and there are quite a few that are really good at it) and run those through hardware to make them sit better in the mix.
So why'd I order a hardware synth? Because it sounds great and will save me some steps in my workflow. And it'll just be more fun to use.
I hope this explains where I am with this. I am not against digital. I'm not a "has to be on tape" guy. I don't use tape any more, and haven't since the 90s. I am not using a traditional console, though I will invest in another summing mixer when I add more channels of D/A conversion, not because it sounds "better" but because it adds something to the sound that I want to hear.
Digital isn't worse than analog, it's just different from analog. Ultimately, however, anything digital has to turn into analog at some point in order to hear it. I think it's how that's accomplished that makes or breaks a mix.
Last edited: