Anderton Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 It was a Big Deal at the Frankfurt show, and probably many of you have received your April issue of EQ by now, where we did a Coming Attraction on it. Anyway, I've been beta testing it and helping with the manual, so I'm pretty familiar with it. If y'all have any questions, fire away. I will say one thing that wasn't mentioned in the coming attraction: It turns out that you can put a split within a split, so you could have (for example) four parallel effects. I'm going to try and see if I can emulate a Quadrafuzz type effect using this approach. The other thing the EQ piece didn't hit on was the two "Tapedecks" (hard disk recorders). One of the neat features is you can record a riff through the processors into one Tapedeck, transfer it to the other, play over the original riff, and record the combination. Basically it's kind of sound-on-sound but it allows building up really incredible textures if you're into recording patterns for loops and such. The miking of the speaker cabinets is cool, too. Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Klopmeyer Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 I also got to check it out a bit early...NI had a little party here in LA right before Messe and demoed it. I was really impressed, but it's definitely the type of thing I'll want to sit down and play through myself. Can't wait! - Jeff Marketing Communications for MI/Pro Audio My solo music and stuff They Stole My Crayon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanner Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Originally posted by Anderton: [QB]It was a Big Deal at the Frankfurt show, and probably many of you have received your April issue of EQ by now, where we did a Coming Attraction on it. Anyway, I've been beta testing it and helping with the manual, so I'm pretty familiar with it. If y'all have any questions, fire away. i'm firin' away- watcha talkin about? who is "NI"? and what is anyone saying about their "guitar rig"? as you have guessed-i dont get EQ-tho' i may have to depending on what the heck this thing is... s AMPSSOUNDBETTERLOUDER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHAN Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 CLICK ME! So Many Drummers. So Little Time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fantasticsound Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Thanks, Khan. Frankly, Craig, I'm no newbie and I pay quite a bit of attention to new pro audio and guitar gear, yet I had no idea what you were talking about. I guess I expect at least a little more than guitar rig and NI from you. I wasn't sure if NI was a company or a particular guitarist showing off his rig, and for that reason had no idea you were describing a software guitar amp, cab, and effects simulator. Looks interesting on paper. I'd love to see the most compact way to implement it onstage. I didn't see any information regarding a Palm/Pocket PC version, which in theory is a no-brainer considering they're pushing this as a live as well as studio guitar timbre solution. The full version could be used for setup and realtime changes within the software, whereas the Organizer software could be the engine with limited software control, but full implementation of the Rig Kontrol hardware. Now THAT would be really cool. It's easiest to find me on Facebook. Neil Bergman Soundclick fntstcsnd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted April 12, 2004 Author Share Posted April 12, 2004 <> Well, you need a pretty hefty processor to do all that real-time stuff...the amps and reverbs in particular suck a fair amount of CPU power, although the other effects are pretty efficient. Don't know if them little computer thingies have enough cojones to do the job. Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted April 12, 2004 Author Share Posted April 12, 2004 <> Hey, I referenced the EQ article! Doesn't EVERYONE read EQ? Okay, I'll give more details next time I do a tease. Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flexoffset Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 I was curious about the emulation quality. I downloaded the first batch of MP3's and the subsequent replacement MP3's and it sounded like my very old Yamaha REX-50 set to 'Distortion' and then going direct into the board. I kinda likened it to Steely Dan's 'Reelin In The Years' tonewise. In real life, how does it sound? With so few amp simulations compared to the Pod XT, do you feel the palette is a bit limited or do the effects make up for it? It seems more suited for clean, dreamy guitar tones vs. heavily distorted tones. Thanks for the help!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fantasticsound Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Good point, Craig. The little units will probably not be able to keep up until they improve in processing power and speed. EQ? Frankly, I gave up on subscribing to most music magazines. I still get Mix, Pro Sound & Stage Lighting and I signed up for the relative infant of pro audio mag's, FOH. As much as I appreciated EQ's early format, I lost interest somewhere along the way. Same for Guitar Player, Keyboard and a few others, though I know the latter lost me because I'm not much of a synth player. I'd rather bang out a song on a real piano any day then spend time fleshing out synth sounds, so most of Keyboard didn't interest me. As for GP, I had too little interest in the popular guitarists of the 1990's and 2000's to be interested in the mag. I don't know if I'm representative of any group or not, but after my mid 20's, I had little use for the creative focus of GP. And with direct access to much of what I DO care for online, there's little need (and plenty of reason not) subscribe. I'd rathe contribute here and play more. It's easiest to find me on Facebook. Neil Bergman Soundclick fntstcsnd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted April 12, 2004 Author Share Posted April 12, 2004 < I'm still trying to find the "sweet spots," although I've found quite a few. There are so many options for mics, mic position, cabinet, amps, etc. that it's really easy to get sounds that DON'T work. However, when all the pieces fall into place, you can get some really great amp sounds, with that kind of "oomph" in the bass that's hard to emulate. I think a lot of the best sounds are just guitar > amp > one or two cabs. But I'm also experimenting with getting really involved, like 4-way parallel splits and stuff to see what will happen. I've also been able to get some really nice, glassy acoustic-sorta sounds -- a pleasant surprise. Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franknputer Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 How's it compare to AmpliTube? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tradivoro Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 I'm sure that you can get some great guitar sounds out of this software... My main question is, if I"m using it with an Athlon 2200 chip and 1 1/2 gigs of ram, am I still going to get a delay when playing the guitar?? Cause when I've tried other amp emulation software, I gotta play with headphones, keep one can off so I can hear the regular guitar so that the delay doesn't throw me... Just curious... www.soundclick.com/paulradelat www.123writemelody.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philter Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Yes, how do they handle latency? ---------------------------- Phil Mann http://www.wideblacksky.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salyphus Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Yep, latency is the first thing that came to mind for me as well. Sounds interesting, but latency really makes guitar playing a lot less fun, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hendmik Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Originally posted by Christopher Kemp: How's it compare to AmpliTube?I use Amplitube and have to say I like it a lot. It doesn't replace a great tube amp, but it still sounds REALLY nice. The thing I've said Amplitube lacks is patch control for real time use. This seems to have what Amplitube doesn't. I'm still unclear if you can use your existing sound card (for live use I'd be stuck with my laptop's onboard sound) or what interface it requires. Maybe I need to pick up this month's EQ. Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform. Mark Twain (1835-1910) -------------------- Reporter: "Ah, do you think you could destroy the world?" The Tick: "Ehgad I hope not. That's where I keep all my stuff!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Klopmeyer Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Originally posted by Salfish: Yep, latency is the first thing that came to mind for me as well. Sounds interesting, but latency really makes guitar playing a lot less fun, IMHO.That's one of the reasons I must play on this thing before jumping in. However, since they've done some tricks that combine hardware and software, I'll bet the latency (or lack thereof) is pretty good. When I saw the demo, it semed good, but as we know, this is a feel thing. you gotta play it to know for sure. - Jeff Marketing Communications for MI/Pro Audio My solo music and stuff They Stole My Crayon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHAN Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 I'm very interested in the future of all of this modelling stuff. A couple of years ago I got a Pod Pro. It has been a useful tool for recording and practicing with headphones, but playing it through a PA system or amp/speaker rig left me feeling disconnected from my sound. For live performance I just love the sound, feel and even the smells eminating from a fired up tube amp. So Many Drummers. So Little Time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tedster Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Anyone Curious About NI's Guitar Rig?[/quote} Geez...I dunno...is that like being "NI" curious? "Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeronyne Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Originally posted by Anderton: [QBI'm still trying to find the "sweet spots," although I've found quite a few. There are so many options for mics, mic position, cabinet, amps, etc. that it's really easy to get sounds that DON'T work.[/QB]How about when you try to emulate your own guitar rig? I'm sure you have the stuff to try an A/B, right? I wonder how close a recording of, let's say, the Marshall Plexi/4 Celestion/ SM57 model would hold up to a recording using the real-world versions? "For instance" is not proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHAN Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Originally posted by Tedster Cottontail: Anyone Curious About NI's Guitar Rig?Geez...I dunno...is that like being "NI" curious?Inappropriate. ..but funny though. So Many Drummers. So Little Time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted April 13, 2004 Author Share Posted April 13, 2004 Wow, lots of questions... < I like AmpliTube a lot. They're very different programs philosophically. Guitar Rig is modular and allows much more customization. There's also good use of tempo sync. AmpliTube is more "plug and play" because the choices have been made for you. Guitar Rig lets you try out all kinds of goofy "what if" options, some of which are outstanding and you can't get with any other software. < It's a function of your sound card and its drivers. In stand-alone mode I can get about 3 ms with ASIO PowerPulsar, and that works for me. When used as a plug-in with a host, although I can still get that kind of speed, I need to go to 5-6 ms if I want to run lots of soft synths and effects. I don't find latency a problem. < Not really, I gave up on amps years ago -- really! I always go direct through a PA and get my sound before it hits the mixer input. Now, I DON'T recommend this to everyone!! I used tubes for years when I had to because that was the only choice, but at one point I switched over to keyboard amps and never looked back...I like a very versatile guitar sound, I stretch it a LOT of different ways, and I found that going through a tube amp always gave the guitar a certain color. While cool on some things, it was confining for other sounds I wanted to get. So, I've spent my time trying to find a great tube sound for when I wanted it, but one that I could switch off if desired. I have quite a few Guitar Rig patches that don't use the amps or cabinets. < So do I, but really, I'm more interested on how something sounds on its own merits -- whether it's a cool sound or not. Having said that, though, some of the emulations are really stunning. The spring reverb is uncanny in its accuracy, and the amps really do have that vibe that I associate with the "real" ones. Although as Marcus Ryle at Line 6 pointed out when we were talking about the POD, it's really hard to emulate, say, an old Vox AC30 because they would drag ten of them in, and they'd all sound different so they had to decide which one to emulate. In many ways, I'm still wrapping my head around the program...it has a LOT of possibilities. I save often not because I'm afraid it will crash (actually it's been very well-behaved, even as a beta), but because sometimes I overtweak a sound and it's good to be able to go back to when it was better Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alndln Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 I'm interested.I'll have to give it a spin myself before I can think of any questions.I'm also interested in the Palmer ADIG-LB www.palmerdirect.com which lets your plug any amp into it,then simulates just the cabinets for direct recording ect. "A Robot Playing Trumpet Blows" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desdinova Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 One thing I would be very curious about with the emulations is how it handles some of the "character" of certain amps. I use a Vox Valvetronix which is handy in the studio, and one of the attractions for me is the way it inherits some of the amp characteristics along with the sound. Such as in "twin reverb" mode you actually get that "splat" sound when you are up the neck using the bridge pickup. It even does that rather annoying but characteristc noise when you select a distortion box in the chain. Not necessirily desireable, but real enough. How does this software handle those kinds of nuances or does it? Natural amp distortion, like the edge you get on a Marshal turned up and things like that. How are the acoustic sounds? You mentioned some were glassy, but how about any rich acoustic (like classical) kind of sounds? Desdinova "...I am the one you warned me of." www.BaronAudio.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted April 15, 2004 Author Share Posted April 15, 2004 <> Well I'm not a tube fanatic, so it's tough for me to give an informed opinion. I just like the sounds I'm getting out it and they remind me a lot of the tube amps I've played through way back when. < There are no "official" acoustic sounds, it's all electric all the way. I've just managed to put together some patches that have more of an acoustic, super-clean vibe. So far I think GR nails the vintage sounds. But you can't get "ultra-modern" AdrenaLinn-type stuff out of it. This is definitely a program that's designed to put a bunch of classic expensive gear into something affordable. Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apophis Posted April 16, 2004 Share Posted April 16, 2004 IMO the demo clips of Guitar Rig sounds pretty damn awful. S.K. Evans | Animus Mundi | Nuendo 3.01, 3 WinXP SP1 machines (p4 3.0, 2.4 Celeron, 2.4 Celeron), Fxteleport, RME Multiface, 2 UAD cards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted April 16, 2004 Author Share Posted April 16, 2004 <> Wait 'til you hear mine . Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatBoy Posted April 25, 2004 Share Posted April 25, 2004 NI messed up the samples that you heard. They will up some new ones shortly and they apologize for any damage to your ears. haha This looks like a great amp simulator and cant wait for release! (lucky beta-users) Like Craig,I am not a tube fanatic either. I dont care where the tone I seek comes from.....just as long as I get it! Remember,tone starts from your fingers not the amp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daddyelmis Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 Craig: What's the street $ for this software looking like? More importantly, if used in a live rig, I presume you've got a laptop with either outboard or PCM audio card? How fast does the Kontroller switch patches? More questions, more questions. I believe that modeling will ultimately win the day for 80%+ of amateur and semi-pro guitarists, just as it did for keyboard players. Of course, any keyboardist worth his salt would love to play a 10ft Steinway, but the Kurzweil will do just fine and handle every other sound. Likewise, I would probably always rather play through a 59 Bassman for that tone, but if I need a plexi, the Bassman, a Twin, and the AC30, even if I had the $$ for all the amps I couldn't take 'em down to the Whale's Tail for a Saturday night gig. Having used midi for years, however, I am concerned with live applications of modeling in a pure software sense (as compared to Line 6 type modeling amps) -- computer crash, lock up, slow switching, crappy audio out, etc. What's your take on the GR as a live replacement for stacks o' gear? And would you monitor from the board or run a monitor amp? www.ruleradio.com "Fame is like death: We will never know what it looks like until we've reached the other side. Then it will be impossible to describe and no one will believe you if you try." - Sloane Crosley, Village Voice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bondsong Posted April 27, 2004 Share Posted April 27, 2004 Originally posted by Apophis: IMO the demo clips of Guitar Rig sounds pretty damn awful.I couldn't agree more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_frankenfurter Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 Wait 'til you hear mine .[/QB]Hi Craig! Is there a Chance to hear/download your SoundDemos soon? NI has removed them .mp3-demos from the NI-website... Is there a new (big?) Step to Realism in Guitarsoundsimulation with GuitarRig now? What in your Opinion are the Differences between POD and the new GuitarRig in Realism, Dynamic, Playability etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.