My Vision of the Future Guitar Amp

[cminor9]

I strongly believe in making everything as complicated as it HAS to be, and NOT MORE. (This is a regular conflict at work when facing the inevitable 'feature creep')

IOW, Make everything as simple as possible and no simpler. Simplicity in design is not the same thing as minimalism (which only some of us like) or a lack of key features (which none of us like); everyone appreciates simplicity.

You are essentially making the argument for dedicated consoles, and I agree with you. Want a computer? Then buy one. Want a video game console? Buy one. Want a DVD player? Buy one. And so on. The moment you start expecting your PC to do everything and do it well is the moment you create the demand for an overly complicated, fragile, and overly expensive operating system.

Let a tube amp be a tube amp.

[Phostenix]

Having a touch screen that looks like the faceplate of the amp or effect appeals to me because it solves one of the big objections to modelling systems - the complex user interface.

I don't think simple is always as simple as people make it out to be. A classic tube amp is simple, but limited, so then you buy another one to get a different sound. And a 3rd or 4th for some other options. Then you start trying different speakers or speaker cabs & trying combinations. And then you buy pedals for more sound choices. And then you need a pedal board & a power supply. And interconnect cables. And then you buy more pedals.

I've seen this over & over and have done it myself. A big part of the appeal of the Boss GT-Pro for me was simplicity. I was sick to death of the endless fiddling and A/Bing of things. I wasn't happy with the sounds I was getting from my gear and didn't really want to spend thousands of dollars on a collection of classic vintage amps - or even modern high end stuff, for that matter (though I'd love to have a Mesa Mark V).

As a recent example (tonight again), even though I spend most of my time playing through the GT-Pro, I've still been fiddling about with different speakers for my current tube & SS amps (Ampeg VL-503 & Crate GT3500H) and can't seem to get quite what I want. I LOVE the fact that changing speaker sims on the GT-Pro is a few button pushes. I can even setup a patch where I can switch between cabs with a footswitch (I did that with the Fender Pro Reverb sim).

Anyway, while I appreciate the guys who have played through the same amp for 20 years & won't put anything but a cable between their guitar & their amp, I don't think that represents most players. Most people love choices, love to try new gear, and continue to add equipment over time to have more options. I am completely astounded at the number of stomp boxes available today (especially OD/Distortion). If everyone was so happy with their amps, why does everybody get so excited about the latest boutique pedal?

Buying great tube amps is expensive & will most likely get more expensive over time. You can certainly argue that it's a better investment (nobody wants a 5 YO computer or a 5YO modelling box), but it's still cheaper to buy something like a Fractal Axe than it is to outfit yourself with 3 or 4 of the classics (plus great analog effects).

We will always appreciate the classics, for many reasons, but I still see these things as tools. I don't want an emotional attachment. I admit that I'm not much for nostalgia. I just want the best tool for the job.

[Chuck H]

What you argue goes back to a point I made in my post. Quality of tone will be sacrificed in the name of versitility and interface compatability. A lot of guys, even professionals, are gigging with modeling amps. It's because they want one amp that does it all. But as I also noted, they only sound good, not great. As far as I'm concearned, great tone is only possible with a tube amp. And "good enough" tone isn't good enough for me. I accept the limitations of the antiquated gear I use because what it does, it does so well. If players as a group opt to accept mediocrity in tone it follows that they must be mediocre artists. If this is the demographic spending $$$ on amps then what they want to buy will become whats available. This phenomenon is made much worse by information technologies and E commerse. And mediocrity will prevail in the gear and the music. That's only technological progress. It's certainly not cultural progress. If I have to prioritize progress I'll put cultural ahead of technological every time. Anyone who wouldn't is an anarchist whether they know it or not.

FWIW I do think there are still some young bands doing good things. But every year it gets slimmer. Perhaps a commentary on my age, but at my age I think I know enough to know the difference. And IMHO subtracting the option of great tone from pop and rock music isn't going to make this trend any better.

Chuck

[Enzo]

"Oh, it's OK for the stage, but I wouldn;t want to record with it."

SOund familiar? Kinda what CHuck is saying.

I have to say I don;t understand how having a touch screen virtual panel makes a user interface less complicated. Ever sit on a chair playing and reach out and tweak a knob with your toe? Or reach over and brush the side of a knob to turn it a little? Requires no precision of movement.

I guess it is OK to imagine "some sort" of touch screen, but the devil is always in the details. How exactly do you envision it to be laid out? Gonna have a virtual panel with images of each knob? Always all the knobs there? Or will it wind up - and I don't see how they could resist - with pages and layers? I mean if you are going to have virtual knobs, it is only a small step to virtual panels. Poke, its a Fender Deluxe, poke again and it is a MArshall Valvestate, poke again, AMpeg V4. The whole panel changes to appear like the modelled amp. Maybe the Deluxe screen would have the option to become the Deluxe Reverb upon demand. Marketing is the whole deal here, so why would they pass that up? You call up Champ, and all the extra "knobs" disappear. Or create your own panel - delete knobs you don't want, say you never use the trem on your Fender, so lose those knobs.

But lets say it is simplicity they want, so we have a stable panel - the same 10 - or however many - knobs are there all the time. How will the "knob" be actuated? You going to have to make a circular motion woth a fingertip like you are dialing an old phone to represent knob turning? or will you just poke at the setting position you want on a circular scale? or (shudder) up/down buttons for each knob?

And effects. You going to have those controls always displayed too? Or will they only pop up upon demand. I mean with any common FX train you got the overdrive gain and level, the chorus speed and depth, the compression threshold and level, maybe the EQ for solos with freqs and levels. If this thing is to take the place of say 6 floor pedals, that is maybe 20 knobs on the panel screen. Unless you want to go to pages of windows, and then so much for simple user interface. GO play with a Korg Triton and check that out.

Speaker emulators? OK, even more controls to select cab style and speaker model?

To me any of that is more complicated an interface, not less. I have to make sure what I am touching. AN example is my car radio. My old radios were tuned by turniing a knob up or down the dial, some these days have up/down tuning buttons. Especially inconvenient while driving. ANother is when I go to turn the volume control and the car hits a bump causing me to push in on the knob a moment. The multifunction control then interprets the push as a command to advance to the EQ or panning or something I don;t want.

If everyone was so happy with their amps, why does everybody get so excited about the latest boutique pedal?

These are mutually exclusive?

Why does someone use a pedal with an amp they love? Variety of tone. It frightens me artistically to hear guys talking about their "tone" as if it were one thing. I can;t imagine anything less interesting than a guitar with the same tone all night long. That Tube Screamer gives your Fender Twin a sound it doesn;t have on its own. And I like my Twin a lot.

I have a hard time believing that no pedals would appear on the floor in front of this modeller.

[BackwardsBoB]

Back in 1979, in college, I heard my professor bemoan the fact that "We gave them 8 bytes of memory, and they wanted more, so we gave them 16 bytes, but the wanted more, so we gave them 32 bytes... There's no end to it!"

For 30 years, faithfully following Moore's law, PC manufacturers have built computers with faster processors and more memory, because it was the only way to differentiate their products.

Now, programmers don't make programs smaller unless they're perceived as too big, and they don't make them faster unless they're perceived as too slow.

Combining these two realities, we find that faster computers with more memory only result in slower, more bloated code. Don't believe me? Boot Windows 3.1 on a 20 MHz processor. Then try booting what you're using now. Except for a decent networking card, the only common applications that old computers can't handle are video and 3D gaming, and that code had to be optimized to get it to work. And the speed race has dramatically reduced reliability and put a drain on the power lines that's hard to believe.

So, for your prediction to become reality, modeling technology will have to become fully competitive with tubes before the processor needs 100W+ and 20 programmer-years for software development. Wait too long, and you'll have to go to Asia for the software, and for reasons I've never figured out, they've never been able to write a useable user interface.

I am constantly amazed at the low-volume products I can't do cost-effectively because I'll need some simple software. Our $40,000 (used) 'scope runs Windows. It got a virus. Six weeks and $550 later, we've got it back. That's OK. I prefer the little 200MHz lunchbox one for most stuff.
There's no software in tube amps.

I'm not against sand in a tube amp. You could stick little DSPs in front of all the tube grids, and get an amp that will model everything out there, with touch sensitivity, but it wouldn't be any fun.

How many knobs do you need? Line 6's first amp had a row of maybe 8 knobs, with maybe 12 rows of labels above them that you selected with pushbuttons. That made maybe 96 effective knobs. I got some nice sounds out of it (though the default setting sucked, and you had to hook it up to a computer to get a useable interface), but it was possible to change some obscure global setting and turn it all to junk. Line 6 now offers a simpler interface with only a few knobs, dramatically limiting adjustability. Apparently, they agree that adjustable "everything" is way too much. Unfortunately, on many products, they dropped the nice input level knob with the clip LED, so you need high-output pickups or a booster in front, or none of the presets will sound right.

Ever notice how the modellers always seem "unfinished"? There will be a few decent models, but then there are a bunch of bogus ones because the marketing department said they needed a minimum of 12. Same with the effects. And there's always something brain-dead in the user interface that serves to limit and annoy. And the combo amps' speakers have their own tone that can only be twisted so far... You can only spend so much on NRE before the product is a sure loss.

I do like my GNX4 for practicing with headphones though. The MFX SuperModels Diesel Uberschal model and the stock EVH model are fun, and I can get some nice clean tones. With the recording, drum machine, and external input, it's pretty neat.

But I'll probably never see a Window 7 driver for it. Oops. Upgraded my computer. Need a new amp.

Please stand by while Windows loads the next post (ever wonder why they don't let you walk away, do something else, and come back?).

Paper empty on Drive A: (I actually got this message once).

[BackwardsBoB]

And did you ever notice that when you install a new piece of hardware, Windows goes out and finds a new hardware wizard that screws things up? Ever wonder why it doesn't find the old hardware wizard that did it the last time and knows what's changed?

It's because the new hardware wizard is a kid here on a visa. Lots cheaper.

[booj]

first find a way to change out batteries without losing yer programs

hide the screen. use the knobs and your ears to get the sound

make sure the input can handle the latest botique pedal

[Gollum]

I can totally agree about the whole bloated code aspect. Fortunately there's a lot of creativity out there now days in the software engineering field. Sure, big corporations and niche markets are still pretty dreary for the costs, but innovation is booming and the kids are learning programming logic younger and younger.

Phones are one of the most competitive markets for programmers right now because how the software FEELS is everything, and that's one of the hardest things to really get right. It was the difference between mario and all the other 2d scrollers that just didn't move well. Attention to detail makes a product last, and in that market products are in and out so fast you can blink and miss them.

I think a touch screen modeling amp could be done well, very well even, and will existing technology. It could run on a proprietary operating system, or take a cue from the rest of the world lately, go open source. Products that WORK sell. Unfortunately marketing departments for guitar companies don't truly know their audience in my opinion. They're far too concerned on how something will look on paper in a magazine, and not worried about what people will think when they're using it in the store. I can't count how many times I've found myself in a guitar store tweaking a Vetta trying to get something decent out of it and someone walks up and says "sounds good, too bad it took you an hour to do that though." And they're right. It shouldn't take that long to find something decent.

The reality is that a modeling amp can sound great on the bench of a studio desk. It can sound great for a studio musician that needs 100 types of tones that fit into a geo metro. Modeling amps give newer players something to experiment with and try new things. But they simply fail to WORK as they should.

Plug in a $100 Valve Jr into a decent cab and you'll be hard pressed to find a BAD tone. Just plug in and GO. With a modeling amp I have to SEARCH for that "tone" feature they seems to say this thing has hidden in it somewhere.

Bah /rant off.

I guess my point is that modeling CAN work, and I'd like to see it work. But the current lineup is kinda dismal. As I stated in my previous post, even the "kids" out there making "inaudible" music are using high end tube amps because modeling amps get painful to the ears and just don't work on a nationwide tour with 50 stops in 60 days lugging your gear in a trailer (surprise surprise).

Example: I've hung out with these guys, awesome people. They're not huge money makers, they lead worship at their church when they're not on tour. [nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EezL-fFoJc"]YouTube- IMPENDING DOOM "More Than Conquerors"[/nomedia]

Or how about these guys, even less known, but tube tone all the way.
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaWUPLKakco"]YouTube- For Today - Agape[/nomedia]

I'm just saying that if THIS is what the kids are looking up to these days (which they are) then I think tubes are safe for a little while longer still.

[Steve Conner]

I've blogged about this before:
scopeblog Less is More: Pay More, Get Less

The theme was "Pay More, Get Less". I argue that if you pay more for a tube amp, you get less controls and less options, but they were options you didn't need in the first place, so the lack of functionality actually makes it easier and more fun to work! You can quit worrying about the gear and just play music.

Another opinion I have of modelling amps is that they don't model classic amps, they model the programmer's idea of classic amps, and DSP programmers aren't always good, tasteful musicians. If the Line6 guy has a Fender Twin in his lab, there'll be some tone that he likes from it, and he'll set it up that way, and twiddle his DSP code to copy that tone. He might nail it perfectly, but does it follow from that that it'll do what *I* might want out of a Twin? I think this is what's meant when people say that modelling amps can be "one-dimensional".

I could probably make a DSP modelling amp that I'd enjoy playing as much as a tube amp, but I bet it wouldn't sell: it wouldn't have enough bells and whistles.

Also +1 on Enzo's comments about touch screens and knobs.

Computer-based "amps" can be interesting. Lately I've played the amp sims in GarageBand. They're remarkably good, but there's still noticeable latency, and I don't think that will ever go away on a desktop PC/mac platform.

[zzzapfizzz]

I think we still have a long way before we see stuff like this.
If not some new firm will enter the marked soon.

Look at what we have now. Line6 are so cheap that they're version of color screen is four different colored background LED's. Not sure Behringer even know what LCD are. Or better, haven't figured out how to copy it. But at least they are honest about they're stuff are made cheaply in China.
And Fractal, the only seriously builder out there doesn't even have amp knobs on they're simulator of today. If they had I buy it.

As a side note to the cost figures. Had to replace the touch screen on my kids Nitendo DSl. Total parts price including shipping under $3

[Old Tele man]

...simplicity is simple, so why do so many people work so HARD at trying to make it 'simple complexity'?

...why's the Telecaster still so popular?--it's utter simplicity!

...why are we being "groomed" for continuous 'updates'?--because of MS's bugs.

...why isn't Fender's "digital" replication of its "analog" amps still around?--because the RI models are simple.

...change simply for the sake of change is just that--change--and too often NOT a positive improvement!

...just because something CAN be changed is NOT a valid reason for changing it!

[hasserl]

I'm with you OTM. I'm a firm beliver in the KISS principle. To be frank, as a player I really don't care what technology is used, if it gets me the sound I want I'll be happy with it. If that technology is digital modelling, so be it. If it's tubes, that's fine too. I really don't care. I want to be able to plug in and play and enjoy the experience, that's all.

As a hobbyest amp tweaker I enjoy playing with tube amps, not solid state and I wouldn't have a clue what to do with digital modelling as far as repairs, mods, etc. And I really don't care to learn either. Messing with tube technology guitar amps is fun, that's why I do it. When it's no longer fun I won't. And messing with digital modeling doesn't appeal to me.

[Phostenix]

Good discussion, guys. We'll see what happens.

[Old Tele man]

...some people like to "push" the envelope.

...others just like the envelope the way it is.

...both work, but for different reasons for different people.

...as the Fench say, "...vive le difference!"

[Prairie Dawg]

...simplicity is simple, so why do so many people work so HARD at trying to make it 'simple complexity'?

...why's the Telecaster still so popular?--it's utter simplicity!

...why are we being "groomed" for continuous 'updates'?--because of MS's bugs.

...why isn't Fender's "digital" replication of its "analog" amps still around?--because the RI models are simple.

...change simply for the sake of change is just that--change--and too often NOT a positive improvement!

...just because something CAN be changed is NOT a valid reason for changing it!

My old man-the metallurgical engineer-always used to tell me I was studying for my doctorate in obsolete technology. He also used to say that progress was a good thing but it's gone too far.

Referring to a lot of this stuff, the old farmer that lives in my head would scratch his head and say "It's nice, sonny, but what does it DO?"

Donald Douglas was well known for what some called the Peoria standard. When engineering had produced the latest better mousetrap he'd say "Yes, yes, but how will it work in Peoria?" Unless there was a good answer it didn't get adopted-he did not like change for the sake of change-which is what my old man used to call Brownian motion, or 'a whole lot of heat but no light'.

I personally would like to get a nice flathead with a few improvements and put it in my Ford Ranger, even though the 3 liter engine therein makes more power and torque while burning less fuel.