Current State of Amp Sims

[deltafox]

Hi guys, new here (been a lurker for a while )

So atm I'm writing my dissertation (music tech course) on guitar amp modelling and was hoping to get your input/opinions. I've written on aspects of why tube-based guitar amp have their own tonal characteristics and then gone on to describe current methods of guitar amp modelling. It's written in simple terms and doesn't go into too much into the technical/programming stuff.

Basically my question is, will amp sims ever sound as good as the real thing?

What are the limitations of current methods of guitar amp modelling and what developments are taking place to improve emulation?

Thanks

[sangos]

They are as good as the real thing...and better because of their ease of use, myriad of options, scalable unlimited, endless possibilities of tonal development (developers please!). As a user am very happy with all the free stuff as well as paid....some of the amps simulated are near perfect as the real rig as tested and proved by users...onqel's X50 for ex; SLO amp from AT3 etc.

Currently what can be cooler than having your rig on your iPhone...of course we still need the player skills and all the hard work and total commitment to this incredible instrument

Goodluck with your work!

[strangedogs]

I love Amp Sims and Modeling and actually haven't turned on any of my real amps in months BUT:

IMO There will never be any Computer SIM as good as a REAL TUBE AMP cranked up.

[maxthedog]

Hi guys, new here (been a lurker for a while )

Basically my question is, will amp sims ever sound as good as the real thing?

The difficulty here is that you're asking a question about quality, and perception of quality or value is rather subjective. Guitar amp modeling will be of different value to different people for different reasons.

[deltafox]

Thanks for the replies. Yeah, I probably shouldn't have said "good" . I acknowledge amplifier sims come with many advantages over analog guitar amplifiers. But from a purely technical standpoint, will it possible for amp modelling to exactly (or perceived to be exact) replicate the sound and feel of the analog amplifier it's attempting to emulate. Therefore, in theory, making analog guitar amplifiers obsolete.

[bill0287]

One thing to keep in mind is that most sim chains are designed to simulate the recorded guitar sound - not the sound that pumps out of a 4x12 speaker cabinet. The only way to really compare the two would be to take the preamp output of the simulator to a real poweramp, driving a real set of speakers. For me at least, there is no desktop substitute for four 12 inch speakers pushing air around a room.

If your goal is to compare the recorded results between the two, then that is another story and you would have to have the exact same analog chain to make that comparison.

[sangos]

I would say with the IR technology - some of the best are by impluse experts in the forum here like Alu, I get a near replication of a Marshall, celestion cabs no problem. Even dig the Amplitube cab technology, which is almost perfect as the real air pushing thing IMO.

One thing to keep in mind is that most sim chains are designed to simulate the recorded guitar sound - not the sound that pumps out of a 4x12 speaker cabinet. The only way to really compare the two would be to take the preamp output of the simulator to a real poweramp, driving a real set of speakers. For me at least, there is no desktop substitute for four 12 inch speakers pushing air around a room.

If your goal is to compare the recorded results between the two, then that is another story and you would have to have the exact same analog chain to make that comparison.

[FormSRAudio]

If your question is only regarding the amp sim, I would give that a big YES. Check out this Youtube video by our own Hallowman aka MattismPL:

http://www.link-not-allowed.com/watch?v=eqGj73YSHeE

Lepou did a comparison (unfortunately no longer available on this site) with his recto as well, it's REAL hard to tell the difference.

In a mix, most people, including guitarists and engineers couldn't tell the difference in sound. Playability/feeling is very good in some of Lepou's, Onqel, and Alu's new stuff. The major players like amplitube/guitar rig are behind those guys in my opinion.

Will they ever be used live? until the cabinet section becomes better, probably not. But the amp sims themselves are pretty freakin good now. I can certainly see sims replacing the real thing in studios. I'll stick by the claim that if you've never been fooled by an amp sim, you're lying. I also love hearing the air comment from people that can't even explain what the "Air" sound is. I agree with Sangos above, but It won't be long before someone figures out how to add it to the cab section sound and it gets even better.

[Honch]

The thing is elusive. Think like this instead:

1. Why does amp sims manufacturer come out each year with new and bettered sims, speaker IR's and so on?

2. Marshall came out with it's PLEX in the 60's. So did Fender Twins, and they left it at that. Why do you think?
If they came out with something new, it was a new model from start on.

3. Does amp sims sound like real guitar amps: NO! And never will.
4. Does amp sims sounds like miked up guitar amps - i e recorded guitar amps in a studio: YES! And most of them have been doing that for quite a while.

This is what you should compare to. Recording (miked up) real guitar amps. Nothing else.

It's the 4th point that we are discussing and arguing about ad naseum. It's like the derivate or something. You will get closer and closer to that guit...sorry... cigar but never reaching it totally. As we develop and get better and better, it will be sufficient enough, for most people. Say, take Guitar Rig, Amplitube, POD Farm, or any og the big sims. If you'd buy all this gear IRL it would:

1. Cost you a fortune.
2. Weigh too much, take up too much real estate, and consume waste energy - think about how ENVIRONMENTALLY friendly, amp sims are! Especially those of CLASS A things.
3. Save your hearing. No need to crank past 120 db to get "that" tone.

There are several other things. Like, amps that aren't made anymore. Vintage styles, and combinations of ohm, sagging tubes, Power attenuators, that will shorten a real tube amp lifetime, if not even being downright hazardous to your health and even life. You can pretty much experiment with anything, and nothing will blow, or short in the virtual world. The most dangerous things that can happen is crashing your system. A restart and then you're up again. No tubes wearing out if you don't tell the sims to do that. No cables to trip over. Save the one between your guitar and soundcard/PC/MAC.

My gripe, with ALL SIM manufacturers, so far, is that they aren't picky enough. They tend to focus on different and - imho - wrong parts of the timbre. When playing through ANY sim over a dense backing track, it's very hard to make any note JUMP out when you're leaning in with pick attack. I e dynamics. Even with distortion. Not so on real amps. I have had a very cheap transistor Peavey backstage amp at the side of my studio monitors, and even on the lowest volume level, that guitar note is heard above the mastered and compressed-to-death dense music that is going on from the computer. However, the note wasn't particularly good sound wise. But you could detect it all over the noise. Even DigiDesign ELEVEN and most of Axe FX patches suffers from this mind you. You can't EQ or "mic" your way out of these things. You have to turn up the general volume of the guitar track so it becomes annoying. Transient plug-ins won't help either.

I would love to see more manufacturers go into greater detail than before what happens to the transient initial pick attack, and what it does to especially speaker cone movement and overall tone. I find when I am playing up the plain strings on any guitar, it can sound pretty damm good sometimes, but as I go down the spun bass strings, they drown, in the attack and just turn muddy. The thing is: Not on ANY real amp, on any distortion setting, miked up or not. I mean, it should react more to all nuances of pick attack, angle and more sensitive dynamics. What happens after that, the decaying note and sustaining note, they've sorted out a long time ago. And those things I have no complaints about as of yet. There are still some kind of intimacy lacking, though. Albeit small. And nitpicking thing by the public in large. Say Studio Devils amps, or THD2 by Overloud. No matter what amp, clean or distorted, or resolution, there's a slight "CCCCHHHH" sound or timbre present in all presets that you can't really get rid of using EQ. Same with Guitar Rig. Even if you swap between Marshall, and Fender, there's a "haze of sameness" to the sound, timbre and tone that ain't present IRL amps.

The dream is when an AMP SIM company (or reviews of it) will state: If only a REAL AMP sounded as good as this!
And even, when such a statement will come from their competitors.

[Honch]

Oh BTW one thing more. You can't and shouldn't compare ANY amp sim, by wav files over the net, Youtube or manufacturers site. You simply must sit down and test how it reacts to YOUR picking and playing. That's the only do or die.

To me, it's the same thing like, displaying a YouTube videos of HiFi high end speakers "Listen how good these speakers sounds" and all you do is listening to them on your desktop speakers. And speaking of which, I have yet to see or hear anyone offering a blindfold test to tell the difference between a real and a sim on a NAMN show or Frankfurt. Also, still when cranking up headphones on A N Y patch or IR on ANY Amp SIM to full volume and even excessive distortion, just don't pick hard.... brush lightly with your picking hands thumb just to make the faintest strum and listen carefully for those moths that are starting to fly around in the general strumming noise...that digital "frazzle" or "haze" shows up as a ugly digital noise. You mask that by playing very hard with the pick, but it'll destroy your ears. But, on a real amp? No moths flying around...

But I am sure that one day, the differences will be so small, that it will be sufficient enough for most people, and can live with the small idiosyncrasies that they have different from IRL amps. It's just a matter of money and technology advancing.

[FormSRAudio]

The dream is when an AMP SIM company (or reviews of it) will state: If only a REAL AMP sounded as good as this!
And even, when such a statement will come from their competitors.

The only problem I have with this line of thinking is this: What if the sims came first and then the hardware was made? Do we think that real amps are better simply because it's what we're accustom to hearing?

I'm not going to argue some of your points, Honch, but I don't agree 100% with some of them. It sounds like you've got more experience with the paid for "big company" stuff than the free stuff. Some of your points are very true for the amplitubes and guitar rigs of the world, but some of your tonal problems I don't have with some of the "better" (free) stuff. Things you've mentioned like pick attack and sustain sound worlds better on the free sims than the paid for stuff.

Also, examples that I've heard of the sim played through a real speaker....you'll never tell the difference between the real and the sim. The amp sims are there, the speaker sims are not.

[Honch]

Yeah, FormSRudio, but Deltafox was writing an dissertation on this. I just wanted to put in things that hasn’t been said yet in another post. I said that the dream, and utopic would be somthing like that. There may be numerous freebies today that sounds better than huge companies products. You are alright and I agree with you that if vintage amps sounded like modellers of today, they and that sound would become the yardstick of course. It's the same debate with active pickups. If pickups sounded like EMG back in the 50's, and someone came up with a pickup today, that hummed big time, and had weak output no one would've bought it.

The thing is, that when I've turned to the control room after recording a real amp with the band, I've always thought/said "Uhhuh, so that is what it sounds like! ...". It’ never the same, or to my liking. The MAIN thing is that it will sound GOOD in the end, and that "GOOD" will be all different from any real amps in the room in the studio. That it fits into everything else is what matters. When I hear a finished production today, there’s absolutely no way I can tell if it’s made on a sim, or a real amp. I have to PLAY the thing, with my own guitars, and preferrably on my own headphones at a level determined by me alone, for a long period of time before I can VAGUELY detect any difference.

The word "GOOD" today is open for interpretation. Some manufacturers will clean off the "Warts and all" from the real guitar amps (even S-gear claimed this in their manual). The idiosyncrasises and unforgivenness to ones playing and pick attack, that is present on - let's face it - any real amp, is taken away and cleaned off, in the first place, even before they start to design the modeller, it seems. It's hard to explain, but the closest thing I can even compare to is the "mastered" versions of todays popular and well produced recordings. I e - say - a high gain metal sound of a high gain amp on a big block metal production, is the yardstick for modelling it seems. The high gain sounds - to me -like it has been processed through a "mastering" processor, and are played and felt through that. It's basically the same with all the rest of the sounds. It's a "static" sound. Undynamic and linear. The problem with IR’s and impulses is that they are very linear, and in most cases undynamic. If companies like QUANTEC should start making IR’s or a “speaker box” simulator they would’ve not cut any corners on unlinearity or dynamics. But it would crash your CPU in a split second.

Still, on any modeller today, regardless of freebee or bigtime, there’s a SLIGHT “cccchhhhh” sound to any note. Clean or distorted or in between. You just have to play a lot with different amp sims, and then after a while it starts to dawn on you. Whether you can live with that, is of course, just up to you and your taste. Even Axe Ultra-FX has this present on all patches but not as much. If this “ccccchh” sound occurred on any real amp I would not have a problem with this, of course. If you don’t hear it, get out the earliest (and worst) examples of say Behringers V-amp and put on your cans, and play for a while. After a while, these moths are starting to fly around in your head. 

[rusk]

The differences between sims and real amps:

1. Live feeling. You will never feel ampsim like as real amp with cabinet. But in recording sims are very useful. Sometimes you will be able to get much better sound in mix using ampsims instead of real analog chain (especially if you have no proper room and studio setup and enough knowlage to record guitars).

2. Dinamics. Software cab sims still differ to real cabs when you play with diferent dinamics.

3. Price. Even most expencive sims costs less then one good guitar stack.

[Zanman777]

Wow, it's such a relief to read other people saying that amp sims are really good, (nearly) as good as the real thing. It gets tiring to read everybody desperately holding on to the "hope" that the real thing is still better. Not trying to be arrogant here.

Just wanted to post my opinion here.

I find it dazzling when people say that sims don't sound EXACTLY like the real thing. To these people, I have one question: do you think the REAL thing is EXACTLY the same in each unit? By other words, do you think EVERY Twin Reverb in the world, or EVERY Marshall JCM900 sound alike? The answer is obviously no... Take two exact copies of the same amplifier, bring them into a room and do an A/B test. You'll find the same "differences" that you find when you A/B sims vs. real tube amps. Chances are the sims difference is smaller.

On the other hand, two software copies of amp sims will sound EXACTLY alike (given they have the same settings, are played on the same room through the same cab/speakers). Software is just 1s and 0s.

I sense amp sim's quality is sort of a taboo on the guitar players' world. It's like It's forbidden to say amp sims are that good. It's like there's an inherent sense of guilt... Technology is stunning, what's wrong with that? Tubes/valves are a "technology" from the past, they're history, they've been replaced on pretty much every industry except sound (especially guitar related).

Honch, I've read your points, and I agree with a fair share of them. I certainly respect your opinion. But let me tell you the same thing I usually say about solid state amps. Amp sims and solid state amps are cheaper to make (sims can even be made for free). They are also cheaper to acquire. So... all the "low budget, rookie-targeted stuff" fall into the solid state/amp sim category. But does that mean all solid state amps/amp sims are "low budget, rookie-targeted stuff"? NO! It just means that, amongst solid state/amp sim pearls, you also find rocks. A lot more rocks than in the tube amps industry. The tube industry simply is "already filtered out", the ones that weren't worth it didn't/don't stick (unlike solid state/amp sims).

The "Chhhh" thing you mention is wierd. I never had that problem. And I can tell you real amps DO have that "chhh" while they're on and idle. So it's not even an amp sim problem.

There are loads of different amp sims, some good, some bad. The one that completely convinced me that the amp sim vs tube amp battle was won was Amplitube Fender. The touch responsiveness, the dynamics... It's all there. And there shall be other VSTs that nail it as well or even better. You just have to search.

[Vietnam09]

great topic here, tube distortion breaks up with the complexity of the universe!!!

amp sim tube distortion uses maths to simulate universe complexity tube distortion - so,

can an amp sim preamp for example EXACTLY replicate a real tube preamp's distortion?

NO!!! not in 2011!! and probably not for a very long time!!! since the person making the emulation can not describe the infinitely complex tube break up in maths EXACTLY as he can not perfectly describe the universe.


So in conclusion the answer was NO a maths based amp sim (emulation) of say a tube preamp can not EXACTLY replicate it's infinitely complex analogue tube based preamp counterpart.

boo hoo!

The thing is!!!!!

Does a digital emulation actually HAVE TO REPLICATE EXACTLY the tube distortion for the listener to actually realise that it is not EXACTLY the same?

I mean how good is the listener doing the A/B test of real tube distortion vs digital? does he have 2 ears? has he heard metal? is it my dad? he couldn't tell the difference between a Marshall and a Mesa Boogie! or is it Andy Sneap? he can! Or even is the listener listening in isolation to the 2 tones (one real and one digital maths) or is it mixed within a mix of drums, bass, vocals and another guitar !!

So.. although the answer is a conclusive no - the theory of the first question will amp sim ever EXACTLY replicate tube amps? Answer... NO! at this point do not get depressed!!! The question although seems reasonable and is one that all of us on our quest of tone must have thought about - it is actually completely missing a fundamental element of understanding of the magic of MIXING / TONE - looking at it from a mixing guy's point of view, when has the mixing guys job ever been easy? perfect !! never does he have a perfect tone coming in - it's all about the magic of making a sound work within the right context and is usually going to be some sort of magic / trickery to fool the listener into believing something anyway!

At least there is a happy ending to this question!

[Honch]

Ok, it's open for interpretation. This will turn out a flame. I think over at S-gear forum, Mike Scuffham has some good insights regarding the last chain. The speaker sims, and his views on IIR, convolution and especially dynamics, and linearity and unlinearity.

Mind you, it's all electronics, one day for sure, all or most amp sims will turn out sufficient enough for the discerning guitar player. It's the same with digital pianos, that they still keep coming out with the newest fad that will sound exactly like an acoustic grand. No way. Keith Jarrett will not change. Or these Hammond Clones organ and Leslie simulators. How people can compare a real life rotating speaker to a recorded one beats me. However, in guitar world we keep comparing something that is entirely electronic in both areas, i e real amps vs amp sims. It's just a matter of time.

To some discerning players the Axe Ultra FX is already there. "Sufficient enough". It's only a matter of time when they can cram it all into a iPhone and let it rip. I still wonder why it hasn't found its way onto regular PC or MAC. I would like to see companies like Quantec Room Simulator do their take on speaker sims, and unlinearity. In reverbs, they cut no corners, anywhere. But at a price. As we all know, what's unreachable for us today, will be in 3-4 years. It's just electronics.

[Honch]

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:

Will tube amps - especially Class A - become prohibited due to environmental and climate smart - reasons?

Say, what happened to endagered woods for guitars, or light bulbs. Let's say the powers that be who doesn't care about anything puts a ban on real class A-amps, due to their waste of energy, and puts a directive on manufacurers to produce amps sims instead, or energy effective small amps with speakers BUT with amp sims?

I mean, it's nothing that we can decide about, whether we like it or not, but it wouldn't surprise me if some schmuck in the powers that be comes up with a stupid idea, which they've done before regarding exotic woods, and obscure regulations on light bulbs, which one's allowed and which are not. As a said, it wouldn't surprise me. Good then, if we're forced to use amp sims.

It's an entirely different topic, but as the thread was "current state of amp sims" it can go on quite a bit.

[Vietnam09]

Quote of the day from Honch:

"To some discerning players the Axe Ultra FX is already there. "Sufficient enough". It's only a matter of time when they can cram it all into a iPhone and let it rip."

[Distorque]

Most medium guitar tube amplifiers will use 100-500W. Most dishwashers use over 1000W. Power consumption is not the biggest environmental issue.

More likely would be the stopping of tube manufacture. Tubes are currently manufactured in China and the former Soviet Union. If that supply dries up, we could see tube amp prices go up as manufacturers are forced to use NOS tubes. Eventually, they would run out. But as long as we keep the market alive, that probably won't happen.

[Honch]

Regarding amp sims and especially convolution, and speaker IIRs:

The important thing to know about convolution is that it is a 'linear process', in simple terms this means that if you put a sine wave in, you will get a sine wave out - just the amplitude (level) of the output will change according to the characteristics of the filter (i.e. the impulse response). Furthermore, whatever amplitude the input signal is, the resulting change in the output signal will always be linear relative to the input signal. In other words, it won't amplify the input signal more at high input levels or low input levels, the effect will always be a linear one. Also, it won't clip, bend or warp the signal. By comparison, a real system (like a loudspeaker in a box), almost certainly will produce a different result with low or high input signal level, it may well clip and warp the signal in a 'non-linear' way.

From the above, you can then see that linear convolution is not going to capture any of the dynamics or overdrive characteristics of a guitar amp. A software amp that employs linear convolution needs to use other methods to deliver the non-linear characteristics of the amp. These methods are open to debate, and different manufacturers take on this. Sintifex, Voxengo, Nebula, you name it, they all have their algorithms and ideas and says that their methods works the best. To me, no one claimed this in real amps. They just do whatever they're doing. Non-linear.

[Honch]

Most medium guitar tube amplifiers will use 100-500W. Most dishwashers use over 1000W. Power consumption is not the biggest environmental issue.

Well, they thought so about some light bulbs, and some exotiv woods, regardless of it wasn't. It's all about whether they find an alternative to it or not. And that is not up to us to decide what's an environmental issue or not. Which is the main issue. There are alternatives to tube amps. Dishwashers? Manual by hand, but no real alternatives as of yet.

More likely would be the stopping of tube manufacture.

Yes, that's what I was talking about. For whatever reason. How should we then know how an amp sounds like, or which sound to replicate faithfully?

[Zanman777]

Regarding amp sims and especially convolution, and speaker IIRs:

The important thing to know about convolution is that it is a 'linear process', in simple terms this means that if you put a sine wave in, you will get a sine wave out (...). By comparison, a real system (like a loudspeaker in a box), almost certainly will produce a different result with low or high input signal level, it may well clip and warp the signal in a 'non-linear' way.

From the above, you can then see that linear convolution is not going to capture any of the dynamics or overdrive characteristics of a guitar amp. A software amp that employs linear convolution needs to use other methods to deliver the non-linear characteristics of the amp.

As it has already been said, if software amplification had been developed before hardware amplification, everybody would reject tube amplifiers, saying "they're awful, they produce differen results with low or high input signal level!! They may even clip and warp the signal in a non-linear way! They're so unreliable, so unpredictable." as opposed to the "software amps suck, they're too sterile, so perfect, so linear..." of real life.

I have to say it...



"I have a dream. That one day, people stop choosing an imperfect thing over a perfect one."

Food for thought

[Zanman777]

Most medium guitar tube amplifiers will use 100-500W. Most dishwashers use over
Yes, that's what I was talking about. For whatever reason. How should we then know how an amp sounds like, or which sound to replicate faithfully?

The point is, tube amplifiers DON'T have to be replicated, they don't have to be the role model/yardstick! They're only usually replicated because of their popularity, because people are used to hear that kind of sound. But there are OTHER amps, there are solid state amps that made history on the guitar world!! Roland JC Chorus 120, remember?? It's okay if software sims and tube amps are not 100% the same. It probably is 99% the same already. I don't get the fuss about the other 1%!!

Software amps give control over EVERYTHING you do, every nuance of the sound... They're a ZILLION times more flexible, easier to use, cheaper, reproducible... They can give tube sounds, and EVERY other sound (real or from an imaginary world), while tube sounds can only give their own sound but can't give software sims' sound/control degree. And the ONE argument that tube lovers find to set software amps aside is the stupid 1% difference in tone!! A mere 1% of difference that gets completely soaked after adding the other instruments, drums, voices and ambience... It beats me, honestly...
Sorry if I seem passionate about it, it's just that I get that 1% argument a LOT!

It's like this:
http://www.link-not-allowed.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

[Honch]

They can give tube sounds, and EVERY other sound (real or from an imaginary world), while tube sounds can only give their own sound but can't give software sims' sound/control degree

Hey, I actually told you that I like amp sims. I can HEAR no difference when JUST hearing. If it sounds good it sounds good. They are called AMP SIMS in the first place. For a reason. Not NEW AMP. or cucumber spaghetti welding units. It's not like they're are called something else, like the synthesisers did when they came around. Some people said the synthesisers (even samplers) would eventually replace every acoustic instruments in the long run, and now we know where that future prediction went.

I don't want tube sounds to have their own sounds. I want the instrumental players (humans who are playing them) to have their own sounds. Say, I like "trademark" guitar players of the world. Those who have their "instant fingerprint" on the tone, as fast as they play one note. Considering recent metal players and high gain players, the majority of these players I am talking about are the old-school guys. Hendrix, Brian May, Eric Johnson, Terje Rypdal (there's one for you), early van Halen, there's too many too numerous to namedrop them all. I e people that you can't copy or mimick no matter how much you try even if they handed over to you their own gear, and vice versa. Most of these people uses only a guitar and a cable and an amp of their choice. Thus, I have yet to see a new guy, the latest gun in the west, who's been renowned for a complete personal and unique tone, that has got that through ANY amp sim. That'll be the day. And still, no blind tests at music trade fairs have been carried out. So, what gives all this? Well, there's still a difference. Whether you may prefer it, or not be bothered by it is just a bickering of taste.

I am not saying that the exactness and perfectionism of amp sims, and digital world is what's ruining players from their personal fingerprint style, but IRL amps and speakers have their idiosyncraises and non-linearities that's makes them interesting to listening for a long time without being tired. You know "warts and all". It's called "listening fatigue". I remember in the synth wolrd when Yamaha DX-7 launched and everybody went ballistsic how real and true it sounded, especially in the Fender Rhodes sounds. Now, people cringe when they hear it, it sounds sooooooo dated. A VOX AC30, or Marshall Plexi still doesn't.

Say, the Ultra Axe-FX that everybody goes ballistic over today. If it had some merit, they would've just released that one, and leave it at that. A Fender Twin hasn't been changed much since the 60's, and if something's changed they released it under a new model name.

The thing I am slightly slanting towards is that, whenever an amp sim comes around, I don't want it to sound EXACTLY like another player (say Angus young patches, Dave Gilmour... etc). I do want it to sound like me. Even if I hand over the guitar to someone else you should hear it in a split second. And today, most real amps, solid state or not, reveals this. Most amp sims today sounds too good and too big, with too little effort. Ha ha!

[Honch]

As I said, the actual amp sim put through a IRL speaker box, will be an even wash today, pretty much, but it's the speaker IIRs, and sims and that whole "convolution" things, that needs - still - to be addressed differently. The non-linearities. AFAIK the company Quantec is the only one dealing with "room" and "box" non-linearities. It's a reverb company though, but they have their fits about convolutions and IIR. They think they basically sucks big time, and makes the resulting sound sound as flat as a pancake. All others, Nebula, and all these italian guys (what's in this?!) makes their own cunning ways around stale and lifeless convolutions/IIR. That .... Kempfer (?!).. company too, with their profiling.

For sure: One day it will be sufficient enough. For all people. It ain't there yet. It's just entirely electronic and number crunching. If it was sufficient enough already, there would be no reason to develop things any further, or any reason for anyone to come up with any new "convolver" or amp sim.