Hmmm, I've never heard any of these type of things that I found satisfactory but I'm pretty picky about guitar recordings. There's just not enough going on there compared to actual modeling which takes into account the relationship between certain mics, speakers and the air betwen them and the room... and even with that there are only 2 modelers that I feel have gotten it right. I've either tried myself or listened to clips of just about everything that's out there going back 3 or 4 years, both software and hardware. But, like I said, I'm super picky about this stuff and how authentic my guitar tracks sound. I came to the realization that nothing is the same as recording a good boutique amp through a 4x12 with a good mic and proper placement so I went and bought a Soldano etc. and proved myself right. That is, until Amplitube 2 and Revalver MKII recently came out. If they were available at the time I bought my amp I probably would have held off... my Soldano hasn't seen alot of action lately :wink:iaresee said:
I disagree. This unit is not a stand-in for when you cannot use a mic. The Palmer unit takes the guess work out of mic choice and placement and preamp choice. And plenty of artists record and perform with them exclusively rather than go through the pains of mic'ing (see this and this). Satriani is a big endorser and, except where he's looking for feedback from his amps, his albums are recorded guitar -> amp -> Palmer.jroberts said:Those Palmer things are a good tool if you absolutely can not mic an amp. They still don't hold a candle to a properly mic'ed amp, though. Better than a poorly mic'ed amp, I suppose.
Fantastic mic if you've got $1400 for the mic. And another $1000 for a great preamp. And the room to turn your amp up loud. And the time to spend finding the sweet spot for the mic.Royer R121. That's all you need to know (other than the fact that you need a really good mic pre to go along with it).
The only thing that bugs me about your response is your use of the word "compromise". It very much isn't a compromise. It is an alternate, and equally valid, choice for capturing the sound of your amp.jroberts said:Yep. And if you don't have the tools or the time, you can use a compromise like the Palmer. Nothing wrong with that. Life is all about compromise.
Sorry to butt into your reply, but just wanted to say that's sort of what I was getting at too with the short novel I wrote... different people need or want different things out of their tone and this or other devices like it just can't give me what I want. They give some of the big name guys what they want and those guys probably don't care about the subtleties and nuances that I crave in a guitar recording. So I think you are right, it's an alternative for some and a valid one, but for myself it would be a compromise. (I realize your reply wasn't directed at me, but had to add that :wink: ).iaresee said:The only thing that bugs me about your response is your use of the word "compromise". It very much isn't a compromise. It is an alternate, and equally valid, choice for capturing the sound of your amp.
You have a point here: calling any one method "the best" is incredibly misleading. There is no one best method. The best method is whatever works for your situation.jroberts said:In the same way a POD is. That's all I'm saying. To say that it's "the best" way to do it is rather misleading.