Just got the H9000, what, if any, of my FX should I even keep?

[bxlgotham]

I’m thinking I should ditch most of my gear at this point, given how powerful this is, and as I move to a more minimalist setup. Here’s what I currently have, and am sure about, and here is where I welcome advice as to whether I would be giving up things that the H9000 can’t easily or effectively do:

1) Three H9 pedals. Why keep these at this point except perhaps for portability and bringing some of this power around with me if I play in different spots? I have a studio and a home playing environment, so I could see keeping one of them, but not three?

2) Axe FX 3. At first I thought I’d ditch this, but I’m thinking now that actually going SPDIF from AFX3 to H9000 could give me maximum coverage, if not in capabilities then in pre-set availability and flexibility. I am not really a big an of digital amp modeling, I am not sure if it’s cognitive bias or real hearing or perhaps the feel of it, but some reason the H9 effects never felt digital to me, and I have always struggled with the AFX3 as a replacement for an amp. For FX I see it as a viable open box. Likewise if I am using FRFR monitors like my two Friedman ASC-12s, perhaps using the AFX3 as the final step for cab simulations is not a bad idea, if for example I want to use an attenuated amp signal into something like the UA Ox > H9000 > AFX3 > ASC-12? To make matters more confusing, I also have an SY-1000 for my Godin LGXT, which I am debating as to whether it belongs in the same chain or a separate one, since it too has very strong regular pickup guitar FX processing outside of its synth features.

3) What to do with classic Eventide gear. Instant Flanger, H3500 maxed out, and all the stuff that preceded it. It’s collectible, but between plugins and H9000, is there really an advantage here outside of holy grail adventure quests for tone? Again, moving towards minimalism. I do want to use this final setup for voice, bass, guitar, and drums, I should say, as well as synths (digital and analog).

4) I have a bunch of Alexander Technologies pedals. They seem to me a bit different than typical pedal fare. But… I dunno, I can find that stuff in the H9000 in probably every case I imagine, if not also the AFX3?

5) Various analog pedals, boosts, compressors, old 80’s MIJ Maxon/Ibanez stuff?

6) I should say I am looking to run a streamlined amp platform. I would like a stereo setup. I currently am thinking to use my Friedman BE-50 Deluxe for left, and my Fender 1962 Twin-Amp for right. I am sketchy about sending crazy signals to the Fender, it’s a rare vintage piece that is a very dry sounding tube amp, unlike other sparkling Fender fare. Almost sounds like a nice solid state, but better. I could instead keep that as a vanilla chain of FX into that on the right side, or I could throw in another Friedman 50 or 100 Watt, or use my 87 Silver Jubilee 50W head. I would like both channels to go through the H9000 though. I’m not sure if the AFX3 can handle two channels or if you need two of them. I’m not sure I care either.

7) Various stuff like a JMP-1. Do I need it? should I keep it for mating up to other combos I’ll keep around for alternate scenarios, like a Tube-Tone Vibroverb 40W, which is clean and can use some help for dirt at times, or just ditch all this vintage rack gear knowing I can always plug the jack out of the H9000 into that combo as well.

Any thoughts welcome. I’m sure H9000 has more than needed and end of day one could lose 99% of this stuff and keep an amp and a cabinet and call it a day. I’m trying to get there, that was part of the point of me getting it.

EDIT: I am running this all into an Apollo X16 for what its worth.

[joeydego]

The only thing I’d have a hard time giving up is the AxeFXIII. Especially if you want to minimize things. Its 200+ amp models in 3 rack spaces. MAybe get to know it a little better before you decide. Ive done test after test and using the same IR, I cant hear much difference at all.

 

The vintage stuff get rid of if you WANT to. I wouldnt.

[joeydego]

Also running UA interface here, I have 3 X8 and 2 octo cards going.

[bxlgotham]

When you say you “done test after test and using the same IR, I cant hear much difference at all”, can you clarify what you mean?

[joeydego]

Sure. I’d record the BE100 head and the FAS BE100 model with no cab. I’d run both into two notes wall of sound at identical cab and mic settings. The results are too close to matter. The IR or the physical mic/cab has a lot to do with the final sound, probably more than the guitar amp itself. So using the same IR, the FAS stuff is in my opinion indistinguishable. I can’t hear a difference. Tested BE100, dual rec and slo100. A couple times I got ahead of myself and confused the tracks and wasn’t sure which was which.

[bxlgotham]

Wow it’s that close? What about the feel though? What about all the various settings on the BE? The various channels and EQ etc. it’s all there? Isn’t the IR stuff very static? I have a Two Notes Reload but haven’t used it yet. Have been using the Ox. Does it feel and sound the same when playin g and recoding or only after?

[joeydego]

In my opinion modelers seem to have a little less fight to them for tracking. You may or may not like this. So there is some adjustment in approach possibly but to me it makes tracking that much easier. Fight isn’t something you can hear. That is my biggest take away. It’s still amp like when I play, but there’s less fight to get what I want out of a model.

 

yes an IR is a static sound in that it’s a fixed frequency and will not change by itself. Neither will your cab and mic so long as you don’t touch anything. In two notes wall of sound you can move a virtual mic around and in FAS cab block there are plenty of tone shaping tools too. There is little good reason to mic a blaring guitar cab these days other than for enjoyment. It’s the long way around.

as for the BE, the sat switch and hbe etc have either been modeled or talked about to death over on the FAS forum as to how to replicate them. Here’s a question for you:

if you can get 95% of the way to a BE100 in the FAS model but you can’t quite get the c45 switch sound the same, is that reason enough to go drop 4 grand on the head? Isn’t for me. I had the Mesa JP2C here on loan and the model held up to the amp just fine. I still own over a dozen tube amps but only because I love them, don’t need the room or money and rarely use them for much of anything.

[bxlgotham]

You make great points. Same boat here with amps. Have a Leslie 950. Can’t really say I don’t like the numerous rotary cab sims out there. However. Have you ever seen a Leslie 950? Or toasted marshmallows next to one?

i think where I need to get over it is the following.

1) The feel. You say requires less fight. I just sense latency. I’m told I’m nuts you can’t detect it in Afx3. Am I nuts?

2) I like the Friedman ASC-12 but for in the room feel it doesn’t hit the 4×12  Do you ever turn off power amp and cab sims and output to a power amp and cab for in ear feel while tracking digitally out of the AFX3?

Here’s a other curveball. Given the choice I’d rather record an actual BE-50 into an Ox or Reload, using the cab and mic sim. I’ve compared this to the modeling in the Afx3 and I’m telling myself this is pure head and power signal captured with merely a cab sim, it solves your point about micing a love room but with minimal digital creation of actual amp tone. Since a cab sim is effectively nothing more than a frequency filter, this sounds the least fake to me and preserves 100% of the amp’s feel

if I took this approach I’d keep the AxeFX as a secondary digital FX box  would I take it and the H9000 and connect them via SPDIF, then place them in the FX loop of the Friedman? Does the Friedman output the proper level +4d? I see it has a volume knob for the loop but not sure how to adjust to get the right level for the H9000 and not sure which input on AFX takes line level.

 

[joeydego]

bxlgotham wrote:

You make great points. Same boat here with amps. Have a Leslie 950. Can’t really say I don’t like the numerous rotary cab sims out there. However. Have you ever seen a Leslie 950? Or toasted marshmallows next to one? i think where I need to get over it is the following. 1) The feel. You say requires less fight. I just sense latency. I’m told I’m nuts you can’t detect it in Afx3. Am I nuts? 2) I like the Friedman ASC-12 but for in the room feel it doesn’t hit the 4×12 Do you ever turn off power amp and cab sims and output to a power amp and cab for in ear feel while tracking digitally out of the AFX3? Here’s a other curveball. Given the choice I’d rather record an actual BE-50 into an Ox or Reload, using the cab and mic sim. I’ve compared this to the modeling in the Afx3 and I’m telling myself this is pure head and power signal captured with merely a cab sim, it solves your point about micing a love room but with minimal digital creation of actual amp tone. Since a cab sim is effectively nothing more than a frequency filter, this sounds the least fake to me and preserves 100% of the amp’s feel if I took this approach I’d keep the AxeFX as a secondary digital FX box would I take it and the H9000 and connect them via SPDIF, then place them in the FX loop of the Friedman? Does the Friedman output the proper level +4d? I see it has a volume knob for the loop but not sure how to adjust to get the right level for the H9000 and not sure which input on AFX takes line level.

 

Maybe you have latency somewhere else in your signal chain? Could really be anywhere from monitors DSP to the interface buffer or something. Could be a cumulation of things. 3ms latency is nothing but x by 7 adds up. With the FAS, the ONLY time I sense any kind of latency is when using the virtual capo. I rarely use it and learned to work with it. I have never turned off power amp or cab sims, no. I’ve been happy (enough) with what I’ve heard out of a wedge or in my monitors or headphones. You have to determine your goals. My goals are 2fold. Live performance and recorded results, of course depending on the situation. For live performance, I need monitoring that inspires me to play my best and consistent FOH sound every gig. That does NOT mean “the best” sound, it just means a sound good enough I can work with to get my job done as a guitarist. For recording, I need my end result to sound great. That usually does not mean the pinnacle of sound when tracking, either. Again , its a sound designed to give me the best performance I can get. If I were playing for solely my own enjoyment to tracks or something, my goal would be different and maybe my approach would be more like yours, I don’t know. But for me, in the room feel and a blaring 4×12 is counter productive for what I currently do musically. I’m certain I have spiderwebs in my 4x12s. As far as the Friedmans output level, I think its instrument level but you should ask Dave. I’m sure you must be on their social media, he’s super accessible. He usually personally answers support questions thru their site as well. Get this right, though. Both the AxeFX and the Eventide can be set to -10/+4 levels so no matter what, you should be able to make this work. I see no issue with making them work spdif and it would be one less conversion. I’d probably want to slave the FAS to the Eventide in this case. Either keep a laptop handy for both editors or get REALLY familiar with both units screens. I don’t want to be a downer but you really aren’t getting much out of the FAS you won’t get from the H9000 if you’re only using FX. If you’re playing live, the FAS would be an excellent built in backup if your amp ever goes down (and it will sooner or later). Hope this helps.

[joeydego]

Adding for clarification and fairness:

 

I don’t want to be a downer but you really aren’t getting much out of the FAS you won’t get from the H9000 if you’re only using FX

 

FAS has a lot of modeled stomp type FX not available in the H9000 that would be irreplaceable in front of a guitar amp. The h9000 would have alternatives but not quite the same in a variety of instances.

[alexone]

For what it’s worth, I came from the Axe Fx II. Sold it some years ago. I now use Two notes CABM+ for cab simulation when I want to play quietly or not bother with recording. As it is hardware, there is no latency. I have plenty of amps and preamps I can use with. Only cab simulation, is a better compromise than full digital:  can still use my analog pedalboard, my amps, and so on. Very happy with my sound.

[bxlgotham]

Isn’t the cab sim in the Two Notes being done digitally? I would think so. I know there are some analog cab sims out there including one famous studio grade one from decades yore that I cannot for the life of me recall (I want to say PD-03 but that’s not it). Nevertheless, I think cab sim can’t sound digital because it’s just a filter of the raw signal based on the profile of the speaker, its not processed right?

[alexone]

Two notes has the advantage to simulate also the power amp.
Otherwise I tested some analog simulation: Palmer PDI 03 and ADA GCS-2. Quite similar. But the best is the one from a French manufacturer. There are tubes to create a slight compression:
http://www.fredamp.fr/Products/144/275/FAC-Tube-Hp-Simulation

HP = haut-parleur = speaker

With analog simulations, you get a better feel in playing. But it’s a little less realistic when you record.

[bxlgotham]

Is one approach then to use go Guitar > AFX3 > front of Friedman BE-50 Deluxe > BE-50 FXLOOP (H9000) > Marshall 4×12?

Thus using FAS for pedal FX that would go in front of distortion/high gain setting on the Friedman (if/when I’m using that), and the H9000 for everything after in the FXLOOP?

This doesn’t address my stereo fantasies but put that aside for a moment.

[bxlgotham]

joeydego wrote:

Adding for clarification and fairness:

I don’t want to be a downer but you really aren’t getting much out of the FAS you won’t get from the H9000 if you’re only using FX

FAS has a lot of modeled stomp type FX not available in the H9000 that would be irreplaceable in front of a guitar amp. The h9000 would have alternatives but not quite the same in a variety of instances.

I get it we definitely have diff goals. I’m not a professional musician. I am a general artist with multiple mediums, music is one. I am composing, recording, and sound scaping in the process. I have very acute ears, the issue I have with amp modeling is not that it’s not good. I tried it again today, the BE amp model. The problem is that I start tweaking it to sound right into my Friedman ASC-12, and to get it to sound and feel like the real thing sitting next to me going into the Marshall 4×12. The more I tweak, the farther I get from thinking I’m anywhere and I start to wonder what I am even playing. Is it bad sounding? No, but does it sound like the thing I have in the room? No. What’s to blame? Maybe the fact that the FRFR Friedman just isn’t going to sound like the actual 4×12 cab I have, it’s not a 4×12, even if I got the IR right, it still wouldn’t sound like it. And I start fiddling with all the knobs in FAS to get more treble, because for some reason the ASC-12, sounding great as it is, sounds darker, warmer, too dry as compared to the real setup. And the more I fiddle the more I’m like what am I doing? How can I say this is the same thing it’s just not.

I realize this is all on me, I am not blaming the gear.

[bxlgotham]

alexone wrote:

Two notes has the advantage to simulate also the power amp.Otherwise I tested some analog simulation: Palmer PDI 03 and ADA GCS-2. Quite similar. But the best is the one from a French manufacturer. There are tubes to create a slight compression:http://www.fredamp.fr/Products/144/275/FAC-Tube-Hp-Simulation HP = haut-parleur = speaker With analog simulations, you get a better feel in playing. But it’s a little less realistic when you record.

<iframe title=”Fredamp FAC Tube Hp Simulation demo” src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/dASyKe5eNzE?feature=oembed&#8221; width=”1200″ height=”675″ frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen=””></iframe>

That’s it, Palmer. That’s what I was trying to find. OK you just blew my mind and made my brain even more frozen on all this. Why do you feel the Palmer and similar are less realistic in the recording department vs the digital? Makes sense it would nail the feel right since zero latency here?

[joeydego]

Just want to add modelers aren’t designed to sound like a 412. They’re designed to sound like the result of a 412 after it comes out of the other end of a mic.

[joeydego]

I have an old Palmer. Your torpedo reload and WOS will blow that away 19 times over

[bxlgotham]

joeydego wrote:

Just want to add modelers aren’t designed to sound like a 412. They’re designed to sound like the result of a 412 after it comes out of the other end of a mic.

Fair point that’s been made to me before and I forget. I get confused. I mean if I send an AFX3 modeled BE-50 into a FRFR, I’m still hearing an amp in the room version of a mic’d BE-50, not a BE-50 “in the room” through an amp, even though the ASC-12 Friedman is trying to be like a combo, right? This is I think still my problem and why I am still “disappointed”.

I go back to what I said earlier. Isn’t my solution to not use the modeler but the heads into a load box, like the Ox or Two Note, and record that, while listening to it live in the room through the 4×12, so I get sound and feel as I would normally, but record the cab sim’d pure powered signal direct (optical) into the Apollo, with H9000 and AFX in back (FX loop) and in front (instrument jack) of the BE-50, respectively? Using the FAS for the front of amp pedals, and the H9000 for all the rest post gain FX loop? Ain’t that the best of all worlds here?

[bxlgotham]

joeydego wrote:

I have an old Palmer. Your torpedo reload and WOS will blow that away 19 times over

I was thinking of trading my Torpedo for the Studio, so I can move the mics around the “room”, and get optical chain, which Torpedo doesn’t have. Good to know though. I know Steve Stevens uses it and he’s not exactly a dummy.

[joeydego]

You can set up the Fractal 4CM and go both in front of the amp as well as in the loop. You ultimately should set up both the AxeFX and H9000 this way. There is certainly enough IO to do it.

[joeydego]

Steve had been playing professionally for close to 50 years. He can get the same results 17 different ways.

[bxlgotham]

joeydego wrote:

Steve had been playing professionally for close to 50 years. He can get the same results 17 different ways.

 

Love it. Huge fan of his work. And work ethic. Agree on your point too.

[bxlgotham]

joeydego wrote:

You can set up the Fractal 4CM and go both in front of the amp as well as in the loop. You ultimately should set up both the AxeFX and H9000 this way. There is certainly enough IO to do it.

Right good point. What a rat’s nest sheesh ok I see where I’m starting to get to though and it could be interesting. Now about that SY-1000 lmfao.

[Author]

Posts