# No More GarageBand Amplifier Modeling



## Henry Terry (Jan 2, 2016)

Two weeks ago, I decided to stop using GarageBand for my amplifier sound. I have a Jackson SLSMG (w/EMG 81s). For several months, I have been playing it through GarageBand (using a Focusrite Scarlett Solo) to get my amplifier sound. Finally, I gave up and bought an amplifier - a used Mesa/Boogie Rocket 44.

On GarageBand, I tweaked and tweaked and tweaked, but could never get a sound that I liked, either clean or distorted. I would spend an hour or two adjusting all of the available parameters to get something that sounded pleasing. Then the next day I would turn on the computer and listen to the patch and dislike it. Everything either sounded muffled or had a raspy edge to it.

I have not tried other modelers, so there may be some which will give me the sounds that I want. However, my Mesa/Boogie cost me $ 600, and I believe its price was lower than the cost of a modeler, a power amp and speaker cabinets or a modeler and a full-range, flat-response system.


----------



## Hachetjoel (Jan 2, 2016)

Do you have a particular question or is this a new amp day? and if so where are the pics!


----------



## Rawkmann (Jan 2, 2016)

I could never get a decent sound from Garageband's built in sims either, but pretty much any other add on program designed specifically for guitar will be a million times better. I've tried Amplitube 3, Peavey Revalver, the Metal Guitar Gods pack for EZmix, and tons of other free plugins and they've all given me usable results. Amplitube 3 is my personal favorite.


----------



## marcwormjim (Jan 2, 2016)

Just don't use anything by Positive Grid until they end their Ponzi-approach to product releases - Even if the app works when you get it, any problems caused by an update to it or the OS will go unresolved until and unless PG decides to release another in-app purchase for it.


----------



## Winger (Jan 2, 2016)

I think he is just venting.


----------



## Henry Terry (Jan 2, 2016)

Winger said:


> I think he is just venting.



You are right, Winger. I just wanted to tell what had happened to ME with GarageBand.

Someone might be thinking of buying a Mac instead of a Windows computer thinking that doing so would provide a free program, GarageBand, with amplifier models. I wanted such a person to know that at least in one case - mine - GarageBand did not provide satisfactory results. I've been playing the electric guitar since 1976 and have owned many amps - Fenders, Marshalls, Peaveys and others. I know what I like, and I had hoped that GarageBand could provide it. However, GarageBand was not satisfactory for me.


----------



## Demiurge (Jan 2, 2016)

You're not alone in your findings. It's the typical mediocre amp modeling: okay cleans, promising low-gain overdrive, and fizz-city high gain.

Garageband is not bad for a free program: it's good for getting down ideas quick and dirty but it becomes maddeningly non-intuitive for deeper functions. Editing MIDI tracks is the worst in that program.


----------



## Aymara (Jan 3, 2016)

Henry Terry said:


> I wanted such a person to know that at least in one case - mine - GarageBand did not provide satisfactory results.



To make a long story short ... Garageband is a toy 

It is ment as an appatizer to buy Logic. And I even prefer Reaper above Logic, the main reason being, that Logic doesn't support VST and Reaper being much cheaper is even more powerful.

Anybody, who researches recommendations about DAWs will never find Garageband on the list of recommended DAWs, except maybe for learning the first few steps into home recording.

And when it comes to amp sims, it has a reason that hardware solutions like the AXE FX and Kemper amps are the most recommended. So far I found nothing, no software, that convinced me, be it BIAS FX, which is a buggy mess, or Guitar Rig, which is pretty outdated, or Amplitube, which is only ok, but not great. There are others out there, but I fear nothing beats hardware solutions or real amps.


----------



## Henry Terry (Jan 3, 2016)

Demiurge said:


> You're not alone in your findings. It's the typical mediocre amp modeling: okay cleans, promising low-gain overdrive, and fizz-city high gain.
> 
> Garageband is not bad for a free program: it's good for getting down ideas quick and dirty but it becomes maddeningly non-intuitive for deeper functions. Editing MIDI tracks is the worst in that program.



I too find the GarageBand editing to be non-intuitive. I hesitated to mention that point, because I have no experience with other Digital Audio Workstations and so no basis for comparison of DAWs.

However, I do have considerable experience recording on tape decks. In 1980, I recorded 36 songs for copyright, using a four-track TEAC reel-to-reel tape deck and a DOKORDER two-track reel-to-reel tape recorder. In 1986, I bought a Tascam Portastudio - a four-track cassette recorder with a six-channel mixer and some other features - and spent a lot of time during the following 10 years recording with that.

I have found the digital recording experience to be irritating because of the complications with compatibility - the problems caused by upgrades in the underlying operating system and the inability to use any given plug-in with both Mac and Windows operating systems - and because of the poor customer service of some companies. For example, I bought a MIDI keyboard and found a simple thing like registering the product to be needlessly complicated. I have also been offended by the demands for information made by some manufacturers when you try to register your purchase with them.

I wanted to try digital recording because of the ease with which a person can try out multiple "patches" of a particular recording. However, it seems that there is a significant, continuing learning-curve "overhead" required just be keep a given set of recordings useable. The constant "upgrades" are tiresome. I feel that digital manufacturers need to learn one of my favorite rules: IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT!


----------



## Aymara (Jan 3, 2016)

Henry Terry said:


> ... because I have no experience with other Digital Audio Workstations and so no basis for comparison of DAWs.
> 
> However, I do have considerable experience recording on tape decks.



Then I would recommend trying out Reaper:

REAPER | Audio Production Without Limits

You can try it for 60 days and a licence costs only 60 bucks, in case you should like it. The detailled manual comes as a free PDF and the forums are superb.

You'll also find many tutorials on Youtube. So in my opinion Reaper is the ideal real DAW to start with. The only downside is, that it only contains basic (but very good) effect plugins, but no instruments. But many good VSTi can be found for free, e.g. in KVRaudio's website database, as this simple bass for example:

http://www.kvraudio.com/product/4front_bass_module_by_4front_technologies


----------



## Henry Terry (Jan 3, 2016)

Aymara said:


> Then I would recommend trying out Reaper:
> 
> REAPER | Audio Production Without Limits
> 
> ...



Thank you, Aymara. When I'm ready to record, I am going to give it a try. Fortunately, I have both a Mac and a Windows computer, so I can put Reaper on the Windows computer and use VSTs. For the next few months, I will be focusing on learning some new songs. However, when I'm ready to record again, I'll try Reaper.

By the way, I did not buy the Mac for GarageBand. However, because GarageBand was included with the Mac, I decided to try using it. However, it really was non-intuitive to use. I even bought the book for GarageBand which is part of the Apple Pro Training Series. The explanations were satisfactory. However, the layout of the book was very poor for quick reference for how to do a particular thing which one might not remember offhand.


----------



## Aymara (Jan 3, 2016)

Henry Terry said:


> When I'm ready to record, I am going to give it a try.



In my case it's not only for recording, but also for jamming. One MIDI bass track and one MIDI drum track and your guitar on the third. Bam, you have a virtual band 

This way practicing makes much more fun.

But you need an amp with recording output like my Blackstar HT-5R or an amp emulation plugin like BIAS, Amplitube or the like, similar to the stuff in GB, but better sounding.



> By the way, I did not buy the Mac for GarageBand. However, because GarageBand was included with the Mac, I decided to try using it.



That's why I called GB an appetizer for Logic


----------



## Henry Terry (Jan 3, 2016)

I'm in luck. My Mesa/Boogie Rocket 44 has a recording output.


----------



## Aymara (Jan 3, 2016)

Henry Terry said:


> My Mesa/Boogie Rocket 44 has a recording output.



Perfect ... good choice.


----------



## Winger (Jan 3, 2016)

If you don't mind me asking, what songs are you going to be learning?


----------



## Given To Fly (Jan 4, 2016)

Aymara said:


> To make a long story short ... Garageband is a toy



I like to play GarageBand every once in awhile!  Its a fun game, especially when using Apple Loops. Best of all, when rendering the mix, GarageBand will not let the track clip no matter how ridiculous your mix happens to be. 

On the flip side, you are right, its easy to build an ensemble with Apple Loops that students (or myself) can improvise over. In fact, I can not think of an easier way to create a backing track short of another musician to jam with. 



Henry Terry said:


> I'm in luck. My Mesa/Boogie Rocket 44 has a recording output.



The Mesa/Boogie Subway Rocket amps of all varieties are cool amps. A one channel amp with three foot switchable modes seems to be ideal for tonal integrity.Let us know how everything comes together.


----------



## Aymara (Jan 4, 2016)

Given To Fly said:


> I like to play GarageBand every once in awhile!



I sometimes use Garageband on the iPad to quickly record some ideas, which I can transfer to GB on my Macbook and from there to Reaper.

GB on the iPad has one major advantage ... when you manually play the drums, these are velocity sensitive. This is sometimes more practical, than using a keyboard for drums in Reaper.

So GB is not useless, especially for beginners, but for serious recordings it's a bad choice, because it's not powerful enough and only supports 16 bit at 44.1 kHz. Serious recordings are done in 24 bit!


----------



## Henry Terry (Jan 4, 2016)

Winger said:


> If you don't mind me asking, what songs are you going to be learning?



I have a lot of original songs that I want to rearrange and record. The topics range from the "I am a stud" songs to social commentary. The sound in all cases is hard rock to heavy metal.


----------



## Shask (Jan 4, 2016)

Usually amp simulator software does not sound all that great. Sometimes it can sound OK, but feel very flat to play. I actually own NI Guitar Rig, but I never use it for guitar. I have an Axe-FX II, which definitely helps  but any sort of hardware unit is usually better. Line 6, Digitech, etc..... Some of the better programs are free. The LePou VST plugins are decent, and they are free. Use an amp sim in conjunction with an IR loader, and you can get some reasonable sounds. Usually the recording outs on Tube Amps dont sound very good either. You would probably get better results micing it up.

I also use Reaper. It is a very good program, but it can be difficult to learn because it is so customizable. Learning DAW software is a whole topic onto itself. It takes years to really learn what you are doing. I have never used GB, but I know if I liked Macs, I would use Logic. Logic is a very respectable program. My advice is to pick a DAW program and stick with it. Learn it inside and out. Luckily these days it is easy because you can find tutorials on Youtube. Once you know one DAW, it is easier to venture into others.


----------



## Aymara (Jan 4, 2016)

Shask said:


> Usually the recording outs on Tube Amps dont sound very good either.


 
My Blackstar HT-5R has a very good red box out, because it includes cab simulation, where you can select between a 2x12 or a 4x12 cab.

I guess, many other amp recording outputs do not have cab simulation integrated?


----------



## Shask (Jan 4, 2016)

Aymara said:


> My Blackstar HT-5R has a very good red box out, because it includes cab simulation, where you can select between a 2x12 or a 4x12 cab.
> 
> I guess, many other amp recording outputs do not have cab simulation integrated?



They usually just have a low pass filter on them that filters out the highs. You usually either get fizz city, or under a blanket city.

That was fine in 1982, but pretty pathetic compared to digital units today.

The Redbox was a little more advanced, but it is still a few passive filters. Again, very simple compared to using a digital unit that can load impulse responses.


----------



## Aymara (Jan 4, 2016)

Shask said:


> The Redbox was a little more advanced, but it is still a few passive filters.



So far for the theory 

In reality my Blackstar recordings sound much better, than any software solution, I tried. But so far I didn't have a chance to try an AxeFX, which is hardware btw


----------



## Shask (Jan 4, 2016)

Aymara said:


> So far for the theory
> 
> In reality my Blackstar recordings sound much better, than any software solution, I tried. But so far I didn't have a chance to try an AxeFX, which is hardware btw



Your Blackstar recordings probably sound better because of the limited number of variables. You just plug it in and it sounds halfway decent. You can mess with software for weeks and not get anything good sounding. Too much to play with. However, if you keep learning it, you can eventually figure out how to make it sound even better, but it takes time and education on doing it.

I know, been there, done that  I used to use a rack preamp and an ADA microcab years ago. Same idea. I could get a more unique tone than out of the modelers of the day, because I knew it well.

The Axe-FX is hardware, but it is basically a computer with a dedicated interface. It runs the same IRs you can run on a software IR program.


----------



## Aymara (Jan 4, 2016)

Shask said:


> The Axe-FX is hardware, but it is basically a computer with a dedicated interface. It runs the same IRs you can run on a software IR program.



Ok, and now the one million dollar question 

Which software can compete with the Axe FX?


----------



## Shask (Jan 4, 2016)

Aymara said:


> Ok, and now the one million dollar question
> 
> Which software can compete with the Axe FX?



I haven't tried them all, but if you read around the internet, most people say none of them do.

I can believe it, because you cant have a dedicated unit running top of the line DSPs compete with a general purpose microprocessor with a separate interface. The general computer will never compete, because it is not made for that purpose.


----------



## Aymara (Jan 4, 2016)

Shask said:


> ... most people say none of them do.



Exactly. Theoretically maybe the Universial Audio plugins, that use their interface DSPs. But though there are some promising reviews to find, I didn't find any user reports.


----------



## Shask (Jan 4, 2016)

Aymara said:


> Exactly. Theoretically maybe the Universial Audio plugins, that use their interface DSPs. But though there are some promising reviews to find, I didn't find any user reports.



Yes, if Fractal decided to use a PCI card to run all of the processing, then I could see it happen. I doubt they will though, because people still wouldn't be happy. People wouldn't be happy without a Laptop solution, and it would still be expensive. People wont be happy until it is $100 or something.

More realistically, what I would like to see (and has been rumored), is that Axe-Edit (the editing software) will be able to be inserted as a VST plugin one day, and let the actual Axe-FX do the processing.


----------



## Aymara (Jan 5, 2016)

Shask said:


> I doubt they will though, because people still wouldn't be happy.



I think, the main reasons are, that with dedicated hardware you first don't risk incompatibilities and second it can't be hacked like software. Look what happens with BIAS ... tons of bugs and huge problems on iOS 9 and Windows 10.

I guess, it's more likely to see a smaller desktop unit in the future. The FX8 might become a compromise in the meantime. Time will tell.

A further aspect is, that solutions like Fractal and Kemper with prices way beyond 2000 bucks are out of reach for the mass market.


----------



## Shask (Jan 5, 2016)

Aymara said:


> I think, the main reasons are, that with dedicated hardware you first don't risk incompatibilities and second it can't be hacked like software. Look what happens with BIAS ... tons of bugs and huge problems on iOS 9 and Windows 10.
> 
> I guess, it's more likely to see a smaller desktop unit in the future. The FX8 might become a compromise in the meantime. Time will tell.
> 
> A further aspect is, that solutions like Fractal and Kemper with prices way beyond 2000 bucks are out of reach for the mass market.



Fractal has a much lower latency than the other units. That is why they have the feel people rave about. Very instant, quick response. You wouldn't get that on PC hardware.

Also, the Ax8 is only $1500


----------



## Aymara (Jan 5, 2016)

Shask said:


> You wouldn't get that on PC hardware.



Maybe with UA plugins and their interfaces with integrated DSPs, I don't know.



> Also, the Ax8 is only $1500



Yep, more reasonable, that the in my opinion overpriced FX2 ... at least in Europe.


----------

