With ALL amp sims, to get the kind of sound I want, I pretty much always need to put a parametric EQ at the output for the reasons described in this article. Of course, someone else probably thinks that's the worst one in POD Farm If I had never tried it, I would have said "POD Farm doesn't really have any good stompbox compressors" but I did try it, and I really like it. Even among individual effects, although there are for example several compressor stompboxes I like the Vetta comp far and away the best. POD Farm has so much stuff in it (I have the Platinum version with 10,455,300 different models.okay, maybe it's not that many, it just seems like it) that I can get some really fine sounds and some that leave me cold. Their sims seem the most "rock and roll" to me, compared to say Guitar Rig, with has an edge if you want to take your sound further than the ordinary. If you're happy with the IK stuff, well, so am I. I have very definite feelings about amp sims, but the main one is that you have to work at it to get a good sound - just as you have to spend time in the studio trying different mics, pointing them at an amp in different ways, adding EQ at the console, experimenting with different pickups, etc. In your opinion what's the sound quality level compared to IK stuff?
POD FARM METAL SHOP SOFTWARE
I haven't found software that sounds better but POD Farm looks intriguing. As time allows I'll try a couple different amps and see what the results are.Ĭraig, I use mostly amplitube 3 and Fender. Perhaps the '64 Blackface 'Lux is an anomaly, it's the only testing I've done and I wanted to keep it simple by eliminating all effects and just concentrating on an amp model. I'd probably have to expect that the sound may be a little different anyway because we're using different computers/interfaces as compared to a preset I'd create for the GSP1101 hardware guitar unit for example but when I get so much difference just sitting here with all other things being the same it just really seems odd! I can't be confident that the preset I post, or send to someone else, is going to sound the way I'd intended. Now, it's possible that I can dial in the same sound with PF2 with some more tweaking of the dials but then I'll be dealing with inconsistency if I'm saving presets that I'd like to use on either version. The sound I'm getting from PF1 is more realistic to me in as much as I believe it's closer to what I'd hear in a room with a real amp (I've been using headphones for all my testing). The PF1 example has the sound I prefer with more presence, spank and 'sparkle'. So.I'm pretty surprised by the difference in sound between the two versions when the computer, interface (KB37), model and all settings are absolutely the same.
One thing I may need to do is go back to the Cab screens and be certain that the mics are set on the same distance and axis.Įdit: There is no setting of mic axis or distance in POD Farm, there is only a percentage setting for 'Room' and in both versions this is set to 50.
There is some sort of delay 'pot' on the PF2 mixer which is turned off but otherwise there doesn't appear to be any tone shaping options on either mixer. The other item on the right (or would it be your other left? ) in the PF2 photo is the mixer which also exists in PF1 but is only seen on the mixer screen. It's the same mic in the first photo (PF1) however, you have to look at the Cab screen to see it. In the second photo (PF2) the mic is a '67 condensor'. In the second photo I see a mic and some module to the left which is absent from the first photo?
0 kommentar(er)
