The search for a cheap speaker cab simulator

[Zin]

Dear masters of distortion,

I'm using a Marshall JMP-1 in a mixing context. It goes right into my board.
It's a great box, but using it "direct" without a Cab kinda shackles it.

I'd like to get a hardware speaker simulator to complement it.
..or maybe you call it an Cab/Mic simulator.

I know there's some good plugins for this, but I do not want to go:
Computer -> D/A -> JMP-1 -> A/D -> Computer -> Speaker Sim Plugin -> D/A -> Board
That would suffer another round trip of latency and it's a pain in the ass -- so I just want a good outboard Speaker Simulator.

I've seen Mercenary selling a Palmer PGA 04 for $650. I actually need 2 channels of speaker simming (lead&rhythm -- JMP-1+anotherTubeBox), and even $650 is too expensive, let alone $1300 for two of them!

There must be some weird speaker sim device for less money. You know, the kind of cool thing that pops up on ebay.

Hell, it could possibly be some digital FX unit and still sound great, because the JMP-1 is doing the hard part and the heavy lifting -- real tube overdrive. As long as the tube emulation parts of this mysterious digital unit could be disabled, allowing only the speaker-sim to be utilized, it might work. Maybe there's one particular digital FX unit which kicks the other one's asses just when it comes to Speaker Simming?

tutt a $50 Behringer V-Amp might even have good Speaker Sims if you just disable all the tube simulation parts of the patch. Who knows! I'm keeping an open mind about this.

Or maybe some other kind of device entirely that I don't even know exists.

Any ideas?
Much appreciated!

[Jules]

Do you still have the manual for the JMP1 ?

It has a BUILT IN cab simulation

If you are feeding a power amp - you need to disable it

but if you are recording direct - you need to enable it.

Do that... & then you dont need to buy anything..



Another over complicated but good device (again with optional built in speaker cab sound) is the old Digitec Valve FX

To clarify - the JMP-1 is a GTR pre amp - so you wouldnt employ a speaker / power soak unit like a Palmer on it .. Those typs of units only get used after a power amp stage (just before or inplace of speakers)

[Zin]

Originally Posted by Jules

Do you still have the manual for the JMP1 ?

It has a BUILT IN cab simulation

Jules, the built-in cab simulation in the JMP-1 is unusable. There's no way you could make a record with that. For my purposes, the JMP-1 "has no" cab sim and I keep it permanently disabled. If you read posts about the JMP-1, one of the first things people do is disable the cab sim. It screws the tone up, muddies everything into mush and it doesn't even sound anything remotely like a Cab.. That part of the circuit is just a design error.

[ultrasonic]

I use the Palmer PDI-09 and I think it works very very well.

It's the direct box type product, but basically the same kind of filter with less adjustability and no load resistor, which you don't need anyway with your JMP-1.

I highly recommend this box, and I always use it when doing extensive guitar tracks. In the studio I use it to supplement real mics on a multiple amp/mic set up. It shows up on a fader right next to other signal paths. For instance the last basic tracking session I did had four guitar amps:

1960 Fender Concert > 421
1965 Vox AC30 > RE20
New Ampeg J-20 > EV635
Vox Brian May (practice amp thing) > Palmer DI

It worked great with the small amp because it eliminated the cheap speaker from the recording path. The tone of the amp was great, but the speaker itself didn't really hold up. Including the palmer I had a great signal from each amp and they were blended as required for each song.

I also have used it for recording live performances and sound reinforcement. It's a really great tool to have.

At about $175 each it's not the cheapest DI you can find, but compared to other speaker emulators, nice direct boxes, and microphones-- well, I think it's a bargain that has earned it's keep many times over.

[Zin]

Originally Posted by ultrasonic

At about $175 each it's not the cheapest DI you can find, but compared to other speaker emulators, nice direct boxes, and microphones-- well, I think it's a bargain that has earned it's keep many times over.

ultrasonic,

What kinda cab does the PDI 09 sound like? I guess it just sounds like a PDI 09 eh?
I shied away from this unit cause I figured that it would just sound like the 1 thing (albeit a good single thing) with no tonal options besides its "mellow/bright" switch.

The digital fxboxes are interesting cause they usually have like 10 or 20 models of speaker simulation and I could pick up a few different ones.

[ultrasonic]

Originally Posted by Zin

ultrasonic,

What kinda cab does the PDI 09 sound like? I guess it just sounds like a PDI 09 eh?
I shied away from this unit cause I figured that it would just sound like the 1 thing (albeit a good single thing) with no tonal options besides its "mellow/bright" switch.

The digital fxboxes are interesting cause they usually have like 10 or 20 models of speaker simulation and I could pick up a few different ones.

Right... it's not going to sound exactly like some particular guitar cab. It sounds good! Like a mic close to a speaker.

You've got a ton of variations in your hands, your guitar, effects, etc. Don't sweat the simplicity. Honestly I usually just leave the switch set to normal, move on with my life, and get some music recorded!

Take a chance, order one from

JAMS Audio - Nashville, TN

or

Mercenary Audio - Palmer Guitar Tools

If you hate it you can resell it and you're only out $50 or $75.

[simplemon]

a few years ago I found myself moving up to the east side and bought a new house in a new neighborhood. I didnt want to be known as the "loud guy" on the block like I was in my last neighborhood, so, I started buying every cab simulator I could find until I could come up with some kind of soundproofing solution. I bought (and sold) them all...almost. I never tried the groove tubes one or the SPL transducer. (I had tired of cab sims by the time I had learned of these and the prices were so high I didnt feel like taking a gamble on a concept I had already soured on. They might be fine products for all I know. No experience. )




But in the end, the only one I TOTALLY liked was............ the behringer one. The ultra-G. The cheapo. It was a little raspy but for songwriting I liked it. (it doesnt have a built in loadbox so I had to build my own load box with a little help from my electronics guru friend).

BUT there was a catch. My behringer lasted all of 2 months and then...."burned out"? I dont know what happened to it. It went to behringer heaven (in a smog cloud above a chinese factory).

These days, the only one I kept is the palmer because the model I have has a built in load and sounds OK but I wouldnt compare any of them to an actual cab except in my dreams.

I never replaced my behringer but i did like it. I would start with that one (it was cheap). It might surprise you. If that one bums you out, go for a palmer. Palmer at least has a track record of pros using their products. (satriani, alex lifeson etc).
Can't argue with the choice of pros.

Each amp reacts differently with speaker sims. One of my amps sounds like crap with ANY sim. I just use the line out with that amp.

[simplemon]

another honorable mention goes out to the ADA Ampulator (my first cab sim I ever had). It gets mixed reviews but I remember liking mine.
ADA was lightyears ahead of their time in so many ways. That company is ancient history but their products are still ahead of today's time.

What separated that product from most on the market today is that it was designed to simulate "power tube" tones in addition to a speaker cab.
Your preamp doesn't have a power section and will lack that added dimension nomatter what cab sim you use. It could probably benefit from power amp simulation.

But, good luck finding one. I've never a/b'd it with a palmer though.

I'm surprised you don't like the jmp1 direct.

A few years ago I stumbled across the instrumental guitar music of some guy whose name I can't for the life of me remember. I thought his tones were pretty sick. (the good kind of sick). When I read his gear page, I was surprised to learn he used a jmp1 direct.

I would never have guessed that at all.

[Zin]

Great replies,

Originally Posted by simplemon

But in the end, the only one I TOTALLY liked was............ the behringer one. The ultra-G. The cheapo. It was a little raspy but for songwriting I liked it. (it doesnt have a built in loadbox so I had to build my own load box with a little help from my electronics guru friend).

You're reminding me that there's many aspects of the guitar-pre-dimension that I don't understand at all and have just been skating along and plugging things in and maybe getting lucky. I've been meaning to learn, but have somehow managed to not think of how to ask. I'll try right now:

1) What does a loadbox do and what kinda scenarios would cause you to need a loadbox/load resistor?

2) What kinda "signal" comes out of a guitar preamp box? Not line level, not pro or consumer levels, but ... something else? Is it supposed to be called "speaker out"? ..and how is this different from regular outputs?

3) Speaker outs have a different impedence from regular outs?

4) Are you supposed to hook a "speaker out" to a "Power Amp"?

5) What kinda signal comes out of a Power Amp?

6) How is a Power amp's out different from a "Speaker out"?

7) Amp heads have load but rackmount guitar pre's don't? Is the load from a guitar amp head because it has a built in power amp too?

8) Some digital GT fx boxes have separate Hi-z / Lo-z inputs. What is Hi-z / Lo-z anyways? Is this related to load? If I wanted to plug the previously mentioned "weird output" from a guitar Pre like the JMP-1, would that go into the Hi-z input of some fxbox?

9) And what does a "soak" do?

10) Is it a "power amp"'s output that causes you to need a soak/loadbox?

Please excuse me if I've asked too much.

Originally Posted by simplemon

BUT there was a catch. My behringer lasted all of 2 months and then...."burned out"? I dont know what happened to it. It went to behringer heaven (in a smog cloud above a chinese factory).

lol!

[simplemon]

Originally Posted by Zin

Great replies,



You're reminding me that there's many aspects of the guitar-pre-dimension that I don't understand at all and have just been skating along and plugging things in and maybe getting lucky. I've been meaning to learn, but have somehow managed to not think of how to ask. I'll try right now:

1) What does a loadbox do and what kinda scenarios would cause you to need a loadbox/load resistor?

2) What kinda "signal" comes out of a guitar preamp box? Not line level, not pro or consumer levels, but ... something else? Is it supposed to be called "speaker out"? ..and how is this different from regular outputs?

3) Speaker outs have a different impedence from regular outs?

4) Are you supposed to hook a "speaker out" to a "Power Amp"?

5) What kinda signal comes out of a Power Amp?

6) How is a Power amp's out different from a "Speaker out"?

7) Amp heads have load but rackmount guitar pre's don't? Is the load from a guitar amp head because it has a built in power amp too?

8) Some digital GT fx boxes have separate Hi-z / Lo-z inputs. What is Hi-z / Lo-z anyways? Is this related to load? If I wanted to plug the previously mentioned "weird output" from a guitar Pre like the JMP-1, would that go into the Hi-z input of some fxbox?

9) And what does a "soak" do?

10) Is it a "power amp"'s output that causes you to need a soak/loadbox?

Please excuse me if I've asked too much.



lol!

loadbox (load/soak). If you buy a tube amplifier or head, what does every guitar amp manual say?
They always say: "when powered up, this amp MUST be hooked up to a speaker at all times..... OR ELSE" Or else you will wreck your amplifier. You will blow up your output transformer (not literally. It wont EXLODE. It will just cease to function properly and you will need to replace it which is costly).

For complex electrical reasons, a powered up tube amplifier needs a load which is usually a speaker. If you turn on a tube amplifier with no speaker attached to it.......It becomes a ticking time bomb of self destruction.

NOw, what if you want to record your 100watt guitar amplifier head silently straight into your recording device because the police said "this is the last time we are coming out here to warn you about the noise. Next time we are slapping you with fines and charges for disturbing the peace"? The last thing you want to do in this case.... is hook your amp up to your SPEAKER.

So, in this case I would use some kind of loadbox which serves 2 functions. 1) The loadbox provides the load that would ordinarily be supplied by a speaker AND 2) it brings my amp down to line level so I can plug it (the loadbox) directly into my mixer or recording interface or whatever. Amplifier--->loadbox---> mixer/daw. (yay! no speakers in this setup). Alternately, I might use a loadbox to provide a load and then use my amp's "line out" to the mixer or recording interface or whatever.

I made my own loadbox (really my friend did most of the work) but Weber supposedly makes good ones. THD makes a good one supposedly also.

In your case, you are just using a preamp (jmp1). You don't need a loadbox with that. But if you were using a Peavey 5150 head with no speaker .... then you will need a loadbox to substitute for the speaker.


The popular commercial Loadboxes are also used for another application besides "silent recording" (which is what I mostly use mine for). They are used for "attenuation" purposes. (attenuation simply means: "to make something that is STUPID LOUD ... much quieter")

When used for "attenuation" purposes, loadbox/attenuators can be placed inbetween your amp and your speakers. They enable you to totally crank the volume of your amp (thus driving your amp's power-tubes into pleasing "power tube" distortion) while at the same time controlling how much volume you actually hear coming out of your speakers. So, your amp's volume could be on 7 but the sound coming out of your speakers would be tamed to something a lot less "roof collapsing".

"soak" is just a marketing term used in the past by companies. It means the same as what I've been talking about so far: attenuation and loads bla bla.

Some speaker simulators come with a built in load (like my palmer). So, I can plug my amp directly into it and leave my speakers in the basement collecting dust. Other speaker simulators have no built in load. In that case.... I would have to hook my amp to the speaker sim and the speaker sim to an actual speaker to provide the load.... or else KABOOM (Then I would use the line out from the speaker sim to record the simulated cab sound).


Now you dont always need a loadbox/attenuator. In fact, I submit 95% of guitarists dont have one. If you use speakers and can crank your amp ... then you dont really need a loadbox/attenuator. It wasn't until I started recording silently that I needed one.

wow, that was just the answer to number 1. lol

[simplemon]

Originally Posted by Zin

2) What kinda "signal" comes out of a guitar preamp box? Not line level, not pro or consumer levels, but ... something else? Is it supposed to be called "speaker out"? ..and how is this different from regular outputs?

3) Speaker outs have a different impedence from regular outs?

4) Are you supposed to hook a "speaker out" to a "Power Amp"?

5) What kinda signal comes out of a Power Amp?

6) How is a Power amp's out different from a "Speaker out"?



8) Some digital GT fx boxes have separate Hi-z / Lo-z inputs. What is Hi-z / Lo-z anyways? Is this related to load? If I wanted to plug the previously mentioned "weird output" from a guitar Pre like the JMP-1, would that go into the Hi-z input of some fxbox?


10) Is it a "power amp"'s output that causes you to need a soak/loadbox?

Please excuse me if I've asked too much.



lol!

The jmp1 has master outs. Those would go to the inputs on whatever power amp you are using. If you prefer the sound of the speaker emulated outputs, then use those instead. Those are generally intended for going straight to a PA system or mixer or console or recording interface.


10) yes. read the manuals of the amps you use. Generally If they say "you need a load" or "speaker must be hooked up" then thats when you need to be concerned about speaker loads. They always warn you in the manuals.

4) a speaker out goes to speakers. Your manuals will usually tell you what needs to hook up to what. Good manuals have arrows (I sometimes need those lol).

5) power amp outputs are hooked up to speakers (speaker cabs).
Mine also has a line level line out (which goes to effects or another power amp) but I rarely use it. Some power amps are more flexible than others in terms of connections. Depends on which model you buy.


8) Impedance FAQ

BOSS FV-50L Volume Pedal :: FAQ

[aclarson]

Seems like all the good ones are expensive. It's hard to simulate a inductive device, most speaker sims are just resistive or modeled and are pretty one-dimensional.

If you're just using it for recording, why do you need the two channels, couldn't you just do one at a time and switch the cable?

I've been drooling over the Motherload, people have been raving about that thing, I'm really curious how good it is. Also more than you want to spend, but people have been making some BOLD statements about this thing, here's a thread from a few years ago about it:
Sequis Motherload Mk2 (long post)

[lobsty]

I've used the PD09 with good results, but only live, and without time to experiment either. Decided to order an Ultra-G and see what happens. It's cheap and I'll let you know how cheerful it is when I get it

[Zin]

Thanks guys.

I ordered both an Behringer Ultra-G and a Palmer PDI-09... $200 total.
I'll mix and match to try to see which works best.
The Behringer was $20 and the Palmer was $180.
I'll find out if the Palmer is worth the 9 times higher pricetag ;0

[ultrasonic]

Originally Posted by Zin

Thanks guys.

I ordered both an Behringer Ultra-G and a Palmer PDI-09... $200 total.
I'll mix and match to try to see which works best.
The Behringer was $20 and the Palmer was $180.
I'll find out if the Palmer is worth the 9 times higher pricetag ;0

When you get them please record a couple test tracks. Run out of your JMP-1, normal output, into the Palmer, and use the 'through' jack to go into the Behringer. They will be comparable because they're from the exact same signal.

Record the output of each one and post the results. Please make it a blind test so listeners can't tell which file is which.

Do a pass of a clean tone, and a pass of a distorted tone.

I hope we all learn something!

[Zin]

This whole thing is turning into a bigger challenge than I originally imagined

It turns out that I think I also need a "ReAmp" box.

I've been connecting the D/A (+4 dBu) directly to the JMP-1's input via a 10-foot cable, and then turning the level down in the computer until it sounds like the JMP-1 is distorting right. I've never been certain if things were sounding as good as they could be.

The JMP-1 manual states that the input is of course just a "Guitar Input socket".
After reading up about "Hi-Z", I realize that I'm NOT properly connecting my D/A because the output from the D/A is *low impedence*

damnit, damnit!!!

So I now have to buy a reamplifier, and go
D/A -> ReAmp -> JMP-1 -> Palmer PDI-09 -> Board

I've been planning to add an ADA MP-1 so that I can have a second distortion channel (Lead+Rhythm parts).
So I now need a minimum of 2x ReAmps, 2x Pre's, 2x Speaker Sims.

And then this is further complicated by "Active" or "Passive"...
Radial makes the ReAmp boxes I'm now looking at, but they have 2 different boxes: an X-Amp and also a ProRMP.
The X-Amp is active and the ProRMP is passive.
So I have to figure for each of the ADA MP-1 and JMP-1 if they'd be best paired with a ReAmp that's active or passive. Any idea?

ah... the search for a working tone... it's complicated..
don't laugh at me, I know it's kinda hilarious.

And by the way. What if I wanted to do something like this:
D/A -> Radial X-Amp -> JMP-1 -> *SOME PHANTOM POWERED DI BOX* -> Neve 1272 Mic Pre -> Board
A DI box which accepts an output intended to connect to a Power Amp, but instead converts it to Mic-level.
What box would that be?

[ultrasonic]

Don't get hung up over active vs. passive.

There are good reamp devices by several makers: Cuniberti's REAMP, the Radial products, and Littlelabs come to mind. Any of them will work fine.

And yes, if you're doing that signal chain, you should have a reamp box. I personally could not work without them. The studio at which I work most of the time has two, and a few years ago I made three more of my own. I use them for reamping guitar, bass, keyboard, etc., and also for running effects pedals on inserts or aux sends during mixing.

How are you recording the initial guitar? The one that you are sending back to the JMP-1?

[gwpt]

I have a LittleLabs RedEye (passive) and it works perfectly! I can't tell the difference between 'live' and 'reamped'

[aortizjr]

Wow this is a lot of reading for a fairly simple thing.

Since you are using a JMP-1, that is just a pre-amp so it will be line level. Personally I like the Behringer Ultra-G as well. Sounds good enough.

If you are using a computer as your DAW, I would take a serious look at Cabinet Impulses. If you search around for those, there are tons of information. Basically it is a sampling of a power amp, guitar cabinet, and microphone. I have found these to be the best sounding cabinet simulations. Sometimes I will even use these over mic'd cabs if I mess it up.

So the way I track guitars is as follows:

Guitar->DI Box->Preamp (JMP-1)->DI->Ultra-G

Then I record the DI for the guitar, DI out of the preamp (nasty sounding) and the Ultra-G with cabinet simulation. I really only use the Ultra-G for monitoring. But sometimes it blends well to give some bite and clarity. Then I will use cabinet impuleses on the DI direct from the preamp. The guitar DI I can use for Re-amping or amp simulators.

The cabinet impulses are nice and you have access to them with free software and free impulses. For commercial stuff, the only pack I know of is Recabinet (Recabinet - Album quality guitar tone, direct.).

[aclarson]

Originally Posted by aortizjr

So the way I track guitars is as follows:

Guitar->DI Box->Preamp (JMP-1)->DI->Ultra-G

This is wrong. The JMP-1 takes an instrument level signal, not line level. You would not want to use a DI on the input.

You would indeed want a Reamp device (or at least a pad) for feeding from the D/A to the JMP-1 input.

Seems to me you'd want to do this:
Guitar (split 1) -> DI -> mic preamp -> A/D
Guitar (split 2) -> JMP-1 -> speaker sim -> -> mic pre (optional for flavor) -> A/D

This way you have the same track effected while you record so it sounds right, but you also have a dry copy for reamping use.

So later when you're ready for reamping using the DI track:
D/A -> Reamp -> JMP-1 -> Speaker Sim -> mic pre (optional for flavor) ->A/D

I believe this would be the most versatile setup.

[Zin]

Originally Posted by aortizjr

If you are using a computer as your DAW, I would take a serious look at Cabinet Impulses.

Not interested in that.

It'd be a 64+2048+64 sample latency to go:
D/A -> ReAmp -> JMP-1 -> DI -> A/D -> Impulse Modeler -> D/A -> Board

[noah330]

ADA makes the microcab. If you need a load buy an attenuator like a Weber and just turn it down.

[aclarson]

Originally Posted by Zin

Not interested in that.

It'd be a 64+2048+64 sample latency to go:
D/A -> ReAmp -> JMP-1 -> DI -> A/D -> Impulse Modeler -> D/A -> Board

If you're looking to hear it live as you play it only, that could be a problem. But for recording, I've heard some DAMN good results with impulses, I wouldn't rule it out, just compensate for the delay:

Delay Compensation in Pro Tools - FREE Video Tutorials!

It's for Pro Tools, but the theory applies to all DAWs, I'm a BIG fan of this video.

Also here's a tutorial on how to do cab impulses:
Impulse FAQ - Ultimate Metal Forum

[Zin]

Can't use anything like that, no impulses or plugin delay compensation.

I'm doing live tracks with no bouncedowns or recorded parts.
The whole point of the CabSim is to hear it while I'm working.

[aclarson]

Originally Posted by Zin

Can't use anything like that, no impulses or plugin delay compensation.

I'm doing live tracks with no bouncedowns or recorded parts.

So you just want to record the parts you play live? Or are you saying you play your guitar part during live mixdown?

Basically, if you just want good guitar sound into the live board, do this:
Guitar -> JMP1 -> Speaker Sim -> board

If you want to record the effected sound, you'll need to split the speaker sim output to an input (A/D) also.

If you want to record the dry signal while sending affected signal to the board, do this:
Guitar -> split A -> JMP1 -> Speaker Sim -> board
-> split B -> DI -> mic pre -> A/D -> DAW

If you want to reamp later to get a different sound (dry guitar signal only):

Dry guitar track in DAW played back -> D/A -> Reamp box -> JMP-1 -> Speaker sim -> A/D -> another track on DAW

Originally Posted by Zin

Not interested in that.

It'd be a 64+2048+64 sample latency to go:
D/A -> ReAmp -> JMP-1 -> DI -> A/D -> Impulse Modeler -> D/A -> Board

If you're using it for live only, I'd skip the DAW all together, a single pass through A/D and D/A can cause annoying latency. And unless you're running dry guitar into the DAW, you'll never need the DI. The JMP-1 has an instrument level input and a line level output, so it handles that part.

[Zin]

Sorry, I've been repeatedly avoiding explaining, but I guess I am forced to explain now.

I don't use protools, cubase, sonar, logic audio, or reaper.
I don't use a DAW.
I don't play a guitar.
I don't have plugin delay compensation.
I do not record parts.

I use a tracker + virtual guitar sequencer I wrote.
It sequences the individual strings using a "guitar roll"
It uses 25 "action" parameters per string event: for example, "pressure" or "direction"
Everything is 100% sequenced.
I want to hear the Cab while I am sequencing, not afterwards.

When it hits the board, that's final. I don't use any part ever under any circumstances which is dependent on "hardcoded audio files" unless it is atonal and has no notes in it.

If I change 1 note in a chord a month later, that's it, the note is changed. There's no "audio files."

[ultrasonic]

Originally Posted by Zin

I use a tracker + virtual guitar sequencer I wrote.
...
There's no "audio files."

Ha! Yeah, it might have helped to mention this up front.

Ok. Looks like this is your signal flow.

("guitar" sound source) Line level output > reamp box > JMP-1 > cabinet simulator > mixer > monitor speakers.

[lobsty]

Originally Posted by Zin

Sorry, I've been repeatedly avoiding explaining, but I guess I am forced to explain now.

I don't use protools, cubase, sonar, logic audio, or reaper.
I don't use a DAW.
I don't play a guitar.
I don't have plugin delay compensation.
I do not record parts.

I use a tracker + virtual guitar sequencer I wrote.
It sequences the individual strings using a "guitar roll"
It uses 25 "action" parameters per string event: for example, "pressure" or "direction"
Everything is 100% sequenced.
I want to hear the Cab while I am sequencing, not afterwards.

When it hits the board, that's final. I don't use any part ever under any circumstances which is dependent on "hardcoded audio files" unless it is atonal and has no notes in it.

If I change 1 note in a chord a month later, that's it, the note is changed. There's no "audio files."

Um, don't mean to be a downer, but I don't think cab simulation is the problem here