Upgrade the pickups vs Upgrade the amp

[jonnyg]

Another option is the KRK Rokits as reference powered monitors.. for use with an effects processors. Cost is $458/pair CDN. I haven't quite figured out the Yorkville Wedge at $560, but I think it the same type of powered reference monitor.

 

Perhaps what I am after is not so much a choice but a combination...ie VOX AC4-TV for improved amplified sound re live studio practicing...plus the KRKs for reference monitors when recording....but to keep costs down, the VOX option alone is looking attractive ( and perhaps I sell the Roland Cube).

The KRK's and the Yorkville Sound monitors are both good products but they are not the same thing. The KRK's are good, budget studio monitors which are not designed to function as stage monitors. The Yorkville is a stage monitor which is unlikely to find a place in a studio, and almost certainly not if you want to achieve an accurate mix for playback on other peoples sound systems.

Unfortunately, setting up a home studio that suits you and your way of working is a pretty personal thing. What suits others, and that includes rave reviews in magazines, may not always turn out to be what you wanted. For example, the KRK's are nice monitors, they get great reviews and are well thought of, but I preferred the sound of the Tannoy Reveals at a very similar price. You might feel the opposite in a side by side comparison and that's because we all hear stuff in a different way. I feel the same about using an amp for recording. Many people just put an SM57 in front of the amp and, for them, that's a great sound. As I don't generally play with my ear against the speaker, that's not the sound that I hear nor the sound that I'm looking for. I used to end up using the SM57 near the cab and then putting a condenser mic at ear level about six feet from the amp and mixing the two sounds. It was pretty hit and miss which is why I first went the POD/Behringer route and then used amp-sim plug-ins on the PC. For me the question was, can I get the sound of a proper, cooking Marshall and 4x12 cab from an amp-sim or plug-in? No. Can I get it from a 5w valve amp with an 8" speaker? No. I still get close to the sound I want without the hassle. Others feel differently, like I said it's a personal thing. What I will say is, the one piece of gear that made the biggest improvement to my recordings/final mixes was proper, albeit fairly budget, monitors and I wish I'd bought some when I first started out. Good luck with whatever you choose to do. Here's a link to a very useful site for home recording info http://www.tweakheadz.com/guide.htm

[Gordy01]

I agree with jonnyg. Studio monitors are at the top of the list in importance for a home studio. I purchased monitors that are a little larger, so I can use them live also. They are very accurate and efficient, and are good for both purposes.

 

And to reinforce what jonny said, most of the time I run direct into the mixer/interface, with my guitar.

Once in a while I use the Line Out function on my Vox amp to get a bit of different tone in the guitar.

[MediaMan]

I agree with jonnyg. Studio monitors are at the top of the list in importance for a home studio. I purchased monitors that are a little larger, so I can use them live also. They are very accurate and efficient, and are good for both purposes.

 

Which ones did you purchase? Are you referring to the Tannoy Reveals? Using them for live as well as reference monitors is a nice setup.

[MediaMan]

This dialogue has been quite helpful.. appreiciate everyones input.

 

Starting to put the puzzle togheter here (and of course will get it wrong along the way, so I thank you for the patience … skull is thickening with age.

 

In terms playing the instrument with amplification, I may be expressing this the wrong way, but I think in terms of:

 

• 
   
  
• a conventional amp approach - ie solid-state or tube guitar amp – combo or head/cabs). – intentionally coloured/dynamic/amplified sound , and ,
  
• a simulated amp approach - ie , a digital amp modeler/simulator PLUS a set of dedicated reference (accurate) monitors (aka studio or stage monitors or PA systems)
  

With that in mind, my remaining questions are:

 

1)CRANKING IT UP – I can visualize the mind blowing heart thumping sound coming out of a cranked up conventional amp. But in the simualted amp world, are the reference monitors robust enough in the same manner? When I look at ‘stage monitors’, I think sure -.. but when I look at the bookshelf KRK or Tannoys, I get the feeling they are going to blow up.

Are they in fact as robust?

Ie when wanting to ‘crank it up’, can one get studio monitors as loud as a conventional amp???

 

2) DUAL FUNCTION - In either approach when doing studio recording/mixing, one needs a set of ‘studio monitors’ . In the case of the simulated amp

can the reference monitors indeed serve a dual function

– ie as either a studio monitor function or as an amplified sound function?

 

3) RECORDING - With a conventional amp, when doing recording, one can record direct, ( ie line out of from the amp), or can mic the amp. . With a equivalent amp setup, one simply records direct (line out of the processors) – correct?

 

 

I started off thinking the VOX would be very cost effective, but, if the studio reference monitors (or stage reference monitors) can indeed be used for both a monitoring function and a simulated amp function, well, thats quite attractive as well. I still have the solid state cube conventional amp in the mix ifneeded ( its not tube but its something).

[jonnyg]

This dialogue has been quite helpful.. appreiciate everyones input.

 

Starting to put the puzzle togheter here (and of course will get it wrong along the way, so I thank you for the patience … skull is thickening with age.

 

In terms playing the instrument with amplification, I may be expressing this the wrong way, but I think in terms of:

 

• 
   
  
• a conventional amp approach - ie solid-state or tube guitar amp – combo or head/cabs). – intentionally coloured/dynamic/amplified sound , and ,
  
• a simulated amp approach - ie , a digital amp modeler/simulator PLUS a set of dedicated reference (accurate) monitors (aka studio or stage monitors or PA systems)
  

With that in mind, my remaining questions are:

 

1)CRANKING IT UP – I can visualize the mind blowing heart thumping sound coming out of a cranked up conventional amp. But in the simualted amp world, are the reference monitors robust enough in the same manner? When I look at ‘stage monitors’, I think sure -.. but when I look at the bookshelf KRK or Tannoys, I get the feeling they are going to blow up.

Are they in fact as robust?

Ie when wanting to ‘crank it up’, can one get studio monitors as loud as a conventional amp???

 

2) DUAL FUNCTION - In either approach when doing studio recording/mixing, one needs a set of ‘studio monitors’ . In the case of the simulated amp

can the reference monitors indeed serve a dual function

– ie as either a studio monitor function or as an amplified sound function?

 

3) RECORDING - With a conventional amp, when doing recording, one can record direct, ( ie line out of from the amp), or can mic the amp. . With a equivalent amp setup, one simply records direct (line out of the processors) – correct?

 

 

I started off thinking the VOX would be very cost effective, but, if the studio reference monitors (or stage reference monitors) can indeed be used for both a monitoring function and a simulated amp function, well, thats quite attractive as well. I still have the solid state cube conventional amp in the mix ifneeded ( its not tube but its something).

1. Studio monitors are designed to reproduce what goes into the amp/recording as faithfully as possible, with a flat response. If you record a bad sound the speakers will reproduce a bad sound. Garbage in garbage out. If you're using an amp simulator then you have to get the sound that you want from that. The monitors are not there to make the sound better only to reproduce the source sound better. I should think that it's no more likely that you will blow monitor speakers than any other type. If you overload any speaker you'll damage it.

 

2. If you use powered monitors you can play your guitar straight through them but it's highly unlikely you will get a good guitar tone through them. You would have to add "something" before the amp stage. What that "something" is is largely your choice. It could be something as complex as a POD or something as simple as an overdrive pedal or chorus. Whatever it is that gives you your sound. Monitors are not guitar amps and guitar amps are not monitors. Incidentally, PA speakers are not generally good enough as monitors or guitar amps. They're not flat enough for monitors and they'll be too flat for guitar without that "something" between your guitar and the amp..

 

3. I don't really understand 3. Yes you can mic up a guitar amp and yes you can use a line out from the amp if it has that facility. However, not all line outs from amps are equal to each other. Some have filtering to give a simulation of the sound through a speaker and some just take the signal from the preamp. If I were to use an amp (which I'm not - see my previous post) I would use two mics as using the line out is little different to using an amp simulator, albeit with the amp you only really get one sound.

 

If you're short of cash at the moment you might do well to look at a pair of passive Tannoy F1 Custom Hi-Fi speakers (Note that the Customs are superior to the F1 Standards). You could use them with your existing Hi-Fi amp. They are not as good IMO as purpose designed monitors but they are very good for what they are and what they cost which is around £100.00 a pair ($150.00 US approximately). That might free up enough cash for you to get both of the things you want now.

 

EDIT: If you're mostly doing recording for fun I would suggest that you don't get too bogged down in the detail. It's far too easy to spend too much time trying to get the right gear and completely lose track of what it was you wanted to achieve in the first place.

[Supersonic]

 

3) RECORDING - With a conventional amp, when doing recording, one can record direct, ( ie line out of from the amp), or can mic the amp. . With a equivalent amp setup, one simply records direct (line out of the processors) – correct?[/indent]

 

Yep. Pretty much. My Digitech processor has a USB output, which is way better than hooking up through the line-in on a computer IMO. It's basically as easy as it gets.

[Rewddawg]

I personally would upgrade my amp to a good tube amp. You can make lower quality pups sound good thru a good tube amp. You cannot make a good pup sound good thru a solid state modeling amp. IMHO. I have a Roland cube and tube amps and there is no comparison in mine and most others ears. You can get a good tube combo amp nowadays for about $600 and less. Keep in mind though that I do way more live playing than I do recording.

[MediaMan]

2. If you use powered monitors you can play your guitar straight through them but it's highly unlikely you will get a good guitar tone through them. You would have to add "something" before the amp stage. What that "something" is is largely your choice. It could be something as complex as a POD or something as simple as an overdrive pedal or chorus. Whatever it is that gives you your sound. Monitors are not guitar amps and guitar amps are not monitors. Incidentally, PA speakers are not generally good enough as monitors or guitar amps. They're not flat enough for monitors and they'll be too flat for guitar without that "something" between your guitar and the amp..

What you say above is correct, but thats not I was proposing - sorry - I may not have expressed myself correctly re Item 2. Never intended to suggest guitar --> speakers. Was attempting to describe an upgrade path that would leave me with:

guitar -> digital amp modeler/simulator -> a set of quality dedicated reference monitors (This is also consistent with the strategy of "If you're using an amp simulator then you have to get the sound that you want from that. The monitors are not there to make the sound better only to reproduce the source sound better")

 

Would this not be a better option for playing than waht I have now, which is:

guitar> effects processor -> roland cube?

 

I actaully think I am looking for a set up similar to Gordy01 wehre he mentioned "I purchased monitors that are a little larger, so I can use them live also." I believe he has the Tannoy Reavels, so I am looking at those or similar ones, I ahd thoght the Yorkville ones would be one of the similar ones, but if not I am sure there are others.

[MediaMan]

Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words, so I thought I would try a visual.

 

Again, trying to improve the status quo arangement where my only option for sound is an old hi-fi system and a Roland cube amp. It's very suboptomal (note how I have an amp simualator feeding an amp). I dont gig or live stage work. Spend 90% of the time practicing/playiing 10% reoording, but want to be able to crank it up every now and then, in a quality manner.

 

To date, it has been suggested that, other than future pickup upgrades and modeller upgrades, I have three ways to go:

 

Option A - stop there, nt other upgrades are needed (doesnt really seem to address the issue)

Option B - change the amp to a tube amp ( but home studio volumes may not warrant even this - and have I adressed the issue?

Option C - dump the cube amp, go for quality powere reference monitor (fed from the amp simulator and other sources) This does seem the cleanest way to go, both for playback and recording.

 

[jonnyg]

It really is your choice and no one else can really make that choice for you. Frankly, now that you say that you spend 10% of your time recording and the other 90% playing I would suggest that a better guitar amp might be the better choice. There's nothing wrong with using an "old hi-fi system" for playing back your recordings. I, and millions of others, did that for years.

To address a couple of your other points. I don't think Gordy said he had the Tannoy Reveals but I have them. They are not appreciably different to the KRK's I just preferred the sound of the Tannoy's. They most definitely wouldn't be any use for stage/live work. I will point out again that the Yorkville is NOT a studio monitor. It's a stage monitor so that a band can hear themselves on stage, particularly singers and drummers. I really don't think it would have much, if any, use in a recording setup and it's certainly not a guitar amp.

As I said before, don't let the gear get in the way of what you're trying to do.

[MediaMan]

I have clearly failed to get my point across (my fault) , so I think I'll end it here and work it through with my dealer and in other forums. Good discussion though, and it helped me sort thru the maze.

 

I was trying (unsuccessfuly) to express that this configuration works: guitar > interface> amp modeler > power amp > speakers, for home use, without a conventional guitar amp, for both rock-it-out playback and monitored mixing/recording

 

...and I was hoping to get alternative prodcut choice selections.

 

Heres is are sample posts from another forum:

 

"I use a pair of Behringer B2031P monitors with a Behringer A500 amp in my jam space with 2 12" subs if needed. This setup can rock the house when called on. Add a SUB and crossover, the volume levels can be insane A small mixer, a computer, a keyboard and some software and you are set for in the house recording/playing/sequencing. Playing out I would not use studio monitors."

 

For my home rig I use Behringer B2031A' : Some of the best speakers/monitors I've owned, not to mention bang for the buck. I run Edirol UA-25EX into them and it is USB'd into my PC so it doubles as my PC's sound card. Then my Boss GT-8 into this box for my Electric Guitar needs or I can plug straight into it with an acoustic guitar. With the UA25 I can record guitar parts onto my PC. Mix/tweak whatever and then playback into same speakers. My Goal was to double duty my setup meaning to play guitar with no amps and record/mix on computer and use them as my PC Speakers as well."

 

This is what I was tring to capture in Option C.

 

UPDATE:

The alternatives of using active speakers as the main amp is appratenly refererd to as FRFR amplication (flat response full range). Here are some resources for ready reference:

 

http://forum.thestompbox.net/showthread.php?t=4634

http://www.guitarnoise.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=39804

http://www.guitarampmodeling.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=4412

http://www.acousticguitarforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2156124

http://forum.thestompbox.net/showthread.php?t=4633

[Berserker]

sometimes i think, rather than worry about this stuff, we should just play guitar.

[jonnyg]

I was trying (unsuccessfuly) to express that this configuration works: guitar > interface> amp modeler > power amp > speakers,

If it works it works, job done. If it ain't broke why fix it.