Any modelers simulate the fx loop of the actual amps or stand alone poweramp

[shred440]

The only ones that comes to mind is Atomic Amplifire and Two Notes do power amp models. Any others? I find it interesting that putting things in the fx loop or going into the fx return is a common practice in the real world, yet not so much in the modeling world. I used to go in through the return of my amp using different preamps all the time, back in the day. It would be cool to be able to do this with my Helix!

 

[John Mark Painter]

It would really improve the reputation of the Helix Spring Reverb.
I run mine before amp blocks and think it sounds great.
But an insert option would be a big step up if it didn't crush the system

 

[Guitardave]

The only ones that comes to mind is Atomic Amplifire and Two Notes do power amp models. Any others. I find it interesting that putting things in the fx loop or going into the fx return is a common practice in the real world, yet not so much in the modeling world. I use to go in through the return of my amp using different preamps all the time, back in the day. It would be cool to be able to do this with my Helix!

+1 It would be great if the modeling gave that option. It seems so obvious I wonder why it isn't offered. I wonder how much complexity that would add if there were separate preamp, poweramp modules.

Interestingly enough the Mooer GE-150 puts the power amp section into the cab block. You can run it just as a power amp sim and adjust the tube type without a cab being loaded. I haven't experimented with it yet on electric. I was working on my acoustic electric into the PA and it definitely changes the response a lot.

In addition to their speaker types they allow you to change mic, center to off axis, and distance. I find the combination of those much simpler than using hi/lo cuts. Too bright, move the mic away from the center, too bassy, move it back. Very simple and effective...

 

[primemover12]

The only ones that comes to mind is Atomic Amplifire and Two Notes do power amp models. Any others. I find it interesting that putting things in the fx loop or going into the fx return is a common practice in the real world, yet not so much in the modeling world. I use to go in through the return of my amp using different preamps all the time, back in the day. It would be cool to be able to do this with my Helix!

I think you can do this with BIAS Amp and FX2. You can also get a free power amp simulation from Ignite--the TPA does a nice job. I've used it before to feed an ADA MP-1 into my interface.

 

[Jace Nuzback]

The only ones that comes to mind is Atomic Amplifire and Two Notes do power amp models. Any others. I find it interesting that putting things in the fx loop or going into the fx return is a common practice in the real world, yet not so much in the modeling world. I use to go in through the return of my amp using different preamps all the time, back in the day. It would be cool to be able to do this with my Helix!

This is correct. AmpliFire has 4 different power amp models. 6L6, EL34,EL84 and KT88.

 

[ChrisVereb]

I haven't used it, but it's my understanding you can get a power amp sim out of the fractal products using the TUBE PRE model. The EQ controls are neutral at noon and then all the power amp settings can be tweaked to match the device you want to simulate. Not exactly the same thing, but a work around to get there.

 

[Elric]

Mooer Radar has one... I’d be interested in seeing a review of that functionality if anyone has one... it’s small and inexpensive which is cool.

@Leon Todd did a nice video on using the AxeFx tube preamp model as a power amp sim on YouTube, although I would rather have a dedicated amp model for it...

 

[shred440]

This is correct. AmpliFire has 4 different power amp models. 6L6, EL34,EL84 and KT88.

This is essentially all I'd want. When I used a Two Notes CAB. I used the 4 × 6L6 poweramp sim with the preamp section of my Carvin Legacy 3. I did that for 3 year until I got my Helix. Now that I hear they are adding the Vai Legacy preamp pedal, which it basically the preamp of the Legacy, it got me craving poweramp sims again. I love my Helix, but I've been missing my old setup lately.

 

[phil_m]

+1 It would be great if the modeling gave that option. It seems so obvious I wonder why it isn't offered. I wonder how much complexity that would add if there were separate preamp, poweramp modules.

@benadrian talked about it awhile ago on the huge Helix thread.

https://www.thegearpage.net/board/index.php?posts/23845504/

Here's the scoop. As one might imagine, we model the preamp and the power amp sections of amps. What is not readily apparent to most users is that we are also modeling the power supply. The audio in the amp moves through preamp and into the power amp, as we all know. The power supply feeds the amp in reverse. It delivers power to the output transformer first, then the power tube screens, then the phase inverter, then the preamp from back to front. This means that preamp sag depends on how the power amp is performing.

In a single amp model, we can have bi-directional communication. In a preamp only, we have a behind the scenes trick to maintain the sag as if it was hooked up to a power amp, without using the DSP resources of having a power amp model. There's currently no way in our architecture to have a power amp model talk in an audio-backwards direction to a preamp model. Also, if there are two preamp models and two power amp models, there's has to be a bit of code to untangle the logic of which preamp is controlled by which power amp. In addition to that, every preamp is different, so there has to be some kind of logic to untangle what to do when a preamp that needs four nodes of power supply is only hooked up to a power amp with three nodes of power supply.

So it's not impossible, and it's definitely on our list of stuff to do, but it's much more complicated than most people think to mush two amp halves together and have the new system perform realistically.​

 

[shred440]

@benadrian talked about it awhile ago on the huge Helix thread.

https://www.thegearpage.net/board/index.php?posts/23845504/

Here's the scoop. As one might imagine, we model the preamp and the power amp sections of amps. What is not readily apparent to most users is that we are also modeling the power supply. The audio in the amp moves through preamp and into the power amp, as we all know. The power supply feeds the amp in reverse. It delivers power to the output transformer first, then the power tube screens, then the phase inverter, then the preamp from back to front. This means that preamp sag depends on how the power amp is performing.

In a single amp model, we can have bi-directional communication. In a preamp only, we have a behind the scenes trick to maintain the sag as if it was hooked up to a power amp, without using the DSP resources of having a power amp model. There's currently no way in our architecture to have a power amp model talk in an audio-backwards direction to a preamp model. Also, if there are two preamp models and two power amp models, there's has to be a bit of code to untangle the logic of which preamp is controlled by which power amp. In addition to that, every preamp is different, so there has to be some kind of logic to untangle what to do when a preamp that needs four nodes of power supply is only hooked up to a power amp with three nodes of power supply.

So it's not impossible, and it's definitely on our list of stuff to do, but it's much more complicated than most people think to mush two amp halves together and have the new system perform realistically.​

I vaguely remember reading this a few years ago. I forgot about the untangling issues. I was thinking that maybe it might be easier to just create generic power sections, but after reading this again, it might still be problematic with the communication between the poweramps and the preamps since the preamps are all different.

 

[Elric]

@benadrian talked about it awhile ago on the huge Helix thread.

We have had this discussion before, if they can model a full amplifier head they can easily build a model of a stand alone power amp like a Mesa 2:90 or VHT2:50:2 or what have you. The issue Ben speaks to is real, of course, but it is only applicable to the question, can "Why can't I use an existing model as a power amp simulation by just "turning off" the preamp?". That is not the ask here.

I am sure that the Amplifire amps are built that way and they are very solid, IMHO. Is it the same as using a head? No. But niether is using a tube power amp and rack premp which is what this is simulating.

 

[aleclee]

Funny thing about FX loops is that their origin was a compromise in trying to find a way to emulate studio post-FX in a live rig. People then wanted to do what modelers do today by default and now the desire is to have modelers emulate that emulation.

 

[shred440]

Funny thing about FX loops is that their origin was a compromise in trying to find a way to emulate studio post-FX in a live rig. People then wanted to do what modelers do today by default and now the desire is to have modelers emulate that emulation.

Funny, but true! Lol! fx loops opened the door to many possibilities!

 

[benadrian]

We have had this discussion before, if they can model a full amplifier head they can easily build a model of a stand alone power amp like a Mesa 2:90 or VHT2:50:2 or what have you. The issue Ben speaks to is real, of course, but it is only applicable to the question, can "Why can't I use an existing model as a power amp simulation by just "turning off" the preamp?". That is not the ask here.

I am sure that the Amplifire amps are built that way and they are very solid, IMHO. Is it the same as using a head? No. But niether is using a tube power amp and rack premp which is what this is simulating.

Fully correct. I've been giving more thought to building a modeled tube power amp that can be put after a modeled tube preamp. If we did this, then what you say above would need to be communicated well to our customers; it's like a rack rig where there is a tube preamp and separate tube power amp. The loudness and distortion of the tube power amp would not influence the dynamic response of the tube preamp.

Will this make it into the product. No idea. But I've had time recently to think about future Helix stuff and it's definitely on my short-ist wish list.

Cheers!

 

[Elric]

Fully correct. I've been giving more thought to building a modeled tube power amp that can be put after a modeled tube preamp. If we did this, then what you say above would need to be communicated well to our customers; it's like a rack rig where there is a tube preamp and separate tube power amp. The loudness and distortion of the tube power amp would not influence the dynamic response of the tube preamp.

Will this make it into the product. No idea. But I've had time recently to think about future Helix stuff and it's definitely on my short-ist wish list.

Cheers!

That’s awesome Ben. Thanks for at least considering it and looking into the idea!! I am sure some other customers would be interested too!

 

[jdroost]

Fully correct. I've been giving more thought to building a modeled tube power amp that can be put after a modeled tube preamp. If we did this, then what you say above would need to be communicated well to our customers; it's like a rack rig where there is a tube preamp and separate tube power amp. The loudness and distortion of the tube power amp would not influence the dynamic response of the tube preamp.

Will this make it into the product. No idea. But I've had time recently to think about future Helix stuff and it's definitely on my short-ist wish list.

Cheers!

This would be amazing.