Ampster or small tube amp or DSP or ……..

[IAA]

As you an tell I’m really sure of what to do! So in a nutshell I’m playing lots more guitar and am ready to record some overdubs to my forthcoming EP. But I’m not sure about which could sound most “authentic”.

Options might be,

Guitar direct to AI hi z input then Amplitude (for example) - got all this.
Guitar to Blackstar combo, and mic up with my Shure sm57 - got all this
Get something like the ampster to go between guitar and AI. - would buy

I’m after a strong crunch not too hi gain. Guitar is single coil predominately.

Any advice from the experts here would be much appreciated.

Ian

[ore_terra]

if authenticity is what you're after, there's nothing more authentic than an amp and a mic. That's the fact.

Now that you mention amplitube, I suggest you try ToneX. It integrates with Amplitube and sounds killer. it's based in real amp captures such as kemper and quad cortex, and it performs as good at them.

[Drew Stephenson]

Personally I'd always go for a mic'd amp if you can. The only thing I would caution is to dial in the amount of drive/distortion you want, then just back it off a touch.
It's easy to add a bit more crunch in but often what sounds right at the point of recording ends up being a bit much in the mix.

[Aled Hughes]

Either and any will be an 'authentic' guitar sound, since it will be a guitar, so I wouldn't worry about that.

I'll second the Tonex recommendation, I think it sounds very good, and it's much quicker and more convenient than setting up and amp and a mic.

If you've already got an amp you like, then by all means use it, but a lot of software is free to try so it might be better to go down that route first?

As I alluded to in my opening sentence, I don't think using an amp is a more 'authentic' way of recording an electric guitar. It's just the way it used to be done. It's still valid, but it's not the only way. Moving away from real amps opens new possibilites for the instrument (though software such as Tonex exist mainly to replicate the 'old way' and the old sounds we're accustomed to - and that it does very well I think)

[Kwackman]

I like S-Gear Scuffham amp sim.
I'm NOT an expert, but a couple of good players on this forum have praised it.
I think there's a free demo version.

[resistorman]

Not sure what "authentic" means, but why not record with what you have and see which you like better? Nobody can advise about that.

[Stuart79]

I would say experiment with what you have also. Either can sound good and your ears will be the best judge of what's right for you and your music.

The benefit of DI is that you have more flexibility to change the sound later if necessary. And domestic circumstances sometimes dictate that this is the most practical option. I like to go via the "Thru" output of a DI box to monitor via an amp while I'm playing as it feels better. I sometimes mic up the amp but as it's a domestic space this usually necessitates doing some temporary sound absorption with duvets above and either side of the mic. I'll often just go with DI for speed and use an amp sim later.

Paul White put together a podcast on this not long ago if I'm not mistaken.

[IAA]

That’s helpful, thanks all. I’ll try again to mic the current amp and test against DI and amp sims. I’ll hold off on the purchases till I try again. When I last tried to mic the guitar I was a bit underwhelmed at the results, but it was my first go at it so trying again might be worth a shot.

I'll second the Tonex recommendation, I think it sounds very good, and it's much quicker and more convenient than setting up and amp and a mic.

Yes I’d seen this but need to read a bit more about it. Given I’ve Amplitude it might make sense.

The only thing I would caution is to dial in the amount of drive/distortion you want, then just back it off a touch.
It's easy to add a bit more crunch in but often what sounds right at the point of recording ends up being a bit much in the mix.

. Hmm wonder whether this was part of the problem last time I tried, I definitely remember the sound as way too muddy on playback.

[The Elf]

I wouldn't (and don't) give two hoots for 'authenticity'. Listeners will not care how 'authentic' your guitar sound is either.

Just try your options and choose the one that sounds good to you.

On the previous album I used everything from a DI-ed 50p charity shop FX pedal to thousands of pounds-worth of amps/cabs and mic's. I guarantee that nobody knows, or cares, which one is which.

But always record a clean DI to give you options later...

[IAA]

On the previous album I used everything from a 50p charity shop FX pedal to thousands of pounds-worth of amps/cabs and mic's. I guarantee that nobody knows, or cares, which one is which.

Blimey Mr Elf, next you’ll be telling me listeners can’t tell the difference between my lovely analog synths and my virtual collection!



But I know you’re right of course, it’s just I’d like to get that guitar sound that’s in my head, or more realistically on most of the work that Steve Hackett does!

[The Elf]

But I know you’re right of course, it’s just I’d like to get that guitar sound that’s in my head, or more realistically on most of the work that Steve Hackett does!

Some of the stories I could tell...! A lot of pro's go for the pragmatic solution.

[Matt Houghton]

Personally I'd always go for a mic'd amp if you can. The only thing I would caution is to dial in the amount of drive/distortion you want, then just back it off a touch.
It's easy to add a bit more crunch in but often what sounds right at the point of recording ends up being a bit much in the mix.

Seconded! In the same vein, I'd suggest when setting up your amp/pedals that you don't scoop the mids out too much either.