Might be looking into an effects processor. Need help choosing.

[Nabeel Ansari]

So why make a blanket recommendation for something you don't really do, and then not back it up? Are you trying to be helpful or just get your post count up?

I didn't recommend anything. I was answering individual concerns, mostly about getting high gain tones in Guitar Rig.

Get my "post count up"? Really?

Are you trying to show me what I'm doing wrong or trying to just publicly making yourself look good?

(you should try reading, it helps avoid pointless confrontation. Normally I'd let it slide but I put up with far too much of this crap from people who decide to ignore what I say to try and step on me to make their advice seem more profound than it really is)

[GarretGraves]

If it was an option I could afford, I'd buy a Mesa Boogie Mark V or Marshall JVM and mic it with a couple mics. Even though we have tech that emulates our favorite sounds, the original REAL sound is always better.

I prefer hardware, true. However that doesn't mean I think software has no benefits. There's some awesome, almost synth-like sounds you can produce with GRig. And it's distortion and crunch aren't terrible. Actually you can get some decent roar out of it. I just love the warmth of an amp. So yeah it is a matter of preference.

EDIT: Also, as for recording clean dry guitar first then tweaking later? I'd only do that if I want a clean guitar with effects like flanger or phaser and verb and delay. I don't like the idea of recording clean guitar then adding distortion after. For that, I HAVE to hear the distortion go from my amp through the mics to Pro Tools. It feels better.

[Frederic Petitpas]

That's why I like to work with my GT-10 and my DAW at the same time since you can have 2 channels at the same time; I have my distortion in channel right and the unprocessed signal in channel left (you can have the raw signal coming out from the GT-10). That way, I play with direct monitoring and mute the software monitoring, so I hear the GT-10 without lag and record 2 tracks at the same time; one is what I just heard, the other is the clean signal.

With the same setting but the direct monitoring turned off and the software monitoring ON, I have another option for a live use: automate everymotherfuckingthing.

I set up a good clean sound rather than an unprocessed one, and keep my distortion on the other channel. I can program things like "Mute clean on bar 17/Unmute Distortion of bar 17" and vice versa. Have my delay stop at 75% of bar 24, the value of the time delay change, put a flanger on the last note of another bar... have my volume fade out here and there, solo boost when needed.. you get the picture

If you plan on using the GT-10 with an amp, use the GT-10 as the pre-amp and the amp as a simple power-amp, you do that by using the "4 cable method".

[Kanthos]

Get my "post count up"? Really?

It's a reasonable guess; you're someone who comes across as wanting to be helpful (which you often are) but not always discerning the difference between a helpful response (most of what you've said in this thread, for example) and unnecessary chatter (the one post I quoted). So either you think that everything you say is helpful, which isn't true, or you have some other reason to post often. Don't assume, however, that *everyone* who has something to say about *one* of your posts thinks the same about *all* of them; if I'd had wanted to comment on all your posts, I would've used the word "all" at some point in my post, or quoted more than one of yours.

Are you trying to show me what I'm doing wrong or trying to just publicly making yourself look good?

I don't care about making myself look good period, and I know that the only way I am going to look good is by giving worthwhile advice. All I was trying to do was help cut down on unnecessary chatter.

I didn't recommend anything. I was answering individual concerns, mostly about getting high gain tones in Guitar Rig.

(you should try reading, it helps avoid pointless confrontation...

I did read *all* the posts in this thread, including all of yours. I chose to directly respond to one of them, and point out why it wasn't useful. That seemed to go over your head, so let me try again in smaller steps.

I would always recommend hardware over software for live use.

First, yes, you did recommend something; the sentence above that I quoted is obviously a recommendation. If you did not intend it to be, maybe you should take the time to be clear about what you say?

Second, when you use 'always', that's a blanket statement. Always means "100% of the time" (or, depending on how loose you want to take it, it could be interpreted as "there may be rare exceptions which I will ignore, but generally, the vast majority of the time...") You're saying that no matter what the situation, you'd always recommend hardware. That's a pretty bold statement, given that all kinds of pro musicians disagree with you, from Owl City to Lyle Mays of the Pat Metheny Group.

Logically, you saying that you always recommend hardware means that either 1) you don't know enough about playing live to know when software is the better choice or 2) you disagree with anyone who would use software over hardware while on stage.

The former's a pretty useless statement; the latter is much more relevant, and it would be helpful to Garrett to know *why* you think that. You didn't explain yourself in any detail (and still haven't, at least not in this thread), so it's completely relevant for someone to ask why you're making such a generalized recommendation without saying why you think that way. And, for me personally, I'm always tweaking my keyboard rig, so if you've got something to say that I haven't considered, I'd want to know too. Whatever you say wouldn't likely be enough to change my opinion on using software (I've put *a lot* of time and experience into deciding how I want things to work for me), but you might be able to highlight some pitfall of software that I hadn't thought about yet and could find a way to work around.

Moving on...

I'm more of a studio musician, so such a thing is not a consideration for me.

Ok, so in once sentence you state that you think all live performers should stick to hardware. In the next sentence, you say that you don't have enough focus on live performance to have given it much thought. This makes your argument really weak.

In total, you're saying, "You should do things with hardware, but I won't tell you why I think so, and I don't even put enough thought into it to tell you why". You're certainly entitled to your opinion, and I'll be the first to agree that hardware is almost always the *easiest* option for live performance, but if you're looking for the *best* solution, you should consider both options.

So yes, I did read what you said, and called it out for being unsubstantiated opinion.

Normally I'd let it slide but I put up with far too much of this crap from people who decide to ignore what I say to try and step on me to make their advice seem more profound than it really is)

I'm sorry you feel that way. Some people may be using you in that way, and that's not right (and also not what I did here; I trust my advice on live rigs enough, and have had enough opportunities to see other people put it into practice, that I'm confident to let it stand on its own). I'd also gently suggest making sure that what people are "stepping on" is actual quality advice that they disagree with, not posts like the one I quoted that have very little usefulness.

Look, I think you're generally a helpful, knowledgeable, and nice guy. I just think that if you put a bit of thought into what you post, and that includes deciding when it's not worth posting anything at all, that you'll come across as being more helpful overall and that people will take you more seriously.

[Nabeel Ansari]

Your assumptions that I'm making a recommendation are flat out wrong. I wasn't recommending anything.

I never once said to go with a certain solution. He had already made up his mind when I made the post you are so "cleverly" trying to manipulate. You should stop looking for problems that aren't there.

Saying that I would always recommend hardware doesn't mean I AM recommending hardware. The initial subject of the thread was over when Garrett decided to go with the GT-10. Sure, I'm "playing with my words" to try and "defend myself". What the fuck else can I do when I'm being attacked for something I wasn't even trying to do?

As far as advice goes, my comment about hardware for live use was COMMENT, not advice or a recommendation.

The advice I gave in this thread? Was real tangible advice about a subject that I knew about than any others in the thread at that moment in time because I have been heavily practicing it for the past three days: high gain tones in Guitar Rig 5 Pro. I gave him moderately detailed instructions on how to get a tone I was currently working on. If I recall correctly, he actually did end up crafting a tone that he liked.

Looks like my advice isn't as "blanket" and "unhelpful" as you think it is.

Once more I'd like to say that equating "I would say" to "I am saying" is flat out wrong ESPECIALLY that when confronted on it I say it's not the same thing (yet you still insist I was saying one thing when I told you I wasn't).

So what if I didn't explain my opinion on hardware? He already made up his mind on what he wanted.

[GarretGraves]

Both of you, SHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

I'm not so sure I've decided...or have i?

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/GT100

For 50 american dollars more, i can get this. I saw a couple of vids of Rob Marcello playing with this thing and sounds fricken sweet! And it seems it has some improvements and more features over the GT-10. I think this is the new child I shall adopt.

EDIT: Aaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnnnnddd the order has been made. Expected to arrive a day after my birthday. Happy birthday to me!

[Kanthos]

Happy birthday to you! Have fun with it!