Don't know what computers you guy use or if there's anything else making S-Gear high in CPU-usage. I run S-Gear along with Torpedo PI-101 + SSLChannel, H-Delay and Rverb from Waves and my CPU-usage is about 20%. This is running Logic 9.1.7. When using Pro Tools 9 the CPU usage is slightly higher at somewhere between 20-25%. The computer I use is a MacBook Pro with 8Gb RAM and a 7200rpm HDD.

I have a very similar setup but most of the time im using 8 to 12 instances of S-gear. Even bussing to the waves delays/reverbs it all starts to add up. Generally i will have a couple of reverb and delay setup/plugins to. Add something like SSL to and it really eats up. Just means alot of bouncing or freezing. A minor hassle for the quality of s-gear but it would be nice to be a little less computer intensive.

The Fractal sims also have virtual pots; "Master Volume", "Gain", etc. which all control the same respective software equivalents as those in the Scuffham.

Every single REAL dial in the Fractal has a corresponding REAL element in the signal path used by the DAW in which I run Scuffham.

Whatever brilliant Scuffham algorithms transform my humble DI signal into a thing of magnificently amplified beauty are not free from the effects of the analog chain which acts as neurons delivering my signal to the Scuffham "brain". Likewise, the action of the Fractal upon any input signal is predicated on the integrity of the signal itself, which at all points is mediated by components which have EXACT ANALOGS in my DAW setup. As with the Scuffham, once the signal arrives to the program, whatever the program does is divorced from the physical world from which the signal was derived. And if you should consider this NOT to be the case, then you must at least concede that the same physical considerations which could influence the behavior of the Fractal program could also intrude on the operation of the Scuffham.

So I fail to see how in one case, a system can be considered software ONLY (perhaps because of its portability across multiple platforms?), while another is considered a composite of hardware and software.

Anyways, still in the honeymoon phase with Scuffham, and really enjoying the tones this suite of amps is dishing out!

jigsawlogic wrote:


You should be. I just noticed one of my lead tone presets is "close" to Michael Romeo's lead tone.

it's awesome.

jigsawlogic wrote:

"So I fail to see how in one case, a system can be considered software ONLY (perhaps because of its portability across multiple platforms?), while another is considered a composite of hardware and software."

Well, as I'm certain you must have noticed, Scuffham's 'system' is indeed nothing but software while Fractal's product or 'system' is both software and a bunch of nuts and bolts. This is the very simple fact of the matter. There is simply no debating this very basic truth, yet you seem to be hung up on matters outside what I have been discussing. All peripherals being equal, as I keep stating, we are only discussing what happens within each.

Perhaps, when Mike or other devs start building in tolerances of +/- 20% into and throughout their software, as we find in the hardware of Fractal, we can continue this discussion in a fruitful manner. Although I'm aware how trendy the whole virtual analogue game is at present, those of us who grew up with analogue-only sometimes find it refreshing to get away from that straightjacket in our exciting digital world. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for anyone to design huge variances in tolerance into their software. Besides being a lot of work, much of the hardware slop of +/- 20 rightfully belongs in museums or classic synthesizer pricey reissue editions. The 'happy mistakes' resulting from unpredictable behavior back then was often outweighed by bad results in the final audio produced.

(I, for one, truly would like to see software that completely and accurately mimics, for example, the unreliable behavior of the germanium-based transistor. Wouldn't that be just so clever and peachy!)

Which leads me (us?) to think about the actual GUI of any amp sim, not only S-gear. When looking at ,say, Guitar Rigs fancy panels and elaborate copying of real life amp panels, one looks at certain freeware amp plugins, and so on, and I sigh i disbelief when looking at wish lists such as "add a pedal" add "reverb" add, and then just have to DIVIDE them from the amp, to really point out, that this is a pedal, this is a reverb. When actually everything is software, and IRL real electronics. Just because it looks like an Ibanez Tube Screamer pedal, it lures you, and seduces you into thinking it sounds the same.

Say reverb.
In the early days, a reverb knob was on the amp. Regardless that it was a plate or spring. Now, just because reverb was a dedicated OUTBOARD unit, now when doing anything software, you don't put it inside the amp as just a reverb button, but you just have to do a dedicated GUI display of any rack unit, and show it as a separate item from the amp.

I mean, everything is just electronics, no matter be it a stomp box, compression, effects pedal, reverb, or even cab sim. And walking down that line, in the end, everything is just software, and number crunching, no matter if it's delay,reverb or distortion or whatnot. To me, "everything" is an effect. Or every effect is part of the amp, software or electronic. No need to MOVE it outside of the amp anymore, just because it once was like that. You just turn on a button or turn a knob and some changes happens to the sound. that's it.

In Guitar Rig, such VISUAL things can be elusive. I did a "mean" patch to rile people up. I managed to get the same sound out of each patch/preset (each of different amp sim, Hiwatt, Marshall Plexi etc) , despite having different amps and eqs and effects. They hated me when I published it at user preset library. You could get the same sound basically. Say if I wanted a Roland Jazz Chorus amp sim to turn out a Mesa Boogie Rectifier, I just put a couple of pedals before it, EQ:d it, and put the appropriate cab sims afterwards. Worked like a charm! Sounded EXACTLY the same. Especially those sounds with a lot of distortion in it (mega gain amps). This isn't possible in any IRL hardware amp of the same manufacturer. Which made me wonder if not all these amp sim companies have the same kind of subcontractors out there who makes the basic sound engine for them, and sells them to everyone (Native Instruments, IK Multimedia, Waves etc) and let them tweak the rest to their specifications.

This is something I just speculates on, and can't be sure about it. BUT IT WOULDN'T SUPRISE ME if it was like that.

Now, these things has slowly DAWNED on me, that - say - Peavey Revalver, THD, Guitar Rig, Amplitube, sounds "kinda" the same, when everything else is said and done. Not really the same, but, kind of. A more generic thing that is a flavor of amp software. The funny thing is, that it ain't so with IRL amps of any kind. Even solid state ones.