Guitarists and audio enthusiasts are some of the most superstitious and bull-headed people I know. You can overlay spectrum graphs of digital vs analog audio output, do double-blind tests, etc. and most will still prefer the analog version of it; crediting intangible things like "bloom", "warmth", "air" and touch-responsiveness.

Not discrediting the market for digital modelers though; most fans of these systems that I know use them for less wear and tear for tours and gigs on their tube counterparts.

EHX buying NewSensor's factory ensures that tubes will be around for decades, even for this niche market. Plus the NOS market is still one any laymen can participate in.

https://www.ehx.com/blog/peek-inside-one-of-the-worlds-great...

> Guitarists and audio enthusiasts are some of the most superstitious and bull-headed people I know.

I do think audiophiles trump musicians when it comes to superstitions. Just recently found out there’s a market for cables costing hundreds of euro’s to interface hi-fi components, with lush descriptions of the soundstage afforded by such cables. Ignoring the fact any record one listens to will have its sound passed through 20 euro cables at some point in its production.

I think that another factor may be something I recently learned about called "the Ikea effect": the idea that a part of the attraction that people have for Ikea furniture, above and beyond the low cost, is that because they're required to assemble it themselves, the owners feel that they've put something of themselves into the furniture.

I can see something like this being a part of the audiophile attraction to these types of components: that every time the owner adds a new set of magic interconnect cables, magic power cables, or whatever, they imaging that they hear an improvement. In the end, they have a lot of themselves invested in their "rig", as they call them, and so find it easy to hear virtues that aren't really there.

Agreed. And not just any cables, but polarized cables, with gold plated connectors, and the copper wire formed in oxygen-deprived environments, with individual strands following certain twist-pattern to optimize the electron flow, etc. To read the descriptions, one would think the ore were mined by elves on the moon! Nonsense, all.

I'm hoping these blokes never crack open the amp to look at the plain old PVC-insulated wiring within. And don't tell them the oil-in-paper caps are fading over time. Ditto with the carbon resistors.

Meanwhile, humidity of the air and barometric pressure has a measurable affect on the sound of paper-cone speakers. How long before an "audiophile" barometric chamber is marketed?

This discussion always makes me link to [1] the fact that audiophiles can't tell the difference between a high-end cable and a coat hanger. It's amazing what our ears want to hear vs. what they actually do.

The weakest link always has an effect, as you mention. To some musicians, this is the effect. I.E. Hendrix preferring cheap coily-cables which rolled off the high-end on his Strat/Marshall combination nicely. Now coil cables are a premium.

[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=audiophile+coat+hanger+test&...

This is news? Hundreds of Euro's is the LOW END of boutique cable. While there is much nonsense in the audiophile world, I'm also not going to connect my $100,000 speakers with an ugly $5 cable. If you're already in that realm, $1000 cables don't mean shit in the balance sheet.

Some guitarists like to use old tube amps because they can be repaired, maintained, and modified much more easily than their modern counterparts. Old tube amps tend to have point to point wiring, which is much easier to fiddle with than reflow soldered PCBs.

Electric guitarists are often poor, clever, and self reliant. They can regularly find themselves out in the boonies with nothing but duct tape and baling twine to hold their rig together. Choosing a more robustly built older amp is not an irrational choice for such a person.

Experienced guitarists (well, I, anyway) can easily an instantly spot the difference between a modeller and a real tube amp. I also haven't found tubes too difficult to find; whether NOS or produced recently.

Audiophiles... I don't understand why you want tube amps. They are good for guitar players because of their imperfections (e.g. overdrive, "warmth", etc) which is the last thing I want when I'm listening to a quality recording.

>Experienced guitarists (well, I, anyway) can easily an instantly spot the difference between a modeller and a real tube amp.

It might be possible, but it surely isn't easy nor obvious. "Instantly," as you claim? Sorry, but I'd bet a sizeable stack of money that's not the case. Perhaps if you're talking about a 20-year-old 1st generation Line 6 Pod or Yamaha Fx500, then okay, I can see that. But modern modeling amps are exceedingly good at reproducing the nuances of a valve amp. The Kempler is remarkable -- I would go as far as to say astounding -- in its ability to reproduce the breakup, compression, warmth etc. of an amp at all volume levels. If you heard one in person you'd be a believer. At the other end of the spectrum, even a $150 Fender Mustang amps does a respectable job of sounding faithful [disclaimer - the factory settings are pure rubbish and almost embarrassingly poor, but tweak the settings in the computer editor and a whole wealth of sounds are available, some of them are brilliant).

And why would someone want a valve amp for playback of recordings? The same reason you claim to hear the "warmth" of a valve guitar amp. The same reason guitarists use an EP3 (echoplex tape delay) with the tape out -- that preamp circuit compresses, clips, and enhances the waveform in a way that is very pleasing to the ear. Some notes increase in clarity and bloom in a pleasant way.

A valve amp doesn't imply distortion. Leo Fender was a radio tech before forming his amplifier/instrument company. He knew the value of having lots of headroom.

>If you heard one in person you'd be a believer.

The key is blind testing. Everyone thinks that they can tell the difference between a Kemper and a valve amp.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INJ_H5PiuTE

The gap has closed rapidly. I've gone to modeling totally, sold all my tube stuff. The digital stuff is about 90% of the way there, and the thing is I can have 90% of about 50 different amps. So nice to be able to go, from, say, a Vox AC30 to a Marshall stack in the flick of a switch.

I can't speak for you, but I am sure that most guitarist actually cannot tell the difference.

I've posted many threads over the years at TheGearPage, with real amp recordings vs hardware/software modellers, and in nearly all cases, the guesses are just that - guesses, which fall into a 50/50 distribution. That is of course, when the guys who are purported 'experts' actually participate in the polls. Most of them tend to disappear whenever they are challenged to voice in on them.

I have some lovely tube amps here, and I also own a couple of Axe-FX's, and for me, when travelling, the Axe-FX is my 'go to' purely for convenience. At gig volumes, and in a band mix, it is pretty hard for me to tell the difference, and I enjoy the tone the same.

I know a lot of guitarists say that they have to have the 'feel', but for me, the 'feel' is there anyway (I usually feed my Axe-FX through the power amp stage of a real amp). I normally play fairly clean, blues/rock based stuff, and the last gig I flew across the country for, the rented backline actually had a Mesa Rectifier III for me. I've never played a Rectifier style amp before, but I had my Axe-FX, with a Fender Bassman amp model preset, through the power amp stage of the Rectifier, and it sounded amazing. The other bands were asking me how I was getting such crystal clean tones out of a 'metal' amp!

> Audiophiles... I don't understand why you want tube amps.

The ode to the way things used to be I think drives this market. Combine that with vinyl and you have a medium and listening experience that's superseded entirely.

Nope. Things have been this way even back when it was "the time when things used to be that way." When vinyl was popular, and before CD's were a glimmer in Philips's eye, the audiophiles held out RTR tape machines as the holy grail.

Sounds like an ode to the way things used to be. Yearning for the past, no matter the present. The folks who grew up on tape machines are fewer and fewer. I'm sure there were gramophone enthusiasts saying the same sort of things.

I think the essence is in the word ‘emulation’. If a thing exists, and then another thing exists whose sole purpose is to sound like the other thing, this will definitely add to the prestige of the initial thing. I think it’s the trend for digital software and hardware manufacturers to focus on emulations of analog hardware that’s keeping analog hardware desirable for the current generation.