A had much more sparkle to me. B softer. So my preconceptions said A was the Fender, and wondered why you wouldnt EQ them both more closely so it was less obvious. So I got that totally wrong 😂 But I still prefer A on the audio playback, though only you guys really know what felt better in the room.

This was great . Well done and super practical. Last few gigs I used either tube amp, Joyo AMS direct to PA, and a Katana. Gig success had nothing to do with what rig I used. My enjoyment at the gig, aside from seeing the crowd having fun, was how well and how clearly I could hear my own guitar and vocals. Running a pedal-amp direct to the PA makes that last part easier to deal with. Someday I’ll upgrade the Joyo!

Can’t set the delay

I love the full range sound of the PA - best take a stereo set! Most important benefit of the PA is its versatility… for singing, harmonica, keyboard, acoustic and yesss electric guitar this one rig will do🙉

Amp sim is more hifi, not bad at all. Imo it all depends on your taste and kind of music you play. For trad blues rock, I will go with the amp with a little less verb.

The difference is pretty high, especially with the overdrive is totally different. Maybe increasing the bass on the UA it could help. On the clean the UA is different but i still like it, but with the antique is fizzy….i had the same impression with my Iridium. If i have to go digital i get better tone from all in one solution (e.g. Fractal)

Both sounded great and very similar. In a band mix, no one could tell the difference.

Very spurious comparison. Try the real amp combo, miked and played through the $2000 PA. (In spite of this, I preferred Rig B.)

Amp is fatter and rounder with a better compression on the attack

B. The real rig sound superb. That drip had me making the Tube amp immediately. Phenomenal reverb. But Rig A is really nice as well.

Interesting experiment, good playing, great job! Unfortunately, you cannot transfer the response in the room (the air movement), only the sound EQ'd by room mics. Rig A for slow clean sound is so much better than Rig B because it has a much brighter reverb with a longer decay. As gain goes up I'd say Rig B will be more and more preferable because its reverb sound and mid focus. But I'm sure that it is possible to configure both rigs to sound very much the same: just turn knobs a bit. Funny to read comments that state Rig B is so much closer to what they hear on records, which are closed mic'd guitar amp with reverb off (almost always) and highly EQ'd.

The Fender was clearly more clanky and raw. The tower was more mediocre and flat EQ sounding. For rythm it's probably not that big of a deal. But for mids raunchy punch on lead tones. The amp will always cut through a mix better. Peace!

Here is my 2 cents I like the deluxe with singe coils, and UAFX + EV/PA with humbuckers with different setting it might sound vice versa, so any combination works depending on the taste and preferences as a wise one once said "if it sound good it sounds good"

In my opinion, real amps are great toys, they bring you the real raw feeling in the rehearsal room. But when it comes to live playing, its just way more convenient to use amp sim with DI, it is easier to mix and when your band has their own rig/mixer you can basically plug and play. I still love the 100W head in the rehearsal room, but unless you are playing huge stages, they are always way to loud and crank up the stage volume to more than 110dB, on the one hand, thats rock'n'roll but on the other hand its almost deafening to the audience.

I preferred the Dream and the EV. I didn't care for the amp tone very much. The Dream is a great sounding pedal but I wish there was a little more headroom before it breaks up. My real deluxe amp doesn't break up anywhere near as easily.

For me, just to much reverb!. Even with the drive pedal, to much. The guy playing the Les Paul said the right thing. Adjust both rigs to where they sound best, not alike. I own that UA pedal and it does not have a good drive tone in it, or that you can download. Good luck on your next video.

Purchase a guitar from them and they send you something unplayable and yet claim that’s acceptable. They simply offer a free pack of strings. Disgusting. Shop at Thomann at your own risk.

Beware shopping with Thomann. Recently purchased the Dave Mustaine Flying V which was received in a terrible condition. Unplayable high E string. When correctly tuned it buzzed in the same way it would if tuned right down. Bridge not correctly adjusted. Not set up or check down on the guitar whatsoever. Seems the rumour about this with Gibson guitars is true. The E string snapped by itself within the first few minutes of having the guitar. Not whilst playing it. I had to replace it and try to make a temporary bridge adjustment myself before at some point taking to a guitar store to correctly set the whole guitar up. The fact it was sent out in this condition is one thing. But Thomann only finally responded to my email enquiry after two weeks and multiple emails sent to them. (Replied fast before purchase when enquiring about the guitar but their priority at that point is to secure a sale!). For a guitar that was £2,069, and sent in the condition it was Thomann have stated in their response that this IS acceptable and offered……a feee pack of strings. Beware if you’re shopping with Thomann as you may end up with a similar experience. Won’t be shopping with them ever again.

Beware shopping with Thomann. Recently purchased the Dave Mustaine Flying V which was received in a terrible condition. Unplayable high E string. When correctly tuned it buzzed in the same way it would if tuned right down. Bridge not correctly adjusted. Not set up or check down on the guitar whatsoever. Seems the rumour about this with Gibson guitars is true. The E string snapped by itself within the first few minutes of having the guitar. Not whilst playing it. I had to replace it and try to make a temporary bridge adjustment myself before at some point taking to a guitar store to correctly set the whole guitar up. The fact it was sent out in this condition is one thing. But Thomann only finally responded to my email enquiry after two weeks and multiple emails sent to them. (Replied fast before purchase when enquiring about the guitar but their priority at that point is to secure a sale!). For a guitar that was £2,069, and sent in the condition it was Thomann have stated in their response that this IS acceptable and offered……a feee pack of strings. Beware if you’re shopping with Thomann as you may end up with a similar experience. Won’t be shopping with them ever again.

I love pj basses❤

The difference is in the midrange. PA has richer sound, more highs more lows, the amp has less richer sounds but has midrange where the electric guitar should be in the band. Both sound great, differently, someone will like more richer sound, somebody else will like more mid projecting sound. Just like you two guys there.

Listening with a pair of Sennheiser HD600 headphones through a Neve preamp, and an RME ADI- 2 DAC, I could not tell when the systems changed. If the guitar was played in a band mix, I don't think that there would be any audible difference. The UAFX Dream is that good.

I own EVM12L and Celestion G12-65 speakers. I can immediately tell that Rig B was the real amp - the clear difference was the sound from the speakers themselves. Those small speaker arrays are meant for generic PA use, not just guitar - it is a sound that is not in any of the recordings of guitar riffs I have memorized over the decades.

After one of the lower notes played in Rig B it was clearly the AMP. Amp sims always sound thin and lack the depth and harmonics of an amp. maybe digital cannot duplicate the randomness or imperfections generated by a real amp.

Really like there are places where amps are not allowed? I think live music sounds more 3 dimensional when musicians have amps on stage, lately, I have the impression that live music is pushed more through PA like whole "sound picture" is built in two rows, that is in my opinion kinda 2 dimensional. I think it is better when PA is added on top of the band to fill missing spots. That way sound fills the room from multiple sources in the space giving it 3 dimensional sound, rather than everything comming from two rows of speakers. This is only for smaller venues, for bigger venues PA needs to do heavy lifting.

B set always

Heard the difference especially with the single coil. It breaks up nicely with the tube amp, organic. The tower is good maybe for rhythms.

Both sound great. Dream 65 solution came out on top for me. I don't gig anymore and my home rig is based around a Strymon Iridium, it's what I'm used to now. Spend enough time with one or another setup and you will become accustomed to the nuances of either and be able to coax great useable sounds.

Sir can you please spear me one of ur bass please sir am begging 😭🙏🙏

Have you tried this kind of test with bass amps? I suspect the small PA wouldn't cut it, but if it did, that's very cool.

I think a major difference in sound comes from different radiation patterns. With 12 inch speakers mids and highs become way more beamy than with this this PA speakers system. So it´s not even necessarily simulation vs amp that we hear but probably a lot of speaker physics.

The second guitar was a Gibson ( = a too expensive guitar).

I prefer real amps but what a great time to be a guitar player.

Well that was fun. When the PRS was playing it was really hard to notice a difference, and I thought B was the tower, but when the Les Paul was playing it was a more noticeable difference, and thought B was the amp. Pretty amazing!

The sound of the real tube amp 'blooms' whereas the sound of the sim very clearly does not. Nothing wrong with the sim, but pro/virtuoso guitarists will always favour 'Real' over 'Sim' (irrespective of what they do on stage).

You can hear the artifact in the reverb tank when you accent also the mids are up on the rig b. That’s my choice for awesome tube tone

Through my monitors, they both sound great. I could feel the PA rig in my feet because my sub was working with that setup. The PA had more highs and lows. I love a high presence sound without painful frequencies so I really like the PA. I also loved the pedal into the real amp like Kris. From the audio, both sounds would make me happy and be usable. My experience with my quad cortex suggests the UA pedals will have a similarly responsive feel so I'd probably fall back to using whichever style of rig fits my need in the moment. I made a couple captures of my real amps to use for practice and writing, and play my real amps for having fun. I've been considering getting a headrush or similar to stream my laptop audio. Then I can use an FRFR for my quad cortex and/or playing backing track audio. I never really crank my studio monitors to try competing with my real amps

I will never understand

Uafx is really good. But still prefer a tube amp with a cap. Digital is really good and super usefull at home. But for me. I want the real thing.

Julia is absolutely talented .

A diferença foi muito grande pra mim, descobri no primeiro teste, o digital tem o ataque lento e com menos graves, quando mudou pro Deluxe Reverb, saquei na hora sobrando aquele grave gostoso.

Had it right, and preferred the amp throughout. The sim is absolutely usable.

Although you've EQed the PA it sounds fuller, simply 'more' as Guillaume said. You can hear the deep frequencies of the subwoofer and also the more linear and hifiesque treble frequencies. And in my ears the PA sounded better. But the amp also sounds killer. So which would I prefer? That's a matter of the use case. What kind of music will be played, in what kind of room, at what volume, how many instruments are playing simultaneously, etc, etc............? For example the PA would be totally wrong for a blues gig in a venue with an audience of 100 people. But if you want to play slow ambient things like 'Cigarettes After Sex' with a lot of lush reverb or delay the PA would be better.

When I heard the first demo, I could tell it wasn't an amp, and when rig 2 came up, it only confirmed the impression. Interestingly, I thought the single coils sounded sweeter through the amp, but I also thought the humbuckers came to life more through the PA. I think that I liked the single coils through the amp thanks to the mid focus and top end roll off, which makes total sense. Conversely, humbuckers are darker pickups with generally more midrange, and the clarity and "3D" airiness of the PA kind of pulled the blanket off. And of course, overdrive is gonna be nice through the amp. Just goes to show that you can't make a blanket statement here - people will prefer the one or the other based on a multitude of criteria and depending on "how" they hear their sound and what they generally listen for. Maybe what we need is not more new amps and more meticulous emulations thereof, but futuristic speaker systems than can provide both a full range response as well as a traditional amp curve, and you could switch back and forth depending on your needs.

Very interesting as always... Is there Any chance to check all this models, with the same pickups, the usa pickups perhaps, althoug if you can add an Squier Classic vibe 50s... AND check out if the price worth It😋

WOW i really enjoyed the video. Exactly what I need it. Can you please make a similar comparison between Vox and Ruby they have the same level of "most popular recorded amp"?

I prefer A

Two excellent solutions but from my end of the net, listening through head phones, preferred the digital set up.

It was obvious which was the PA as the room reverb was different, the amp was so much closer to the back wall, and the PA more in the middle of the room. It's also curious that each player prefered the amp they were closest to. C+, but must improve experimental regime! :-D

My goodness to me the amp is just miles above. It’s not that the PA didn’t sound good, but in comparison the amp is great.