Captures: Which Device/Platform?

[Frankencat]

Which capture device/platform do you prefer and why?

 

[2dor]

For profiling / captures, I'm 100% on board the NAM train.

I use the QC live with the band with Neural Captures of my amps. While not as good as NAM, the Neural Captures still sound pretty close to my gear. They fall apart if the amps you're trying to profile have a higher amount of high-end / presence and gain (or clipping diodes engaged) - NAM does a lot better here.

Tonex is sometimes slightly better than QC, sometimes way off; I gave up on it because the juice wasn't worth the squeeze imho.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

NAM for most things, but only in the studio using the plugin.

If I was out gigging, it’s tough to say. ToneX mini pedal is so damn cheap. Neural stuff sounds better than kemper and the overall ecosystem is quite good.

Kemper sounds worst but is pretty robust/flexible. That would be my last pick, the others would all have their own caveats depending on which compromises make most sense.

 

[Frankencat]

Thanks guys. Added NAM to the poll.

 

[Sedaxel]

I didn't try Kemper, Tonex nor Neural. I've tried Mooer MNRS, TH-U (supposedly Kemper), GuitarML (should be AIDA-X) and of course NAM.

NAM feels the best to me.

As I see it, capturing has 2 great goals.

First, being able to have a miniature copy of your own amps. If you gig, and you love your rigs, capturing let's you use both your rig or your lightweight version depending on the situation. Rehearse without carrying heavy amps, fly with little a lightweight gear... And gig with your amps when it's comfortable. If you find a reliable way of using NAM live, it's my favourite. However, it's not easy. For me, other platforms are more gig worthy... And I would lean towards NDSP.

Second, the ability to explore amps you would never play instead. For that scenario, the problem of NAM is that the input gain is not standardized, so even when it's the most accurate system, it's really difficult to trust on captures and find reliable ones with stated input gain. So, for this use I also would choose other system, with standardized gain... Which is to say, boxes that are able to do on board capturing (QC or Kemper), because that ensures the gain is just what it should.

Tonex seems to be a disaster in terms of ecosystem and input gain stuff. So, zero interest for me (even being so cheap).

I wish NDSP or Kemper had the accuracy of NAM... They don't, and that's what's still keeping me from getting one of that expensive boxes.

 

[NightWalker]

NAM for most things, but only in the studio using the plugin.

If I was out gigging, it’s tough to say. ToneX mini pedal is so damn cheap. Neural stuff sounds better than kemper and the overall ecosystem is quite good.

Kemper sounds worst but is pretty robust/flexible. That would be my last pick, the others would all have their own caveats depending on which compromises make most sense.

i own the Axe 3,Kemper and QC and to me Kemper is top,,i dont give a shit about null test,i have friends that still prefer the Kemper over the QC or Tonex,i dont think the Kemper sound worst

 

[NightWalker]

I wish NDSP or Kemper had the accuracy of NAM... They don't, and that's what's still keeping me from getting one of that expensive boxes.

if you havent own the Kemper or the QC you cant talk about accuracy,dont trust videos buy the devices and test them yourself

NAM sound good but also enjoy playing with the Kemper or the QC,to be honest i dont give a shit about accuracy,if it sound good is enough to me

 

[paisleywookiee]

Not ToneX, not Kemper. The former is a pain on the ass, the latter just doesn’t do it for me. Would like to try Neural’s, and I think I might try NAM this week.

 

[metropolis_4]

Kemper.

I only use them for live performance and I don’t make my own, so the most important factor for me is access to high quality professional curated libraries.

That’s where Kemper has been the best for me. MBritt Profiles are perfect for my needs.

And Performance mode in Kemper Stage is still the best for live performance

 

[Frankencat]

I tried NAM briefly and I’m not a fan, sorry.

 

[Frankencat]

The MBritt stuff is definitely money for the Kemper, Tone Junky as well. However this is about captures and which one people prefer for that functionality.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

In terms of capturing…in order of preference

Kemper
Tonocracy
Nam
Tonex

In terms of using software

Tonocracy
Tonex
Nam

Hardware

Kemper
Tonex

 

[Frankencat]

Thanks Ed. What do you like about the Kemper over the others?

 

[metropolis_4]

The MBritt stuff is definitely money for the Kemper, Tone Junky as well. However this is about captures and which one people prefer for that functionality.

Oh, you’re only talking about for the process of making your own? I thought you were just asking which of those platforms we liked best for Profiles/Captures

 

[texhex]

I have a Kemper and Tonex and the Kemper is better for me by a huge margin.

• Easier to use to make Profiles and in general overall usability (for me)
• No computer or internet requirement
• Excellent editor and Profile management software
• Thousands of high quality Profiles available

I'd like to try the QC but as I've stated before I just can't get on board with their cloud being required in order to use their devices.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

Thanks Ed. What do you like about the Kemper over the others?

For starters the capturing process incl. refining is way faster.
And with Liquid Profiles and can get by with a lot less profiles of the same end.

But most importantly the amp parameters like definition, pick, sag etc

That’s literally why I got a toaster after the player.
And editing stuff in rig manager is great compared to other guys idea of what/how to edit.

But it’s now at the point where anything works for me digital sift/hardware or real amps.

That said had the NDSP given the ability to run their plugs I’d have bought that day one.

But I’m likely still gonna get the new UAFX pedal dropping next week.
Lol

 

[[Nathan]]

This thread will be a great eye opener to the NAM crowd who don’t think a proper guided calibrator training process is desperately needed to be taken seriously against other formats. I’m not complaining that one doesn’t exist because I don’t have the time or skills to build one myself, but at least acknowledging that it’s a missing piece of the puzzle is stage1 of a dev possibly looking to create one.

 

[paisleywookiee]

I wish IK (or someone for use with NAM) made a calibrated USB interface that turned your computer into a Kemper/QC. I don’t mind the wait for the machine learning. But the inaccurate gain and such is such a fucking pain in the balls.

 

[bigmenace]

I know I might be the minority over here, but I say no to captures.

 

[bikescene]

I've been using NAM and have been happy with it. I decided to try it after concurrently seeing the NAM and Input Calibration threads here on TGF after taking some time away from guitar.

I was definitely skeptical of NAM, and didn't enjoy it prior to understanding the input calibration issue. Those creators who actively encourage the information to be shared have made it a more enjoyable experience.

I've captured 6 of my amps in depth, and that has made me appreciate it more than just flipping through random one off captures. Some paid captures that offer numerous captures have provided me access to unique sounds. To be able to catalogue sounds with such accuracy is a big thing to me. The lack of bloat in the NAM plugin has probably kept me from looking into ToneX further.

I've invested many hours with NAM though. It took the trial and error of making a few captures myself to convince me that it would bring something different than the Helix and Fractal stuff I was already using. I can definitely see how someone would be put off by the initial introduction to it, and I was probably on the verge of dismissing it myself.

I only play at home, otherwise I could see myself going with the Kemper Profiler Player or bigger ToneX Pedal and immersing myself in those platforms.