sevenagn
Groupie
- Messages
- 29
Helix Stadium would be a great option, but price here is really high. Old helix does not have a good form factor for a desktop device in my opinion.
Hardware Modeller as a Bedroom Player
- Thread starter sevenagn
- Start date
sevenagn
Groupie
- Messages
- 29
Latency is the same as when using a DAW, isn't it?
Shask
Roadie
- Messages
- 188
I used to hate playing through the computer for years, plugins or Axe-Fx. Last year I really got into ToneX, and it changed my mind mind completely. Better tones than I get with my FM3. I just capture my tube amps, and then have digital versions of my tones with more dynamics than traditional modelers.
I have been super impressed with the new ToneX / NAM technology. It makes me question if hardware modelers are even needed for home players.
I have been super impressed with the new ToneX / NAM technology. It makes me question if hardware modelers are even needed for home players.
sashimi
Roadie
- Messages
- 838
For a desktop device, I almost want to say just stick with the plugins, if you aren’t going to use foot switches.
AlbertA
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,964
Yeah these days I mainly use the NAM stuff or UAD plugins (which thanks to the free plugin thread in this forum, I've gotten quite a few FX free) when I'm using plugins in the computer.
Last edited:
Jim Soloway
Groupie
- Messages
- 78
Latency on the DAW depends on my settings, but so does the quality of the recording and not in the same direction. The VST host doesn't have that compromise. It just works. It also gives me a great visual representation of the entire chain of effects and a really easy way to move them around and test. There's a bunch ore that make the VST host a lot nicer environment to play in.
Shask
Roadie
- Messages
- 188
I bought the entire IK Multimedia studio, so with Amplitube and T-Racks, I pretty much have everything you need. I also bought a few Valhalla Delay and Reverb plugins, which sound as good as Fractal effects, IMO.
I have NAM and have played with it also, but it just hasn't clicked with me the way ToneX has. I have been able to make 100+ captures of my tube amps which come out great with the v2 captures.
Mixing my own IRs also helped a lot.
My computer probably boots up as fast, if not faster, than the FM3, lol.
At this time, I really dont see the point in a big high priced modeler unless you play out. Playing through the computer is great, and if I want to travel with it, I can just load the sound into the ToneX One pedal.
ragingplatypi
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,431
Personally, I would also consider the HX Stomp or HX Stomp XL. I did all my editing in the box with that one also and found that it was actually easier because all the controls are under one hand and quick once muscle memory kicks in.
For home playing it’s great and its limitations actually spurred my creativity.
For live playing I’d recommend the Stomp XL, but at home 3 footswitches are enough.
MirrorProfiles
Rock Star
- Messages
- 5,332
Plugins>>>
ragingplatypi
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,431
Should we start a full blown plugins vs. hardware war?
Will it live in infamy like its glorious predecessors, Tube amps vs. digital, Knobs vs. sliders, Sweet vs. Dill?
Can it actualize the the apparently infinite potential for lewd double entendres contained within a phrase like “full blown plugins vs. hardware?”
Will it live in infamy like its glorious predecessors, Tube amps vs. digital, Knobs vs. sliders, Sweet vs. Dill?
Can it actualize the the apparently infinite potential for lewd double entendres contained within a phrase like “full blown plugins vs. hardware?”
TSJMajesty
Rock Star
- Messages
- 8,010
The difference btw using the Archetype Petrucci and the Axe III is neglible to me. I actually find the effects to be easier to dial in on the plugin, since they're simpler, and I'm not much into tweaking.
If I bought the Neural first though, I might've not even gotten an Axe III. It sounds fantastic.
If I bought the Neural first though, I might've not even gotten an Axe III. It sounds fantastic.
Jim Soloway
Groupie
- Messages
- 78
They both have their place. I love playing through plugins at home but I can't figure out a practical way to use them live.
That plugin is
I will be happy the day it gets PCOM’d lol
TSJMajesty
Rock Star
- Messages
- 8,010
- Messages
- 10,244
Funny you mention that. Your other post had me thinking on the same lines. The tube vs. digital debate has dwindled significantly. Plugins and modeling have reached the same level of experience and facility, especially if we're talking about moderate volumes and recording/practice needs. A lot even prefer modeling now. Arguments can still be made when it comes to stage and speaker volumes, but even that is starting to even out some. It doesn't really matter as long as the player enjoys themselves -- and in turn those around them listening may hopefully enjoy it.
ChordInversion
Roadie
- Messages
- 806
I don't enjoy using software (plugins) at home at all. I've tried and tried, and I own a few packages that go almost entirely unused as a result. The whole experience involves too much extraneous stuff for my liking. On the other hand, I don't mind using a computer editor to dial in a few presets a month. I spend the rest of the time playing, and I have. I problem making minor changes on my AM4 and VP4 when needed.
I know people who play through plugins almost exclusively. It's really just a matter of personal preference.
I know people who play through plugins almost exclusively. It's really just a matter of personal preference.
Jarick
Rock Star
- Messages
- 5,221
Sonically I think your plugins are going to be as good as any hardware device, assuming you have the plugins that make all the sounds you want.
Hardware devices IMO have a couple benefits but some of them won't be much for a bedroom player. One of the benefits is portability for live use which of course you aren't going to need or use.
But the other is usability, because each of the hardware devices will have its own interface and workflow. Some will be better than others for your preferences. I really like the ability to use the hardware as a standalone unit and get off screens for a while personally.
Hardware devices IMO have a couple benefits but some of them won't be much for a bedroom player. One of the benefits is portability for live use which of course you aren't going to need or use.
But the other is usability, because each of the hardware devices will have its own interface and workflow. Some will be better than others for your preferences. I really like the ability to use the hardware as a standalone unit and get off screens for a while personally.
namathan_zirwir
Roadie
- Messages
- 215
If the FM3 and QC are the same price in your country, for me I choose the QC easily.
This!
A computer with the NAM and a quality audio interface is WAY better than any "hardware" in terms of latency, flexibility, integration (backing tracks, stems, MIDI, automation, synchronization, and zero delay patch change). I'm surprised that some people here don't go the computers route, because the Pros are heading toward it.
