Hardware Modeller as a Bedroom Player

[ivanmancic]

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.

Because it's not just about absolute sound quality or realism, it's also about convenience, not screwing around with input level calibration (even worse with captures), additional effects etc.
I prefer all-in one solutions with known calibration, which is why I mostly used Helix Native when going computer route.
Plugins and good audio interface are great until you have to add some guitars in a session with many instruments and effects in place, that you cant run at less than 256 samples. Hardware + direct monitoring is just more consistent.

 

[Shask]

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.

It is definitely becoming a hard choice.

I tried for YEARS to play direct. Plugins, hardware, Fractal, Line 6, etc... I was never happy with the overly smooth fuzzy feel for my high gain chugging sounds. You can make it sound OK, but the feel is never right. The 3 things that really changed it for me were:

1. The new Machine Learning capturing of ToneX / NAM . I am sure NDSP is similar. I just find capturing to better capture the dynamics more realistically than traditional modeling.

2. I got an IK Axe I/O Interface. This interface has a high impedance JFET input designed for guitars. I think this helps the feel vs the traditional inputs of interfaces. With another interface I think I would be looking for some sort of DI box to plug in between the guitar and interface.

3. Mixing my own IRs. Instead of looking at "mix ready" IRs, I started mixing together IRs with room and rear type IRs to pick up more of that distant sound that sounds more like sitting in the room with a cab, instead of sitting on the floor with your ear on the speaker.

 

[ChordInversion]

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've found captures to be an exercise in futile hunting, in large part because i don't have a bunch of amps I want to capture. The modeler is my set of amps.

Not that there's a wrong way to do it. Among my good friends who play, one is a QC guy, one is a modeler lover and Line6 guy, one will never leave amps, and another mixed playing through a computer with playing through amps, like you. I have never enjoyed pieces of gear (other than guitars) as much as my AM4 and FM4. I just don't like the experience of playing through a desktop/laptop computer. I won't list why, because it would sound like I'm criticizing the people who like it, and I'm not. It's just not for me at all.

There'e nothing to argue about, thank goodness. There really is something for everyone.

 

[Shask]

I've found captures to be an exercise in futile hunting, in large part because i don't have a bunch of amps I want to capture. The modeler is my set of amps.

Not that there's a wrong way to do it. Among my good friends who play, one is a QC guy, one is a modeler lover and Line6 guy, one will never leave amps, and another mixed playing through a computer with playing through amps, like you. I have never enjoyed pieces of gear (other than guitars) as much as my AM4 and FM4. I just don't like the experience of playing through a desktop/laptop computer. I won't list why, because it would sound like I'm criticizing the people who like it, and I'm not. It's just not for me at all.

There'e nothing to argue about, thank goodness. There really is something for everyone.

With captures, when I was searching and buying I found good to great ones, but capturing my own amps gave me f-ing amazing ones.

My issue with modelers is the feel is always off. It doesn't matter how many amp models there are, or how much you tweak it, they all have their underlying tone and feel you cant dial out. Every brand has their own tone, no matter how much people say they "sound like the real thing". That is not necessarily a bad thing, but when that certain thing bugs you, you can't get rid of it.

My FM3 is on my desk hooked up through my interface connected to FM3-Edit, so if I play my FM3, or my plugins, the experience is the same either way. If I don't want screens I will play my tube amps and pedals. I switch around to different rigs pretty much daily because I like playing with different toys.

 

[deadpool_25]

It makes me question if hardware modelers are even needed for home players.

The answer is “no.”

But they’re fun so “want” is the deciding factor.

 

[SeeD]

I don` like to play tru Plug-ins and PC. Give me hardware any day of the week, and twice on sunday
To me it just feels better

 

[DieSchmalle]

Tonex One sounds awesome, can mimic any amp tone, has less than 2 ms of latency, is super easy to carry around and boots up in a second.

 

[laxu]

Tonex One sounds awesome, can mimic any amp tone, has less than 2 ms of latency, is super easy to carry around and boots up in a second.

At the same time, it has limited or inconvenient switching between sounds (unless 3rd party tools like the Pirate MIDI Polar devices are used), capture quality is all over the place and the effects are ok at best. The Tonex software sucks to work with and finding the captures you like is a chore. Portability and cost are its main strengths but personally I'm so much happier working with modelers that I can adjust like actual amps.

If I had to go the plugin route, I'd probably pick the UA Paradise Studio on sale (when that eventually happens) for clean and lower gain tones, and some NDSP plugin for high gain stuff. Even then, I'd say you can get better effects out of other plugins than what those offer. Even e.g UA's own dedicated reverb plugins do sound better than the Paradise Studio equivalents.

With hardware units it comes down to whose "flavor" you like best. People get too hung up on the amp simulation comparisons and we rarely see the effects being compared at all.

When I had the Helix Floor, Quad Cortex and FM3 at the same time, that's where I saw the most dramatic differences. FM3 > Helix > QC was how I perceived and preferred them across pretty much all categories. I did like Helix drive modeling best but several years fo firmware updates have surely improved the Fractal drives from back then.

After being off Fractal for a few years, and recently getting the AM4 it definitely felt like a homecoming. It has improved enough on the UI side that I'm far less annoyed working the front panel now, but definitely still want more.

 

[sevenagn]

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.

My current setup gives me 3.3ms of latency, which is in fact FM3 latency. The majority of audio interfaces can not achieve this kind of latency, rather than the ones that have custom audio drivers (RME, Antelope, Presonus). My old Audient was giving me 7.6ms of latency on Mac and 7.2ms on Windows (@ 32 samples). If you are on mac, the latency is higher because most interfaces use the core audio driver anyways.

 

[ChordInversion]

With captures, when I was searching and buying I found good to great ones, but capturing my own amps gave me f-ing amazing ones.

My issue with modelers is the feel is always off. It doesn't matter how many amp models there are, or how much you tweak it, they all have their underlying tone and feel you cant dial out. Every brand has their own tone, no matter how much people say they "sound like the real thing". That is not necessarily a bad thing, but when that certain thing bugs you, you can't get rid of it.

My FM3 is on my desk hooked up through my interface connected to FM3-Edit, so if I play my FM3, or my plugins, the experience is the same either way. If I don't want screens I will play my tube amps and pedals. I switch around to different rigs pretty much daily because I like playing with different toys.

Our experiences aren't the same at all, but of course they aren't. We're different people. My years of experience with the Tonex left me flat, while the AM4 and VP4 have me playing more than ever and enjoying it more than ever.

There's plenty of room for both options and many more. Glad you've found what you like!

 

[sevenagn]

At the same time, it has limited or inconvenient switching between sounds (unless 3rd party tools like the Pirate MIDI Polar devices are used), capture quality is all over the place and the effects are ok at best. The Tonex software sucks to work with and finding the captures you like is a chore. Portability and cost are its main strengths but personally I'm so much happier working with modelers that I can adjust like actual amps.

If I had to go the plugin route, I'd probably pick the UA Paradise Studio on sale (when that eventually happens) for clean and lower gain tones, and some NDSP plugin for high gain stuff. Even then, I'd say you can get better effects out of other plugins than what those offer. Even e.g UA's own dedicated reverb plugins do sound better than the Paradise Studio equivalents.

With hardware units it comes down to whose "flavor" you like best. People get too hung up on the amp simulation comparisons and we rarely see the effects being compared at all.

When I had the Helix Floor, Quad Cortex and FM3 at the same time, that's where I saw the most dramatic differences. FM3 > Helix > QC was how I perceived and preferred them across pretty much all categories. I did like Helix drive modeling best but several years fo firmware updates have surely improved the Fractal drives from back then.

After being off Fractal for a few years, and recently getting the AM4 it definitely felt like a homecoming. It has improved enough on the UI side that I'm far less annoyed working the front panel now, but definitely still want more.

That's literally my setup right now: UAD PGS for clean/mid gain and NDSP for high gain, on top of NAM captures. I do find the FX of PGS excelent tbh. The Plate and 224 reverbs are amazing, and the EP3 is better than the IK plugin that I have. The Large Hall on 224 sounds the same to me as the Valhalla VV Concert Hall algo.

Did you find the amp models on the AM4 better than UAD and NDSP ones (plugins and QC)?

 

[DieSchmalle]

At the same time, it has limited or inconvenient switching between sounds (unless 3rd party tools like the Pirate MIDI Polar devices are used), capture quality is all over the place and the effects are ok at best. The Tonex software sucks to work with and finding the captures you like is a chore. Portability and cost are its main strengths but personally I'm so much happier working with modelers that I can adjust like actual amps.

If I had to go the plugin route, I'd probably pick the UA Paradise Studio on sale (when that eventually happens) for clean and lower gain tones, and some NDSP plugin for high gain stuff. Even then, I'd say you can get better effects out of other plugins than what those offer. Even e.g UA's own dedicated reverb plugins do sound better than the Paradise Studio equivalents.

With hardware units it comes down to whose "flavor" you like best. People get too hung up on the amp simulation comparisons and we rarely see the effects being compared at all.

When I had the Helix Floor, Quad Cortex and FM3 at the same time, that's where I saw the most dramatic differences. FM3 > Helix > QC was how I perceived and preferred them across pretty much all categories. I did like Helix drive modeling best but several years fo firmware updates have surely improved the Fractal drives from back then.

After being off Fractal for a few years, and recently getting the AM4 it definitely felt like a homecoming. It has improved enough on the UI side that I'm far less annoyed working the front panel now, but definitely still want more.

I've not even hooked up to Tonex software yet. The stock captures are enough fun already.

I've send the AM4 back after a month of testing. It doesn't sound or feel better than Tonex to my ears. The FX are great, and the parameter automation is cool. But I didn't like the onboard UI. Not bad, but it got in my way too often.

So I keep my HX Stomp for now where I can realize ideas quickly.

 

[Jarick]

At the same time, it has limited or inconvenient switching between sounds (unless 3rd party tools like the Pirate MIDI Polar devices are used), capture quality is all over the place and the effects are ok at best. The Tonex software sucks to work with and finding the captures you like is a chore. Portability and cost are its main strengths but personally I'm so much happier working with modelers that I can adjust like actual amps.

If I had to go the plugin route, I'd probably pick the UA Paradise Studio on sale (when that eventually happens) for clean and lower gain tones, and some NDSP plugin for high gain stuff. Even then, I'd say you can get better effects out of other plugins than what those offer. Even e.g UA's own dedicated reverb plugins do sound better than the Paradise Studio equivalents.

With hardware units it comes down to whose "flavor" you like best. People get too hung up on the amp simulation comparisons and we rarely see the effects being compared at all.

When I had the Helix Floor, Quad Cortex and FM3 at the same time, that's where I saw the most dramatic differences. FM3 > Helix > QC was how I perceived and preferred them across pretty much all categories. I did like Helix drive modeling best but several years fo firmware updates have surely improved the Fractal drives from back then.

After being off Fractal for a few years, and recently getting the AM4 it definitely felt like a homecoming. It has improved enough on the UI side that I'm far less annoyed working the front panel now, but definitely still want more.

100% agree on everything here!

For plugins the new Paradise will do 90% of anything clean to mid gain. Add in Gojira or something for modern heavy. Done.

Really enjoying the FM9. All the sounds are in there. The UI isn’t great but spend some time with it and I prefer being able to use without a computer most of the time.

Getting close to thinking of selling off the Fender TMP but holding for now. I am starting to wonder about the QC again because I still want to capture my amps. I did see a cool video where someone used neural captures to get the ox stomp dynamic cab sims. That looks neat. But all probably overkill.

I haven’t been tempted at all by the Stadium yet. Price is too high and it seems more like an incremental upgrade. Maybe in a couple years with more used units on the market or more feature development it could be more tempting.

But I’m kind of in downsizing mode now. I’ve sold off a modeler, guitar, and amp/cab already this year. Need to sell off my axe fx 3 too.

 

[Shask]

Our experiences aren't the same at all, but of course they aren't. We're different people. My years of experience with the Tonex left me flat, while the AM4 and VP4 have me playing more than ever and enjoying it more than ever.

There's plenty of room for both options and many more. Glad you've found what you like!

That is how I felt years ago. I have had Fractal units since 2008 or so. I have had all of them up through current. It wasn't until the last year or 2 with the new machine learning units that I felt modeling has been topped by capturing. It is really not even the sounds, it is the dynamics and feel. The immediate punchiness of when you attack the strings.

 

[Shask]

I've not even hooked up to Tonex software yet. The stock captures are enough fun already.

I've send the AM4 back after a month of testing. It doesn't sound or feel better than Tonex to my ears. The FX are great, and the parameter automation is cool. But I didn't like the onboard UI. Not bad, but it got in my way too often.

So I keep my HX Stomp for now where I can realize ideas quickly.

From what I see, people who prefer Fractal are generally more concerned with features, switching, effects, many different sounds to switch between.

People who prefer ToneX stick with only a couple of badass sounds and dont care as much about effects. It is more about the core feel and dynamics. You can add outboard units for the other stuff.

 

[Dez]

What's that?

When it’s available on the QC so I don’t have to boot up my Mac to use it lol

 

[ChordInversion]

That is how I felt years ago. I have had Fractal units since 2008 or so. I have had all of them up through current. It wasn't until the last year or 2 with the new machine learning units that I felt modeling has been topped by capturing. It is really not even the sounds, it is the dynamics and feel. The immediate punchiness of when you attack the strings.

Again, not my experience. But that's ok!

 

[Shask]

At the same time, it has limited or inconvenient switching between sounds (unless 3rd party tools like the Pirate MIDI Polar devices are used), capture quality is all over the place and the effects are ok at best. The Tonex software sucks to work with and finding the captures you like is a chore. Portability and cost are its main strengths but personally I'm so much happier working with modelers that I can adjust like actual amps.

Personally, I never really understand these comments. ToneX was never designed to be an all-in-one. It is amazing for loading up a couple very dynamic feeling amp sounds, and you add other hardware to build out your system. It is more of a piece of a pedalboard than the whole pedalboard. They did tack on some bonus effects, but it was never meant to be an Amplitube-like pedal. Maybe one day they will come out with something like that.

Personally, I have never had an issue with the software. It is basically just a tone database. You select your sound and go. If you cant find a capture you like, then make your own. Even with real amps I tend to use a standard setting and put an EQ in the loop to fine-tune, and I find capturing programs to work in a similar mindset.

For me personally, Tone/Dynamics > Features every time.

 

[Dez]

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.

Because I work in IT and I just like to plug into hardware, not concern myself with plugins or audio interfaces or whatever

 

[laxu]

Personally, I never really understand these comments. ToneX was never designed to be an all-in-one.

Yet it tends to come up for that when people want an amp modeler. Obviously you can pair it with whatever pedals or even multifx if you want.

Personally, I have never had an issue with the software. It is basically just a tone database. You select your sound and go. If you cant find a capture you like, then make your own. Even with real amps I tend to use a standard setting and put an EQ in the loop to fine-tune, and I find capturing programs to work in a similar mindset.

The Tonex metadata sucks balls and the captures from others can be a very mixed bag. It's kinda like gold panning in a muddy river. I just hate that as a workflow.

For me personally, Tone/Dynamics > Features every time.

I've yet to find Tonex to do anything better than the best modelers on the market. Even with V2 captures I made myself.

To me it's a question of workflow first and foremost. I've learned to work with amps over the years so I know immediately how to get what I want out of most amps, and thus prefer that workflow on modelers as well.