I tried Captures for the first time

James Freeman

Rock Star
Messages
3,325
Warning: This post contains PERSONAL OPINION.


I'm not impressed.
The Gain, Tone Stack, Presence (negative feedback) and especially Master Volume controls don't behave anything like on a tube amp.
It's one dimensional, there is only one sound in it, no matter how I fiddle with the knobs.
I've also tested for 'swirl' and bias excursion that all Class AB long-tail PI tube poweramps have, yeah, forget about it.
In essence, it's a single sound fuzz box with a shaping EQ.

IK has made captures accessible to everyone and when everyone tries captures the hype will inevitably cool down and a new era of understanding will arise.

Yours truly,
The friendly party pooper, know-it-all, Helix shill, James Freeman.
 
I think the included models/captures/whatever held up to the hardware (AxeFXIII). They weren’t exactly the same but you definitely hear the same ballpark for the most part. I still like the form and function of the hardware, but not sorry I got the plugin either.
 
So with a kemper or QC what ever capture/profile you have that's it ?
I cant Mod it to my tastes ? what about snapshots it that possible in a Kemper or QC ?
a lot of songs I like to cover have very different settings in the snapshots, this cant be done in a Kemper or a QC ?
 
So with a kemper or QC what ever capture/profile you have that's it ?
I cant Mod it to my tastes ? what about snapshots it that possible in a Kemper or QC ?
a lot of songs I like to cover have very different settings in the snapshots, this cant be done in a Kemper or a QC ?

With captures, it's a snap shot of how the amp sounds, at that particular moment, with those particular settings through whatever particular gear you're using to create the capture inc IRs/speakers.

Its effectively a profile of the output of the entire system, and there's no way to separate the units/components.

For example, a capture doesnt model the particular tonestack, and even if it did, the tone controls on the unit cannot place it into the same spot in the signal chain.
 
With captures, it's a snap shot of how the amp sounds, at that particular moment, with those particular settings through whatever particular gear you're using to create the capture inc IRs/speakers.

Its effectively a profile of the output of the entire system, and there's no way to separate the units/components.

For example, a capture doesnt model the particular tonestack, and even if it did, the tone controls on the unit cannot place it into the same spot in the signal chain.
Then that's def not for me :)
 
Can you record `any` amp model in the helix with the same IR ( Cab, with same mics ) and JUST tweek tone controls..Drive/Gain ,Bass, Mid, Treble, Pres and see if you get a wide variety of sounds?
Even better if you got a real amp, and do the test

I think folks `think` that an Amp have 20 sounds..it does not, if you tweek basic controls, it`s in the same ballpark the hole time
You can clean up a lot of amps, Captures will also clean up to a degree, close to the real amp

I had the Axe Fx II and i tried this all the time.. hmmm can i get this amp to sound like this, and this.. not really, but close

When you try something that says it will `capture` it`s a snapshot of that `setting`
It`s like a Photo (still)... and not like a Video ( alive )

And this is why i think it`s ok that the Quad Cortex `only` have basic tweeking in the capture page
 
In principle it is fine, as long as the amp settings I've captured sound close to my amp AND the trained model responds to input level differences in the same way.

I'm rarely touching my amp controls once I set them and typically they're set the same from gig to gig with minute differences in the depth/resonance and presence knobs based on the room.

At a certain point, the amp is fixed and the action is more about volume pedal, wah pedal, and the knobs on the guitar itself.

And there is nothing stopping you from capturing your amp a few hundred times to get the variation you want; if you can really be arsed.

Furthermore, I think most of the tweaky parameters in the Kemper are either too subtle, or they sound shit anyway so I never wanted to touch. The pick attack parameter is the most useless knob in the history of knobs.
 
The Gain, Tone Stack, Presence (negative feedback) and especially Master Volume controls don't behave anything like on a tube amp.
It's one dimensional, there is only one sound in it, no matter how I fiddle with the knobs.
This is to be expected. The dialing in is supposed to happen in the analog realm(or on another digital device)pre snapshot. The basic technological premise is quite brilliant for cataloging those tones to revisit digitally in the future.

Adjustments are really more like post in the recording process.

Using third party captures/profiles/tonex models are going to be hit or miss if someone isn’t archiving their own signal chains and settings.

I think we’ll see an expansion of the technology over the next few years.

To me it’s just another system to take advantage of in addition to the flexibility of component modeling.
 
Yep - pretty much as expected.

I enjoyed my Kemper for a while and found some good tones. But I just decided that I prefer the ‘bottoms-up’ modeling approach better where everything acted like a real amp. With profiles/captures - you have a captured “tone” - and then the greater you veer away from that with any of the controls, the wonkier things get. IMO.

Ended up selling it to @JiveTurkey WAY back when, and that was when we first got to know each other (aww, memories, hugs). LOL. 😊
 
Yep - pretty much as expected.

I enjoyed my Kemper for a while and found some good tones. But I just decided that I prefer the ‘bottoms-up’ modeling approach better where everything acted like a real amp. With profiles/captures - you have a captured “tone” - and then the greater you veer away from that with any of the controls, the wonkier things get. IMO.

Ended up selling it to @JiveTurkey WAY back when, and that was when we first got to know each other (aww, memories, hugs). LOL. 😊
Kemper #36! :guiness
 
Profiling is one dimensional?

giphy.gif


I want the flexibility of component modeling, but let’s call it a “profile”.
 
Can you record `any` amp model in the helix with the same IR ( Cab, with same mics ) and JUST tweek tone controls..Drive/Gain ,Bass, Mid, Treble, Pres and see if you get a wide variety of sounds?

If you mean capturing a Helix model, yes, you totally can. But no, you won't get the results you're proposing.

Tone and drive controls for profiles/captures are basically pre- and post-EQs.
 
If you mean capturing a Helix model, yes, you totally can. But no, you won't get the results you're proposing.

Tone and drive controls for profiles/captures are basically pre- and post-EQs.
No, I said record the Helix amps model, or record a real amp, with differnt settings, and it will still sound like that amp.

Yes i know, i own a QC
 
Can you record `any` amp model in the helix with the same IR ( Cab, with same mics ) and JUST tweek tone controls..Drive/Gain ,Bass, Mid, Treble, Pres and see if you get a wide variety of sounds?
Even better if you got a real amp, and do the test

I think folks `think` that an Amp have 20 sounds..it does not, if you tweek basic controls, it`s in the same ballpark the hole time
You can clean up a lot of amps, Captures will also clean up to a degree, close to the real amp

I had the Axe Fx II and i tried this all the time.. hmmm can i get this amp to sound like this, and this.. not really, but close

When you try something that says it will `capture` it`s a snapshot of that `setting`
It`s like a Photo (still)... and not like a Video ( alive )

And this is why i think it`s ok that the Quad Cortex `only` have basic tweeking in the capture page
Yeah you can absolutely get a wide range of sounds out of an amp or amp model. You can't get the same range with pre and post EQs on a capture because neither necessarily lines up with the frequencies of the tone stack nor do they accurately reflect the changes in the non-linearity/saturation.

I think capturing (end-to-end model) is the future of amp modeling but not in the way that people think of it now. It needs to be conditional on the amp settings and capture the full range. It'll eventually become something that the modeling company does themselves to model amps faster but to the consumer it'll appear no different from component level modeling, only more accurate and faster to develop.
 
Yeah you can absolutely get a wide range of sounds out of an amp or amp model. You can't get the same range with pre and post EQs on a capture because neither necessarily lines up with the frequencies of the tone stack nor do they accurately reflect the changes in the non-linearity/saturation.

I think capturing (end-to-end model) is the future of amp modeling but not in the way that people think of it now. It needs to be conditional on the amp settings and capture the full range. It'll eventually become something that the modeling company does themselves to model amps faster but to the consumer it'll appear no different from component level modeling, only more accurate and faster to develop.
As I said, it`s a snapshot

Plz record some clips with the same amp and IR file, and tweek the basic controls. Of course a model will have more settings than a snapshot.

But with a snapshot of my own amp is more fun to me than a digital company`s amp
This is were i love my QC, it has capture and models..this is the future :beer
 
This is why profiling/capturing never appealed to me. It’s like the guitarists who spend all this time getting their dream tone in their man cave then move the rig somewhere else and all of a sudden it sounds like ass, except you can’t tweak your way out of it with a profile.

IMO, the digital realm opened up endless possibilities. It seems entirely daft to me to limit those possibilities. I’d just use a regular amp if I wanted limitations.
 
Back
Top