Lysander
Rock Star
- Messages
- 2,837
Yes! This is TGF and any audio samples is heavily based on how many pages this very thread has. One more page will add further audio..... things... to the future audio sample... so keep posting!100 pages now and still no audio samples of the new modeling.
Channels, bright switches and inputs seem also switchable now. If you look closely at DI's video on the Stadium landing page, you can see that on some amps. They did that on the newer Helix models already but it's nice that this seems the standard now. You can also set the controls of the unsued channels. So real channel switching even on vintage amps seems possible now.That means that adding/fixing missing components say a BRIGHT CAP will be a breeze!!
Hype!
I'm excited by the wrong thing, don't judge.![]()
I'd really love to change switch assignments with snapshots but that might be to advanced for most users. Nonetheless useful if you want to stay on one "page". And while we're at it: I'd love to see the encoders assignable to parameters of individual blocks (in some kind of "play view"). So I could have my reverb mix, delay mix and feedback, gain and volume and whatnot always accessible without selecting the corresponding block first (where you might have to page through parameters).There are two Stomp modes—A and B, each one with 10 assignable switches. And if you set Control A, B, C, and D to be footswitch ins, you get a total of 24 stomps per preset: 10+10+4. Snapshots are currently still 8 per preset.
I'd really love to change switch assignments with snapshots but that might be to advanced for most users. Nonetheless useful if you want to stay on one "page". And while we're at it: I'd love to see the encoders assignable to parameters of individual blocks (in some kind of "play view"). So I could have my reverb mix, delay mix and feedback, gain and volume and whatnot always accessible without selecting the corresponding block first (where you might have to page through parameters).
I guess you'll need the HW to gather the capture data and format it appropriately before sending it to the cloud server for further processing.Has it been said whether users will require a HW unit to make models for the platform?
Even if I had the HW, I don’t think I’d fancy having to rejig my studio in order to make things, especially if I don’t intend to use them on HW (assuming plugin(s) are coming). If the talk is to model things beyond just guitar amps I think it would also be cool to have the flexibility to make models on your own gear.
Can theoretically be done via software ala tonocracy, hence the question I guessI guess you'll need the HW to gather the capture data and format it appropriately before sending it to the cloud server for further processing.
I personally would not if I was them either at this point if they are not ready100 pages now and still no audio samples of the new modeling.
Definitely understandable why they’d want to be cautious with it, but demonstrating absolutely ripping tones should be pretty easy for them to do. They have access to some of the best guitarists ever to have lived, a decent studio, the most ideal conditions imaginable.I personally would not if I was them either at this point if they are not ready
Tons of posts on YouTube saying let’s hear it and complaining but Line6 should not be forced into releasing a bunch of less than stellar clips to satisfy people IMO
The first impressions of Agoura are going to be super important you want to put out the best representations you can
I see. Still, not sure if it would be a good or bad decision. It makes sense that if you want to use the Proxy system, you "gain" access by purchasing a Stadium device. Makes more sense if you plan to sell your captures on your own store, if that's allowed by Line6.Can theoretically be done via software ala tonocracy, hence the question I guess
Has it been said whether users will require a HW unit to make models for the platform?
Even if I had the HW, I don’t think I’d fancy having to rejig my studio in order to make things, especially if I don’t intend to use them on HW (assuming plugin(s) are coming). If the talk is to model things beyond just guitar amps I think it would also be cool to have the flexibility to make models on your own gear.
While I do not like the Nembrini ones I actually do prefer that format as opposed to in a mix or HW or Henning clipsDefinitely understandable why they’d want to be cautious with it, but demonstrating absolutely ripping tones should be pretty easy for them to do. They have access to some of the best guitarists ever to have lived, a decent studio, the most ideal conditions imaginable.
I think it’s just a case of them planning the right approach - picking the right examples and framing them in the most appropriate contexts. I don’t think they need to be TOO cautious about it, I think a bit of bravery and confidence goes a hell of a long way.
The opposite is something like what Nembrini do, a half assed soundcloud playlist of largely dreadful demos. I’m not surprised at the response of them posting AxeFX preset demos - something that has been dialled in by someone else is never going to sound quite right when played by someone else. Demos should show the absolute best of what’s possible, not just “here’s me playing a random ass preset that I didn’t even make, and not sure I even like”.
I think if I made a playlist playing through stock presets on any device they’d sound underwhelming. It would be like trying to mix a song using only presets made by someone else
I get this side of things, but also think of it this way.While they could allow collecting capture data on third party hardware like NAM and Tonex do, I think this would be a big mistake for them.
The Kemper/QC method of doing the capture on controlled hardware allows for some significant benefits in the consistency of the captures, plus simplifies the software, documentation and support. In addition, hardware only capture may help sell hardware.
From the perspective of Line 6, there is no way I would allow non-hardware capturing with Proxy, and even as a customer, I would prefer they not allow it in order to increase the average quality of third party captures and avoid the mess of different users setting levels their own way.
I've seen people saying things like "You can't know what the gear actually sounds like because Pete Thorn makes everything sound good". You can't win no matter what. "Too good" is apparently a thing for them.Definitely understandable why they’d want to be cautious with it, but demonstrating absolutely ripping tones should be pretty easy for them to do. They have access to some of the best guitarists ever to have lived, a decent studio, the most ideal conditions imaginable.
I think it’s just a case of them planning the right approach - picking the right examples and framing them in the most appropriate contexts. I don’t think they need to be TOO cautious about it, I think a bit of bravery and confidence goes a hell of a long way.
The opposite is something like what Nembrini do, a half assed soundcloud playlist of largely dreadful demos. I’m not surprised at the response of them posting AxeFX preset demos - something that has been dialled in by someone else is never going to sound quite right when played by someone else. Demos should show the absolute best of what’s possible, not just “here’s me playing a random ass preset that I didn’t even make, and not sure I even like”.
I think if I made a playlist playing through stock presets on any device they’d sound underwhelming. It would be like trying to mix a song using only presets made by someone else
HW and Henning wasn’t really what I had in mind. I was thinking more like Zach Wish, Butch Walker, Blake Mansfield, Tim Pierce etc.While I do not like the Nembrini ones I actually do prefer that format as opposed to in a mix or HW or Henning clips
If you have a list you can have a bit more variety like maybe those 4 corners in focus view
A crunch , an 80s , modern etc etc
I like the demo set up like a metallurgy you clip on image of an an you get 3 or 4 short
Clips not in a mix