ML Sound Lab - Amped Volcano [Parametric NAM amp modelling]

[laxu]

So I finally took the time to test the plugin.

I don't seem to notice any aliasing etc issues with its tones when using it myself. I did manage to get it into a state where the cab sim was just completely busted. It would just cause weird noises to come out, and bypassing it and replacing with a cab sim plugin fixed the problem.

I used the ML MIKKO Reflex plugin's free version as a cab sim instead. It's actually a pretty nice sounding cab sim, might consider buying it now that everything at ML is at 50% sale. I've gotten a lot of use out of MIKKO 2 as well.

I compared Amped Volcano to Helix Native's SLO models and they were pretty comparable with the same knob settings, though obviously not identical as knob positions are never 1:1. Helix also doesn't have a Depth control on the SLO model.

The ML model does not have a master control so you can't overdrive its poweramp at all, so kinda missing some tones - but at the same time few use a real SLO like that because it'd be ungodly loud.

The EQ etc controls work, but don't seem to have that much range. It's been like a decade or more since I've played a real SLO so I can't say how authentic it is in that behavior, but seems to be kinda similar to Helix model.

Similarly picking softer it cleans up in a similar manner to Helix.

TL;DR: Plugin seems to work fine and sounds good to me. Might be of interest to people who want a VST of the Soldano SLO and Astro-20 in one package.

Since the trial versions are free to test with just occasional muting and nag screens, go give them a spin yourself.

 

[deadpool_25]

Yeah - that's the next step forward for NAM imho.

The first showcase of this concept was back in Jan 2024: https://www.neuralampmodeler.com/post/the-first-publicly-available-parametric-neural-amp-model

Interesting. I was assuming Fractal would just use a NAM player block and that still may be the case, but if they can get NAM profiles to act more like real amps in terms of adjustments that would be suuuuuper cool imo.

 

[2dor]

Interesting. I was assuming Fractal would just use a NAM player block and that still may be the case, but if they can get NAM profiles to act more like real amps in terms of adjustments that would be suuuuuper cool imo.

I think Fractal's the one to pull it off the right way if there's any vendor with the ability to take it on; I have a feeling Cliff won't stop at just "static" profiles like most folks are leveraging with NAM right now.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Interesting. I was assuming Fractal would just use a NAM player block and that still may be the case, but if they can get NAM profiles to act more like real amps in terms of adjustments that would be suuuuuper cool imo.

For a start, they could come up with a NAM block similar to the Codex block in Two Notes' Genome, which IMO is the most excellent choice for "static" NAM captures right now as it has pre- and post-EQing plus some Enhancer which is actually working very well for some stuff.
You can do most of that with 2 separate EQs, but having it in one single block is super convenient.

 

[jay mitchell]

For a start, they could come up with a NAM block similar to the Codex block in Two Notes' Genome, which IMO is the most excellent choice for "static" NAM captures right now as it has pre- and post-EQing plus some Enhancer

Given that all those processing blocks have been readily available ever since the first-gen Axe-Fx units appeared ca. 2006, that's really moot. Just place a NAM block somewhere in the signal chain grid and then put whatever you like before and/or after it (as well as in parallel, if you want). Options abound. I personally would have no use for a "capture," but there's no real downside I can see for people like me who won't take advantage of them, IMO the real downside will come from the whiners for whom the FAS implementation is "missing" some feature.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Given that all those processing blocks have been readily available ever since the first-gen Axe-Fx units appeared ca. 2006, that's really moot. Just place a NAM block somewhere in the signal chain grid and then put whatever you like before and/or after it (as well as in parallel, if you want). Options abound.

Believe me, it's a LOT more comfortable to have these things in one block - especially in case you can save block presets (*check*).

 

[jay mitchell]

Believe me, it's a LOT more comfortable to have these things in one block

Actually, I don't believe you. That may be true for you. It's completely meaningless to me.

- especially in case you can save block presets (*check*).

You can save presets to use as templates even without that feature. This is exactly the sort of whine that will make Cliff wonder what the hell he was thinking.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

The best NAM player is the OG plugin, even when having to use a wrapper for AAX. Not aware of any others supporting automatic input calibration, and I never use/need the EQ features. And on top of that, there’s so much other bloat to ignore. OG is the most slick and reliable for me.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Actually, I don't believe you. That may be true for you. It's completely meaningless to me.

You could possibly tell FAS to remove their boost options from the amp block as well. I mean, it's completely meaningless, isn't it?

On a sidenote: How often do you actually *use* this kinda stuff? And do you have Two Notes' Genome installed to even know what I'm talking about?

You can save presets to use as templates even without that feature.

That's an entirely different thing. Like *completely* different.

Which begs the question again: How often do you actually use these kinda things?

 

[Sascha Franck]

The best NAM player is the OG plugin, even when having to use a wrapper for AAX. Not aware of any others supporting automatic input calibration, and I never use/need the EQ features. And on top of that, there’s so much other bloat to ignore. OG is the most slick and reliable for me.

Yeah, when you're all in anal-mode, that might be true. For the vast majority of users, comfort is possibly as important.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Yeah, when you're all in anal-mode, that might be true. For the vast majority of users, comfort is possibly as important.

if butchering NAM models with unnecessary eq and dealing with bloat is comforting, sure. Not everyone wants that stuff, and it’s actually the opposite reason of why I might use captures to begin with. Other options are better suited for tweaking IMO.

100% personal preference if you like Genome better for dealing with NAM models. Total opposite for someone else

 

[Sascha Franck]

if butchering NAM models with unnecessary eq and dealing with bloat is comforting, sure.

What the heck does that have to do with "butchering"? It's just what each and everybody does with each and every amp. You slap coloring pedals in front, you slap coloring pedals behind and you touch the EQ.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

What the heck does that have to do with "butchering"? It's just what each and everybody does with each and every amp. You slap coloring pedals in front, you slap coloring pedals behind and you touch the EQ.

You’d reach for eq if the model itself isn’t dialled in for what you need and you need it to sound different. Rather than reaching for a more appropriate model (or IR), one can resort to doing it with eq.

If you had the real amp, you’d capture it as you intend to use it. Trying to manipulate it after the fact is an easy way to make things sound weird, and isn’t my preferred route. But if the original sound needs work, I’d rather just use a more appropriate model, or something I can dial in with more control. Manipulating static captures isn’t really for me. I prefer to capture the amp as I want it - I’d rather adjust the amp and recapture if I can’t get what I need.

Each to their own though, there’s no right or wrong with it. But it’s why I prefer a more straightforward NAM loader over one that offers a lot of extra manipulation.

 

[Sascha Franck]

You’d reach for eq if the model itself isn’t dialled in for what you need and you need it to sound different. Rather than reaching for a more appropriate model (or IR), one can resort to doing it with eq.

Exactly.

If you had the real amp, you’d capture it as you intend to use it.

No. Why would I bother if a little EQ (which more often than not is a "post-most-gain-stages" affair anyway) would already fix it? Absolutely no difference between a real amp (or a component model) and a capture.

Trying to manipulate it after the fact is an easy way to make things sound weird

Now, that is just nonsense. I'm using a post-EQ for *all* my leads since decades and nobody has ever complained about them sounding "weird". And I also use some tools (compressors, EQs, drives) pre-gain to kick the gain some. Again, that's just what pretty much all people do. It's not weird by any means.

But if the original sound needs work

It's not about that, not at all. It's about getting the most out of things. EQs are incredible at that. And I use them almost every bit in the same way with component modeled things (or real amps when I was still using them).

 

[MirrorProfiles]

It's not about that, not at all. It's about getting the most out of things. EQs are incredible at that. And I use them almost every bit in the same way with component modeled things (or real amps when I was still using them).

If you have a real amp, and you want to change the tone, you’d adjust it on the amp as much as possible first before considering messing around with pre and post eq. It would be crazy to have the wrong settings on the amp, and then to bust out a few eq’s to salvage it. Static captures don’t allow for adjusting settings, it’s a limitation and if you want to adjust things then you have no option but to get your hands dirty.

If it works for you, great. I’m sure it sounds fine. I think other approaches make more sense than relying on EQ, I have no reason to compromise when there are so many other ways to go that I prefer.

 

[Sascha Franck]

If you have a real amp, and you want to change the tone, you’d adjust it on the amp as much as possible first before considering messing around with pre and post eq.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
And well, this option doesn't exist with captures (unless you're rolling your own - and even in that case I wouldn't want to wait), so I'm using an EQ. Easy, convenient, working.

It would be crazy to have the wrong settings on the amp, and then to bust out a few eq’s to salvage it.

Again, nobody's talking about the "wrong" settings. Just about maximizing things. Which obviously only works in case the core capture delivers a great starting point.

Static captures don’t allow for adjusting settings, it’s a limitation and if you want to adjust things then you have no option but to get your hands dirty.

Using an EQ has got *zero* to do with getting your hands dirty. Heck, look at the pedalboards of pretty much any Nashville studio guys. GE-7s all over the place. But hey, I guess they're using the wrong amps and settings, so they need to get their hands "dirty" with EQing. Yeah, sounds plausible...
Slapping a TS-808 drive in front of an amp can almost be considered a standard in the heavier world. That's almost the same as using an EQ.
And as said, people love it that there's a built in boost block in the FAS ecoverse. But I guess they're all not enough of a purist for you, either.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Heck, look at the pedalboards of pretty much any Nashville studio guys. GE-7s all over the place. But hey, I guess they're using the wrong amps and settings, so they need to get their hands "dirty" with EQing. Yeah, sounds plausible...
Slapping a TS-808 drive in front of an amp can almost be considered a standard in the heavier world. That's almost the same as using an EQ.
And as said, people love it that there's a built in boost block in the FAS ecoverse. But I guess they're all not enough of a purist for you, either.

Big distinction in ALL of these is you aren’t using EQ because of not being able to adjust the amp settings. But whatever, that nuance doesn’t matter for you. For me it negates the benefit of using captures over other approaches.

 

[jay mitchell]

On a sidenote: How often do you actually *use* this kinda stuff?

NAM? Never. Exactly never.

And do you have Two Notes' Genome installed to even know what I'm talking about?

I know what you're talking about. Some principles really do generalize.

 

[Sascha Franck]

NAM? Never. Exactly never.

So there.

Some principles really do generalize.

Just that they don't.

 

[Sascha Franck]

But whatever, that nuance doesn’t matter for you. For me it negates the benefit of using captures over other approaches.

I actually don't care about what I'm using as long as I like playing through it, it sounds well and pays my bills.