My next modeller

[Jarick]

That’s a crazy thought…asking AI to give you the capture of a tone from a song. But we probably aren’t all that far away to be honest.

 

[Sedaxel]

I guess all-in-one units and modular systems will always have their users. Depending on the needs, one could prefer one or another approach.

And let´s not forget that here we´re only a minuscule part of the world´s guitarrists. When, as a beginner, I first thought about buying "some of those gadgets that add that cool effects to the guitar", I looked at a cheap Zoom with "a lot of cool stuff and 4 footswitches". Those beginners are hundreds of thousands around the world (I don´t know the order of magnitude... maybe millions?). I suppose that most of them don´t know a word about capturing, modeling, Fractal, Kemper, Strymon or Eventide. I didn´t at all.

Now, here in the forum We want a lot of stuff that We know because We have turned this "guitar matters" into something much more time consuming in our lifes than a simple and light hobby, but taking a little perspective, We are minority.

 

[Sedaxel]

Can you share a pic of your board with the Nano?
Just curious

I shared it in some thread here... but I´m always tweaking it so it´s changing all the time. I´ll try to post something When I´m at home (or when I´ve got a little time).

 

[OneEng]

What's the issue with all NAM players on the market? Usability, form factor, built-in effects. For effects there's no shortcuts (at least yet) so you can't become Strymon or Fractal fx just like that, or use a dirt cheap processor to make it cheap.

So I see the more expensive units offering the things you need around NAM captures, maybe at best advertising they can run the highest quality NAM captures or something. There is demand for something like this considering the fake "Tonex Pro" pics that floated around drummed up some excitement.

The talk around modelers is all too much centered around the amp sim stuff. That's the part becoming a commodity.

Maybe they will be advertised more towards pro users, who want to be sure they have something really reliable, that allows complex footswitching for live use, is well supported and so on.

I agree. For most guitarists, nearly any capture unit does a sufficient job to get well above the "sounds great" today. Likewise, most modelers provide more than convincing amp sounds for nearly every amp ever made. The remainder of features that are important are around the quality and flexibility of the efx, and the usability / durability of the physical interface.

I can see things getting more modular and a move away from big all in one setups where most users are using less than 5% of what they’re capable of.

We’ve already seen HX One, VP4, ToneX One, and countless little amp only pedals. The big surfboard sized pedals work fine, unless you decide that you prefer another companies amps, or fuzzes, or reverbs or delays. I think the more modular boards let you experiment are try new gear more freely which can be appealing. and you get more dedicated controls and layouts rather than a single interface that has to do absolutely everything. IMO the notion that a single product is going to be all you use is a bit dated.

The big all in ones assume that you’ll be happy with “it’s LIKE” something else - something more modular gives more freedom to do what you want. Obviously nothing stopping you using an axe fx with whatever gear you like, and it integrates it well. Also a chance it’s overkill for many. And I know DI has said about Helix was always intended on being part of the rig rather than a replacement for it, but again, the flagship is big and potentially overkill. HX Stomp is so good for that reason - it feels more like a “it can be whatever you want it to” pedal.

Yes, I understand your point, but building your own pedalboard with premium efx and a premium capture "mini" pedal, you quickly reach the point where the price all those individual pedals exceeds the price of an all-in-one.

Additionally, perhaps I don't currently use a tremolo effect for anything I do ..... but I really appreciate the fact that should I need to play some old 70's tune that has it, I can get that tone without buying anything.

I do agree that having 3 major contenders in the "premium" digital amp market is enough. I do kinda wish Behringer would throw their hat into the ring with a "premium" offering at less than 1/2 the price of the current high end units to bring the prices down (like what happened in the digital mixer market).

 

[[Nathan]]

That’s a crazy thought…asking AI to give you the capture of a tone from a song. But we probably aren’t all that far away to be honest.

I doubt the results would ever be much better than a generic amp sim with an eq tone match to match an album tone. This kind of thing always sounds great in theory but when you dive into the details it’s so so. Heck even now you could AI split a song to isolate the guitar tracks and you’re a lot of the way there already.

Everything is so contextual like the guitar/pickups on your end vs the source. How the different players play, the amp tone your trying to clone has gone through mics, studio processing, mix mastering processing it’s just many steps away from the original amp tone that having it in real time probably wouldn’t feel as inspiring as a raw amp a lot of the time.

 

[Jarick]

I doubt the results would ever be much better than a generic amp sim with an eq tone match to match an album tone. This kind of thing always sounds great in theory but when you dive into the details it’s so so. Heck even now you could AI split a song to isolate the guitar tracks and you’re a lot of the way there already.

Everything is so contextual like the guitar/pickups on your end vs the source. How the different players play, the amp tone your trying to clone has gone through mics, studio processing, mix mastering processing it’s just many steps away from the original amp tone that having it in real time probably wouldn’t feel as inspiring as a raw amp a lot of the time.

Agreed, but I still think it will happen. It's going to be like the instant coffee version of the tone, completely usable and many people won't care, but for the hardcore people it will pale in comparison to the real thing.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

I watched this today and it really shows how much nuance can go into something we might perceive as straightforward. There's still something we are able to interpret using our brains that I think will be very hard for computers to currently understand so effortlessly.



Also, its just fucking nuts that in 2025 we can carry around an amp model (or several thousand) of our very own amp and run it through an actual quantec and record at a fidelity way higher than analog tape, all with a touch screen on our phone. Its not like we're on the other side of some small technological advancements, its so far ahead from the time when most guitar gear we expect to use was invented.

 

[laxu]

I can see things getting more modular and a move away from big all in one setups where most users are using less than 5% of what they’re capable of.

We’ve already seen HX One, VP4, ToneX One, and countless little amp only pedals. The big surfboard sized pedals work fine, unless you decide that you prefer another companies amps, or fuzzes, or reverbs or delays. I think the more modular boards let you experiment are try new gear more freely which can be appealing. and you get more dedicated controls and layouts rather than a single interface that has to do absolutely everything. IMO the notion that a single product is going to be all you use is a bit dated.

The big all in ones assume that you’ll be happy with “it’s LIKE” something else - something more modular gives more freedom to do what you want. Obviously nothing stopping you using an axe fx with whatever gear you like, and it integrates it well. Also a chance it’s overkill for many. And I know DI has said about Helix was always intended on being part of the rig rather than a replacement for it, but again, the flagship is big and potentially overkill. HX Stomp is so good for that reason - it feels more like a “it can be whatever you want it to” pedal.

Modularity does not have to mean it's not all pieces from the same company.

FM3 + FC6 + EV-2 would be a good example. The only reason it fails is that the FM3 does not have FM9's capabilities, so you have more limitations, and the FC6 is not exactly compact. Meanwhile the Axe-Fx 3 has the burden of the rack format. But the next gen probably will have a FM9 amount of power in a FM3-ish size.

To me things like "HX Stomp + Tonex in the loop" are fool's errands compared to the simplicity of just using the HX Stomp as is. The HX Stomp's failings are largely the same as the FM3: Lower CPU horsepower means limitations, but also a compromised user interface compared to the full Helix in exchange for the form factor.

I'd love to see "FM0 + FC6" type setups instead in the future where the "brain" of the system is just meant to sit on your desk, top of amp/cab or pedalboard but not meant to be stomped on at all. You have something more suitable for that in the form of a foot controller designed to be comfortable to stomp.

The Luminite Graviton M1 MIDI controller's system is lovely when I can choose if I want to take just the M1, bring the footswitch, or just rely on the joystick controller. All wireless even.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Modularity does not have to mean it's not all pieces from the same company.

I agree, I think that's the whole point. You can choose accordingly, it doesn't have to be anything at all. That might mean switching things around, upgrading to newer versions etc. You don't have all your eggs in one big basket - there's freedom to choose what makes the most sense for the individual's own use cases.

FM3 + FC6 + EV-2 would be a good example. The only reason it fails is that the FM3 does not have FM9's capabilities, so you have more limitations, and the FC6 is not exactly compact. Meanwhile the Axe-Fx 3 has the burden of the rack format. But the next gen probably will have a FM9 amount of power in a FM3-ish size.

I think capability is only really important for what the user needs, not what the device is capable of. You're only really "missing" features if you actually use them, there's a hell of a lot of capability in the Axe FX that I would probably hide if I was able to because it simply gets in the way and I can't foresee any situation where I'll need it.

I think part of the appeal of a more modular setup is you don't need unlimited power from each device - they just have to accomplish the role's they're there to do. Something like an FM-9, Axe FX or Helix is "potentially" trying to accomplish a lot of complex tasks, or it's doing something very simple. For the user using it for something very simple there's a hell of a lot of redundancy and bloat. It just depends on the users needs, but presumably for a modular set up, the user is not going to buy units that don't meet the requirements. With an all in one device, you are hoping that the device can just happen to do everything you need it, and in a manner that makes sense to you. That's not always the case, sometimes. you have to adapt things a bit to suit how the modeller wants to do things. Having DSP in reserve isn't really helpful, especially if the alternative is having dedicated controls and a UI that is only designed to do very specific tasks.

To me things like "HX Stomp + Tonex in the loop" are fool's errands compared to the simplicity of just using the HX Stomp as is. The HX Stomp's failings are largely the same as the FM3: Lower CPU horsepower means limitations, but also a compromised user interface compared to the full Helix in exchange for the form factor.

I agree but it really depends on what the Helix is there to do. The CPU limitations don't have to be a factor at all, and if they are, then the user has the wrong device in the first place. Just because it can achieve similar end results to a ToneX pedal, it doesn't have to be an all in one. I've never come close to maxing out DSP on a HX Stomp because I never intended to use it for anything that pushes it close to its limit.

Some people might prefer having their amps on its own dedicated pedal with separate controls/management. IMO the FM-3 is too big and bloated to do a similar task - which is why the VP4 exists. The FM-3's shortcomings (IMO) are more to do with form factor and bloat rather than being underpowered. Compared to the bigger Fractal units, it's not just underpowered, it has less I/O, less flexibility with I/O, more awkward form factor etc. When I had one, DSP was never an issue because I wasn't requiring it to do a lot. But I did have issues with the rest.

I'd love to see "FM0 + FC6" type setups instead in the future where the "brain" of the system is just meant to sit on your desk, top of amp/cab or pedalboard but not meant to be stomped on at all. You have something more suitable for that in the form of a foot controller designed to be comfortable to stomp.

Same, although I'd rather the FM0 was just a plugin. It solves more problems for me that way. An FM0 HW box would solve some things for me but there's still other aspects that would make it worse to use than software.

 

[Jarick]

I think traditionally you had the BRAIN + CONTROLLER concept as the rack unit and the floor controller. The shift now is to have the BRAIN be something small that can fit on a pedal board. The question here is, can you fit FM3 (or FM9) power in a VP4 (or smaller) device? And would there be enough demand to sell those?

 

[laxu]

I think capability is only really important for what the user needs, not what the device is capable of. You're only really "missing" features if you actually use them, there's a hell of a lot of capability in the Axe FX that I would probably hide if I was able to because it simply gets in the way and I can't foresee any situation where I'll need it.

Fair, for me the Axe-Fx 3 turned out to be severe overkill. I thought I'd use all the extra it can do, but in hindsight the FM3 did enough for me as long as I didn't try to build "everything but the kitchen sink" presets on it.

I agree but it really depends on what the Helix is there to do. The CPU limitations don't have to be a factor at all, and if they are, then the user has the wrong device in the first place. Just because it can achieve similar end results to a ToneX pedal, it doesn't have to be an all in one. I've never come close to maxing out DSP on a HX Stomp because I never intended to use it for anything that pushes it close to its limit.

For me the HX Stomp is just a bit too limiting, in the way that I end up having to play "block Tetris" because you run into the CPU walls regularly.

My main beef with it is that its UI is so much worse than the full Helix with its 6 encoders and bigger screen.

Some people might prefer having their amps on its own dedicated pedal with separate controls/management. IMO the FM-3 is too big and bloated to do a similar task - which is why the VP4 exists. The FM-3's shortcomings (IMO) are more to do with form factor and bloat rather than being underpowered. Compared to the bigger Fractal units, it's not just underpowered, it has less I/O, less flexibility with I/O, more awkward form factor etc. When I had one, DSP was never an issue because I wasn't requiring it to do a lot. But I did have issues with the rest.

I agree the form factor is really awkward. It doesn't fit well anywhere when it has to be at the front of a board to access the footswitches, but at the same time putting anything behind it is a problem because you need to plug things in at the back. On top of that it's somewhat large to put together with other pedals. For me the FM3 also required "block Tetris", which might've been solved by the FM3 Turbo, or the gapless switching and using simplified presets.

Same, although I'd rather the FM0 was just a plugin. It solves more problems for me that way. An FM0 HW box would solve some things for me but there's still other aspects that would make it worse to use than software.

I always just want real knobs to use. Until modelers come with far better MIDI mapping capabilities, this will be a reality.

Would love an Axe-Fx in a plugin, or even some parts of it like they did with the reverb plugin (that is now just left to rot with no Apple Silicon support afaik... )

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Fair, for me the Axe-Fx 3 turned out to be severe overkill. I thought I'd use all the extra it can do, but in hindsight the FM3 did enough for me as long as I didn't try to build "everything but the kitchen sink" presets on it.


For me the HX Stomp is just a bit too limiting, in the way that I end up having to play "block Tetris" because you run into the CPU walls regularly.

My main beef with it is that its UI is so much worse than the full Helix with its 6 encoders and bigger screen.


I agree the form factor is really awkward. It doesn't fit well anywhere when it has to be at the front of a board to access the footswitches, but at the same time putting anything behind it is a problem because you need to plug things in at the back. On top of that it's somewhat large to put together with other pedals. For me the FM3 also required "block Tetris", which might've been solved by the FM3 Turbo, or the gapless switching and using simplified presets.


I always just want real knobs to use. Until modelers come with far better MIDI mapping capabilities, this will be a reality.

Would love an Axe-Fx in a plugin, or even some parts of it like they did with the reverb plugin (that is now just left to rot with no Apple Silicon support afaik... )

I think for what you really want, it's somewhat of a goldilocks product, and I'm not sure if it exists. Maybe QC is closest in that regard?

I think if the HX is too small and underpowered for what you want to do with it, then you'd looking at one of their bigger offerings. The on board UI is slightly annoying, but for smaller less ambitious tasks (IMO) it's fine. The fact you can edit with HX edit means anything complex can be done via a computer and anything on board only needs to be minimal. I don't see the HX Stomp as a replacement for a rig, it fills in the gaps. As an entire rig, and using the on board GUI, I'd go crazy. But I don't think that's the point of the device at all, even though at can do it.

It's similar with FM-3 - if you are at the point of playing block Tetris, it's either time to incorporate other gear or go for something bigger. The size of the FM-3 means it's quite a compromise though if you need to rely on other gear. And IMO, with everything that the FM-3 is already trying to do, plus the fact it's designed to be on the floor, you REALLY need to use a computer to edit it. I had it on my desk and its frankly to big for that, and I got fed up of bending over to use it on the floor. Nice size screen but still lots of paging and tabbing around looking for things. QC still sort of suffers from these issues - it's slightly more desk friendly but it's still probably best off out the way and using a computer editor. And you might as well just stick with plugins and have an even better time.

For any device trying to accomplish a lot, and for it to be small, I'm not sure how possible it is to make it nice to use. Its hard enough making something big that accomplishes a lot nice to use. In that regard, more simple dedicated devices can have better UI's, 1:1 controls without those issues.

 

[Los-D]

FM0 as brains + FC6/FC12 or MIDI controller has been my wish for some time now. BUT, I realize I probably just miss my old POD+Mount+FBV setup from 15 years ago. Not truly revolutionary lol.

I still want an FM0 though.

 

[laxu]

I think for what you really want, it's somewhat of a goldilocks product, and I'm not sure if it exists. Maybe QC is closest in that regard?

Absolutely. QC is the closest for sure. Hotone Ampero 2 Stomp is a close second. I'd be using the QC if Neural DSP hadn't done such a bad job with improving it. The Hotone is pretty lovely for a more budget range unit, but I'd gladly pay more for something that is truly better.

That's why I'm putting my hopes on next gen Line6 and Fractal. It's just a long wait...

I think if the HX is too small and underpowered for what you want to do with it, then you'd looking at one of their bigger offerings. The on board UI is slightly annoying, but for smaller less ambitious tasks (IMO) it's fine. The fact you can edit with HX edit means anything complex can be done via a computer and anything on board only needs to be minimal. I don't see the HX Stomp as a replacement for a rig, it fills in the gaps. As an entire rig, and using the on board GUI, I'd go crazy. But I don't think that's the point of the device at all, even though at can do it.

It's similar with FM-3 - if you are at the point of playing block Tetris, it's either time to incorporate other gear or go for something bigger. The size of the FM-3 means it's quite a compromise though if you need to rely on other gear. And IMO, with everything that the FM-3 is already trying to do, plus the fact it's designed to be on the floor, you REALLY need to use a computer to edit it. I had it on my desk and its frankly to big for that, and I got fed up of bending over to use it on the floor. Nice size screen but still lots of paging and tabbing around looking for things. QC still sort of suffers from these issues - it's slightly more desk friendly but it's still probably best off out the way and using a computer editor. And you might as well just stick with plugins and have an even better time.

For any device trying to accomplish a lot, and for it to be small, I'm not sure how possible it is to make it nice to use. Its hard enough making something big that accomplishes a lot nice to use. In that regard, more simple dedicated devices can have better UI's, 1:1 controls without those issues.

I've had a Helix Floor and it's good, I'll recommend it any day.

But I can't use anything that has to be on the floor and adjusted there. Basically I have some issues with my esophagus so bending over or crouching down on the floor for long times can mean stomach acids coming up, which then feels like throat burning and wanting to vomit. Gets very uncomfortable. That's why big all-in-one floor units are a no go for me.

No, having to use the "pedal edit" mode on Helix is not a solution I'd like to use for anything more regular. It's a fantastic feature for randomly needed adjustments tho.

At the same time I don't want to rely on units that require computer editors, because their onboard user interfaces are clunky or even non-existent (e.g modelers with mobile apps for adjustment). They have their uses, but I'd prefer not having to constantly work with them.

I sit in front of a computer for work enough as it is, and would rather have just real knobs I can turn instead, and don't have to worry about connecting the modeler to something. That's what makes the QC or Hotone pretty good to work with as desk, on top of cab etc units.

I think the Hotone Ampero 2 Stomp is close to spot on for its form factor. If they ditched the largely useless param/value knob and put a marginally larger screen with an extra encoder knob under the screen I think it would be fantastic. The 3 knobs do require paging like the HX Stomp but at least it's very fast to do on the touchscreen because you just reach with a finger rather than having to move your hands from the knobs.

 

[Elric]

The popularity of any device with NAM inside, not only yours. How do you justify your great unit´s price when there´s twenty more with the same tone quality for 100€? I think the big brands are actually terrified by this perspective.

It´s not user´s benefit what I´m talking about, of course.

Yeah, and that´s exactly the reason why it´s not economically attractive to any compay (who looks for earn money).

I mean, I get what you say, but then all of that can be made by any company, no matter the accumulated knowhow from years of research in emulation algos and whatnot. Without knowing a word in guitar amps simulation, you can launch a device with the same tone quality (or better) as any other from reputed companies.

It´s no surprise for me that currently there are just a few companies that bring this to the market. None of them are "big names".

It´s just my point of view, of course.

Problem with the above, I think, is that you are looking at it from the perspective of a company trying to maintain high margins. I suspect, the Mooers and Hotones and Donners, et al, of the world will latch onto the zero R&D cost NAM engine and leverage that ever growing free library and try to compete on price. And it won't matter what the 'top tier' (Neural, L6, Fractal) is doing at that point as it would become a commodity.

Pandora's box is opened at that point and everyone competing in the space has to deal with it.

Sure, they'll need the processing power and memory to use the higher complexity models, so users do not have to worry about capture params, etc; but that's likely to become affordable over time if the past 50 years of semiconductor development is any indicator.

And as laxu noted, the benefits to customers of a legit standard are myriad, so I think they'll jump on it even if the big players are late to the game or attempt to maintain competing standards (ToneX, QC). Fractal, L6 et al can always add this after the fact, too; whatever hardware they had on offer at that point will likely be capable and the cost of entry is lower than a non-open source alternative.

I don't think NAM as a standard is a 100% given but, it is feeling more likely due to all the upside and it being open source.

 

[Sedaxel]

Problem with the above, I think, is that you are looking at it from the perspective of a company trying to maintain high margins. The Mooers and Hotones of the world will latch onto the zero R&D NAM engine and leverage that ever growing free library and try to compete on price and it won't matter..

Yeah, maybe. But leader companies need to differentiate in some way... And that's not possible with an open source product. And because of that you're saying, is why I think they are terrified... Those Mooers and Hotones, as you say, could just use NAM (they've got nothing to loose) overnight. Yes, I was thinking about maintain high margins because big companies can't survive otherwise.

Anyway... My bet is that NAM will never be an standard in hardware mfx units. It'll be fun to see what happens in coming years, then We'll know who was right! I have to admit that I hope to be wrong, certainly.

 

[Sedaxel]

Can you share a pic of your board with the Nano?
Just curious

It's a little mess, I'm still making experiments. But I'm digging tones and feeling.