My next modeller

[sliberty]

Hi - OP here again. :)

My use case is simple. I play in 3 bands that do not gig much at all. And when we do gig, its bars. We play in our homes or in studios for fun. We are serious about our fun, but its not much more than that. And I almost never record at home. My budget constraints are artificial. What I mean by that is that I can afford the $1700 devices, but I can't justify it to myself. My wife is supportive, so that is not an issue. I love my HX Stomp, but I also love the idea of captures. The ToneX software is crap, ,but may get better later this month, so I am not selling my ToneX(s) yet. But I am considering my other options. The Nano Cortex price range or (a bit more) "feels" right to me given my situation. But I wanted to hear from those who have it and either love it, like it, dislike it, or hate it, so that I could learn more before I commit.

 

[JCW308]

Hi - OP here again. :)

My use case is simple. I play in 3 bands that do not gig much at all. And when we do gig, its bars. We play in our homes or in studios for fun. We are serious about our fun, but its not much more than that. And I almost never record at home. My budget constraints are artificial. What I mean by that is that I can afford the $1700 devices, but I can't justify it to myself. My wife is supportive, so that is not an issue. I love my HX Stomp, but I also love the idea of captures. The ToneX software is crap, ,but may get better later this month, so I am not selling my ToneX(s) yet. But I am considering my other options. The Nano Cortex price range or (a bit more) "feels" right to me given my situation. But I wanted to hear from those who have it and either love it, like it, dislike it, or hate it, so that I could learn more before I commit.

I would go with the Kemper Player.

 

[OneEng]

I would go with the Kemper Player.

The OP doesn't appear to be interested in the best solution for his usage, but rather a modification of his current rig with a capture capability.

To the OP,

Do you have access to all the amps you want to capture? If you do, then great, but if not, you would be way better off IMO to get something with an extensive library to pick from that also has the best ability to modify those tones to your liking.

 

[sliberty]

The OP doesn't appear to be interested in the best solution for his usage, but rather a modification of his current rig with a capture capability.

To the OP,

Do you have access to all the amps you want to capture? If you do, then great, but if not, you would be way better off IMO to get something with an extensive library to pick from that also has the best ability to modify those tones to your liking.

I don't plan to capture my own amps (only really have one left). I plan to buy captures from Tone Junkie, Amalgam, etc.

I know there are a ton of captures for the ToneX. But I know that Tone Junkie and Amalgam both have large libraries for the QC as well. And unless I am wrong, the NC can use the QC captures.

 

[sliberty]

Here is a very specific question related to the Nano Cortex:

Does the Nano Cortex have a way to disable cabs/irs, and does it work even if the capture was a full rig capture (ie: amp and cabinet)? I play through a power amp and guitar cabinet, so with HX Stomp and similarly with my ToneX, I disable the cab/ir. ToneX does some black magic to "eliminate" the cab. What does Nano Cortex offer in this regard?

 

[OneEng]

I don't plan to capture my own amps (only really have one left). I plan to buy captures from Tone Junkie, Amalgam, etc.

I know there are a ton of captures for the ToneX. But I know that Tone Junkie and Amalgam both have large libraries for the QC as well. And unless I am wrong, the NC can use the QC captures.

If you aren't capturing yourself, why do you care how accurate the capture is? Capture's that aren't identical, are not necessarily "bad" ... in fact, sometimes the "inaccurate capture" sounds better than the original.

If you are using it the way you are saying, than indeed, the Kemper Player would be my vote for the best solution for you. The rig manager has a metric shit ton of really great rigs. If Ton Junkie is your thing, he also has LOTS of Kemper profiles (complete with fx chains and eq).

Anyway, that is my 2 cents.

 

[Sedaxel]

Here is a very specific question related to the Nano Cortex:

Does the Nano Cortex have a way to disable cabs/irs, and does it work even if the capture was a full rig capture (ie: amp and cabinet)? I play through a power amp and guitar cabinet, so with HX Stomp and similarly with my ToneX, I disable the cab/ir. ToneX does some black magic to "eliminate" the cab. What does Nano Cortex offer in this regard?

No. At least not in the way you want it to work.

NC can obviously disable cab/IR block (in all outputs, not independently). BUT there´s no way of removing the cab from a full rig capture. Anyhow, even without having tried the ToneX or Kemper approach at that feature, What I´ve heard is that it does not work very good. I wouldn´t use it if it was available.

 

[Sedaxel]

If you aren't capturing yourself, why do you care how accurate the capture is? Capture's that aren't identical, are not necessarily "bad" ... in fact, sometimes the "inaccurate capture" sounds better than the original.

Yes and no.

In my personal case, for example, my liking is to have very accurate captures because that way I can be "fairly sure" that what I´m playing is closer to the real experience of trying that captured amp. I like the idea of thiIf I wouldn´t care about that, I´d probably just go with sims.

 

[AFKAEjay(retired)]

What I´ve heard is that it does not work very good. I wouldn´t use it if it was available.

On Kemper it works pretty good on what is called “studio profiles” in Kemper world imho. Cant be 100% accurate obviously, but good results.
Plus, the have a proces called “merged profiles” where you do a profile of the full rig, and a DI profile of the amp…then Kemper calculates the cab from those 2, and merges the DI profile and the calculated cab into a merged profile. Those are very accurate afaict.

 

[Sascha Franck]

I love my HX Stomp, but I also love the idea of captures. The ToneX software is crap, ,but may get better later this month, so I am not selling my ToneX(s) yet. But I am considering my other options. The Nano Cortex price range or (a bit more) "feels" right to me given my situation. But I wanted to hear from those who have it and either love it, like it, dislike it, or hate it, so that I could learn more before I commit.

Wait for the new ToneX editor I'd say. From all I've seen, it should at least be half decent (you can never say "decent" as it's from IK...).

And as far as being able to separate amps and cabs goes, you could have a look at how many amp-only captures there are for the ToneX platform. Maybe they're enough already. You could then use a cab block from the Stomp (in case your patches aren't fully loaded already).

 

[OneEng]

No. At least not in the way you want it to work.

NC can obviously disable cab/IR block (in all outputs, not independently). BUT there´s no way of removing the cab from a full rig capture. Anyhow, even without having tried the ToneX or Kemper approach at that feature, What I´ve heard is that it does not work very good. I wouldn´t use it if it was available.

See below:

It works pretty well if you use a studio profile where the profiling process captures both the raw amp output and the cab effect separately. Turning off the cab in the Kemper involves one button press.

On Kemper it works pretty good on what is called “studio profiles” in Kemper world imho. Cant be 100% accurate obviously, but good results.
Plus, the have a proces called “merged profiles” where you do a profile of the full rig, and a DI profile of the amp…then Kemper calculates the cab from those 2, and merges the DI profile and the calculated cab into a merged profile. Those are very accurate afaict.

Yes and no.

In my personal case, for example, my liking is to have very accurate captures because that way I can be "fairly sure" that what I´m playing is closer to the real experience of trying that captured amp. I like the idea of thiIf I wouldn´t care about that, I´d probably just go with sims.

Not really. Without the ability to separate the cab from the amp, any capture you get will be drastically different from cab to cab .... not to mention effected by the mic used, and mic placement, and amp settings used for the capture ..... along with how the tubes were biased, how long the amp has warmed up, how old the tubes are, and about 1000 more things that could effect the capture vs your expectation of what the actual amp sounds like.

Kemper's latest invention "Liquid Profile" also takes into account the settings the specific amp was setup with when it was captured, and also takes into account the way different eq, gain, etc knobs effect the tone on individual amps. In other words, it has the feature you specifically asked for (REAL separation of cab and amp capture), and features that you haven't asked for, but will very much need if you want the amp to be modified in any way from the original capture (less gain, different eq, etc).

As I keep saying, you seem fixated on less capable pedals for doing what you are asking them to do. Perhaps a trip to a music store to try out some of these features on different pedals would be advisable vs. asking on this forum what everyone here thinks?

Sims are not the same as captures (as you know); however, that isn't to say that you can't easily get a model of an amp that is MORE convincing and more pleasing and mixes with the band better, than an actual capture.

Regardless, I would suggest you go try out the different options at Guitar Center before you make any decisions. You might be surprised.

 

[MadMaxG79]

These discussions are pretty humorous... I remember when PodHD's were new and exciting... I'm guessing a headrush or HO-tone sounds just as good these days, endless options out there.

Headrush doesn't.

Yes it does.

 

[laxu]

Yes and no.

In my personal case, for example, my liking is to have very accurate captures because that way I can be "fairly sure" that what I´m playing is closer to the real experience of trying that captured amp. I like the idea of thiIf I wouldn´t care about that, I´d probably just go with sims.

But it's just that: an idea.

So many captures don't work right because they were not captured correctly, or they don't have the metadata to make sure the input levels are matched. So you might as well have captures that are under or overgained compared to the real deal.

Without knowing the real amp, you are at best picking "I like how this capture sounds" stuff and trusting that the capture maker got it right.

 

[JCW308]

Yes it does.

Bottom of the pack for sure. HR doesn't compete.

 

[JCW308]

As far as accurate profiles are concerned NAM has been proven to perform much better than any profiling tech out there. I'm not saying Kemper can't get good tones but I'd look at NAM for "the best profiles".

FWIW I use a Quad Cortex for gigging & band practice because it suits my needs better (easy to tweak on the fly & I can run 4 signal paths through it - 2 guitars, bass & vocals). The Neural Capture feature isn't as good as NAM profiles though

There's no good NAM hardware out there though. Even the best is marginal compared to others when thinking about foot switches, etc....

 

[OneEng]

But it's just that: an idea.

So many captures don't work right because they were not captured correctly, or they don't have the metadata to make sure the input levels are matched. So you might as well have captures that are under or overgained compared to the real deal.

Without knowing the real amp, you are at best picking "I like how this capture sounds" stuff and trusting that the capture maker got it right.

Exactly.

Capture technology (for everything but Kemper studio profiles) is performed by a single microphone in front of a guitar cab, and the raw input of the guitar or signal generator from the capture unit. This inherently makes a capture dependent on:

• All amp settings
• Amp tube bias
• Amp tube age
• Warm up condition of amp
• Microphone used
• Microphone placement
• Room acoustics
• Cab placement relative to room and microphone placement

The difference that Kemper has from other capture devices:

• Amp settings are saved for Liquid profiles (so algorithms to change the settings AFTER capture can be made more accurate). Additionally, the AMP family is captured so that the controls in the Kemper mirror the original amp controls.
• The Amp tube bias can be modified as a single parameter in the Amp settings
• Amp tube age can be modified as a single parameter "sag" in the Amp settings
• Warm up condition of amp is not covered even in Kemper as far as I know.
• Microphone used is covered in the studio profile by separately capturing the CAB input from the amp and the CAB output with a microphone. Note, this means that the microphone effects (microphone used, mice placement, room acoustics, and cab placement relative to room and microphone) are all rolled into the CAB capture process and become part of the "Cab" you use with a particular "Amp" you captured.

When using a studio, liquid profile with Kemper, you get the following:

• Separate amp and cab captures
• A control model like the amp (the gain knob behaves like it does on the real amp, the number of EQ bands and the way each EQ band works on the real amp is reflected in the GUI and the model.

These two differences, along with Kemper's existing "Amp like parameters" like sag, and tube bias, make it much easier to get a capture to sound like you want it to with the gear you are using to reproduce it.

At this time, no other capture device can do these things.

Now, there is still the discussion of the live capture being "more accurate" with Neural, ToneX and Quad Cortex; however, remember, when these studies are performed, the real amp settings aren't changed, the real cab used isn't changed, and the guitar used isn't changed. This results in a capture you download (didn't make yourself with your own amp and guitar) NOT sounding at all like the demo you hear on the website for that capture. Your ability to modify the capture to sound like the recording is much more limited than with Kemper.

The end result is the Kemper can be made to sound better, with less effort, than any of these other devices.

I started out with a VHT and a Fender Blackface. When I got my Kemper, I profiled both of them at several settings before I sold them. Today, I don't use ANY of my original profiles because I have found other captures of other amps that I like better than my original captures (after I tweaked them for my equipment and personal taste).

Of course, as with all things, YMMV.

 

[laxu]

Exactly.

Capture technology (for everything but Kemper studio profiles) is performed by a single microphone in front of a guitar cab, and the raw input of the guitar or signal generator from the capture unit.

You can just as well omit the cab sim and use a loadbox or DI box to get the sound from the amp only, then use cab sims with it. Of course here the loadbox or DI box quality will come into play.

The difference that Kemper has from other capture devices:

• Amp settings are saved for Liquid profiles (so algorithms to change the settings AFTER capture can be made more accurate). Additionally, the AMP family is captured so that the controls in the Kemper mirror the original amp controls.
• The Amp tube bias can be modified as a single parameter in the Amp settings
• Amp tube age can be modified as a single parameter "sag" in the Amp settings

When using a studio, liquid profile with Kemper, you get the following:

• Separate amp and cab captures
• A control model like the amp (the gain knob behaves like it does on the real amp, the number of EQ bands and the way each EQ band works on the real amp is reflected in the GUI and the model.

These two differences, along with Kemper's existing "Amp like parameters" like sag, and tube bias, make it much easier to get a capture to sound like you want it to with the gear you are using to reproduce it.

At the same time, all of those are making it a strange hybrid of component modeling and capture tech. Hotone takes that approach even further with their amp models (not captures) where they use some machine learning models for non-linearities and component modeling for gain, switches, tone-stacks and so on.

Both can sound totally fine, but I would not call them accurate by any means. Captures especially seem to have issues with e.g bright cap behavior where turning the gain (volume on NMV amps) up or down won't work like a real bright cap. Not sure how Kemper behaves in this regard.

All this stuff doesn't mean you can't enjoy how e.g Kemper sounds tweaked like this. I'd find it preferably to the generic EQ of most capture devices. If I have an amp, I'd rather work with that amp like it was the real deal. That's why I vastly prefer component modeling systems like Line6 and Fractal over "capture mystery boxes" you pick through.

 

[Sedaxel]

But it's just that: an idea.

So many captures don't work right because they were not captured correctly, or they don't have the metadata to make sure the input levels are matched. So you might as well have captures that are under or overgained compared to the real deal.

Without knowing the real amp, you are at best picking "I like how this capture sounds" stuff and trusting that the capture maker got it right.

Exactly.

That's why I prefer a more reliable capturing device than an excessively free one.

In the NC, capturing is made in a very guided way. You don't have too much freedom, more or less captures are in the ballpark where they should work, and the input gain is always under control because it's fixed by the on board capturing and playing hardware.

That's basically why I don't use NAM for others captures, because I can't be sure of how they were made.

 

[OneEng]

You can just as well omit the cab sim and use a loadbox or DI box to get the sound from the amp only, then use cab sims with it. Of course here the loadbox or DI box quality will come into play.


At the same time, all of those are making it a strange hybrid of component modeling and capture tech. Hotone takes that approach even further with their amp models (not captures) where they use some machine learning models for non-linearities and component modeling for gain, switches, tone-stacks and so on.

Both can sound totally fine, but I would not call them accurate by any means. Captures especially seem to have issues with e.g bright cap behavior where turning the gain (volume on NMV amps) up or down won't work like a real bright cap. Not sure how Kemper behaves in this regard.

All this stuff doesn't mean you can't enjoy how e.g Kemper sounds tweaked like this. I'd find it preferably to the generic EQ of most capture devices. If I have an amp, I'd rather work with that amp like it was the real deal. That's why I vastly prefer component modeling systems like Line6 and Fractal over "capture mystery boxes" you pick through.

Exactly this. I agree.

Still, Kemper does fundamentally capture amp and cab separately, which is unlike other capture devices.

As you point out, Kemper (and most other capture devices) are a hybrid of capture, and model. In the case of Line 6 and Fractal, it is 100% amp model with a cab capture (IR). With Kemper it is Amp: Capture+Model, Cab: Capture+model.

I also agree that the best approach is dependent on personal taste. Anyone that says you can't get VERY good tone from any of these devices, simply doesn't know what they are talking about IMO.

 

[AFKAEjay(retired)]

When using a studio, liquid profile with Kemper, you get the following:

• Separate amp and cab captures

You only get amp and cab separated if you do a DI profile & a studio profile and use those to create a merged profile. Liquid profile only influences how the tonestack behaves, has nothing to do with amp/cab separation.

Capture technology (for everything but Kemper studio profiles) is performed by a single microphone in front of a guitar cab,

Or from a DI at the poweramp….or from the send just capturing the preamp…choose your poison.
And this is the same across all platform, Kemper being no different.
Liquid profile is special for Kemper…but that is all “after the fact”…it does not influence the capture proces. Its no more then putting a tonestack on the existing profile with certain behaviors, with userdata entered to determine the starting point.
It’s probably great for users who value “behaves like the profiled amp”…personally I’d rather use the generic one, gives me predictable results, equally effective, just a tad different.

You are right about Kempers ability to alter profiles…and it has that ability from day 1 afaik..despite “the internet” telling a different story.
The amp parameters are super powerfull, but not many people seem to know they are even there
The generic tonestack has been super powerfull since day one also….and very amp like if you flip it pre stack…it never got acknowledged as such though. Somehow liquid profiles changed the narrative…in my mind it only adds “tonestack behaves like the profiled amp”, which in some cases maybe even less powerfull to change a profile then the generic tonestack.