NAM: Neural Amp Modeler

[2dor]

Yeah, it really isn't quite as simple to make a parametric model compared to snapshots and so if people are serious about building a product that works in this way - the simple option is to get in touch with Steve or Tone3000 who would be happy to help out.

That being said, I'm sure someone who enjoys solving problems and has the skill to do so, could probably put a workflow together and post it up on github for everyone to use for free. It hasn't happened yet as far as I can see, but it would be cool to see people who can do something like that being pro-active rather than not.

I came across this a while ago but haven't tried it yet:

GitHub - orico/nam-multi-knob-extension: Multi Knob Neural Network Emulator For Guitar Amplifiers

Multi Knob Neural Network Emulator For Guitar Amplifiers - orico/nam-multi-knob-extension

github.com

 

[Dom Mcsweeney]

Cool! Nice find!

I'm quite happy with snapshots, and a decent EQ.
And for example, the Dimehead has a parametric EQ with various tonestack presets, similarly so has Genome.

I'm personally more than happy to support and buy any fully kitted out products people have made, as I'm not sure I have time or energy to dig that deep myself.

 

[elgordito]

I came across this a while ago but haven't tried it yet:

GitHub - orico/nam-multi-knob-extension: Multi Knob Neural Network Emulator For Guitar Amplifiers

Multi Knob Neural Network Emulator For Guitar Amplifiers - orico/nam-multi-knob-extension

github.com

I'd be curious if you try it successfully. Yesterday I got the main nam repo and looked a bit at the code. It was surprisingly easy to train a model on my Mac using GPU. I'll have a look and see if I can train a multiknob model as I see there are some .wav files in the repo.

 

[elgordito]

Cool! Nice find!

I'm quite happy with snapshots, and a decent EQ.
And for example, the Dimehead has a parametric EQ with various tonestack presets, similarly so has Genome.

I'm personally more than happy to support and buy any fully kitted out products people have made, as I'm not sure I have time or energy to dig that deep myself.

My experience using an amp is tweaking the drive or presence or whatever until it feels right. So while snapshots are cool I don't think it really fits most people's workflow. Same if you model any pedal

 

[Sascha Franck]

And for example, the Dimehead has a parametric EQ with various tonestack presets, similarly so has Genome.

I've said so quite sometimes, Genome's NAM block is pretty much perfect IMO. The only thing I'd wish for would be if they could add a custom BMT tonestack with parametric mids. I'd use that pre-capture to shape the amp's gain character and then use the post-EQ for final balancing.

I'd really like a hardware pedal only loading 1-2 NAM captures (plus an IR block or maybe 2), featuring the same things as Genome's Codex block. I don't think I'd ever need anything else again for my amp needs (obviously the thing would have to have MIDI switching).
Should be made by Dimehead because their tech seems to be most excellent (super low latency and nice converters).
And in case anyone is up for doing such a thing, I *demand* that they contact me to talk about UI issues beforehand...

 

[FrankyFire]

I've said so quite sometimes, Genome's NAM block is pretty much perfect IMO. The only thing I'd wish for would be if they could add a custom BMT tonestack with parametric mids. I'd use that pre-capture to shape the amp's gain character and then use the post-EQ for final balancing.

I'd really like a hardware pedal only loading 1-2 NAM captures (plus an IR block or maybe 2), featuring the same things as Genome's Codex block. I don't think I'd ever need anything else again for my amp needs (obviously the thing would have to have MIDI switching).
Should be made by Dimehead because their tech seems to be most excellent (super low latency and nice converters).
And in case anyone is up for doing such a thing, I *demand* that they contact me to talk about UI issues beforehand...

Sonulab will release their Stompstation Pro tomorrow. It will have Dual NAM Blocks. I like their Phone UI, maybe you should check that one.

This is the countdown post:

 

[Sascha Franck]

Sonulab will release their Stompstation Pro tomorrow. It will have Dual NAM Blocks. I like their Phone UI, maybe you should check that one.

I will defenitely watch that closely. But given their one-single-encoder affair, I gotta say my hopes for a decent UI are pretty low.

 

[2dor]

I will defenitely watch that closely. But given their one-single-encoder affair, I gotta say my hopes for a decent UI are pretty low.

This one has several encoders by the looks of it:

 

[Sascha Franck]

This one has several encoders by the looks of it:

Not bad. But what are all these companies thinking by designing footswitches that close to each other?

 

[2dor]

Not bad. But what are all these companies thinking by designing footswitches that close to each other?

I guess with 3 of them you could argue there's enough room to not accidentally squeeze 2 at a time; well, maybe the middle one's iffy but the side ones are alright if you're not heavily hidrated ahem..

 

[Sascha Franck]

maybe the middle one's iffy

Every bit this.
I'd rather have 2 switches for a pedal that wide and connect something external in case I needed more.
Anyhow, curious what the asking price will be like. Given that the small version is around €200, this should clock in at >300, possibly closer to 400.

 

[Chocol8]

Are they really promising full captures in native NAM, or is it another product leveraging A2 captures called down for the hardware? I think I am going to need a bunch of Leo Gibson null tests on A2 before I will know if this StompStation even sounds good.

 

[2dor]

Are they really promising full captures in native NAM, or is it another product leveraging A2 captures called down for the hardware? I think I am going to need a bunch of Leo Gibson null tests on A2 before I will know if this StompStation even sounds good.

Yeap - native A1/STD NAM profiles 48Khz no conversion & A2 when it releases.

We'll find out more this week but if the above is true & price is right, it'll be a success.

 

[Deadpan]

Not bad. But what are all these companies thinking by designing footswitches that close to each other?

That rock stars wear pointy boots?

Or

It is designed to sit on a desk most of the time.

 

[MachineAgainstTheRage]

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Is anyone regularly using pedal captures? Is there anything specific you'd look for with them (both good and bad)?

I dont really see much discussion about them. I'm personally not a huge fan of boosted all in one profiles for most situations - I'd either rather use a real pedal on the way in and choose something that matches my guitar/pickups/tuning to an amp model, or use a plugin/digital version, again for the same reasons.

IMO pedals need to have input and output calibration metadata embedded, the range of level available is enormous and things can quickly go weird if they aren't managed well.

I also can't see much point in capturing pedals at anything below maximum output level (unless lowering changes the behaviour of the pedals). I need to explore whether there's any interactivity between output level and other functions of the pedal.

One of my reamp boxes has a tone control that I could possibly use to try and make the impedance interaction a bit more accurate to a specific guitar. It's far from ideal but it's something that could be done during capturing to steer the tone towards something (again, I'd rather use a real pedal to have the real interaction in place).

Pedals don't really suffer from many of the problems of real amps - they're inexpensive, small, easy to mix and match, don't often break or need much servicing, easily available etc. But I also understand not everyone has a big stash of pedals, nor wants one. And there may be some users out there who are using modellers with real amps who only want to model pedals or FX to use with an amp.

 

[2dor]

Is anyone regularly using pedal captures? Is there anything specific you'd look for with them (both good and bad)?

I dont really see much discussion about them. I'm personally not a huge fan of boosted all in one profiles for most situations - I'd either rather use a real pedal on the way in and choose something that matches my guitar/pickups/tuning to an amp model, or use a plugin/digital version, again for the same reasons.

IMO pedals need to have input and output calibration metadata embedded, the range of level available is enormous and things can quickly go weird if they aren't managed well.

I also can't see much point in capturing pedals at anything below maximum output level (unless lowering changes the behaviour of the pedals). I need to explore whether there's any interactivity between output level and other functions of the pedal.

One of my reamp boxes has a tone control that I could possibly use to try and make the impedance interaction a bit more accurate to a specific guitar. It's far from ideal but it's something that could be done during capturing to steer the tone towards something (again, I'd rather use a real pedal to have the real interaction in place).

Pedals don't really suffer from many of the problems of real amps - they're inexpensive, small, easy to mix and match, don't often break or need much servicing, easily available etc. But I also understand not everyone has a big stash of pedals, nor wants one. And there may be some users out there who are using modellers with real amps who only want to model pedals or FX to use with an amp.

Yeah - I use a pedal profiles all the time in series with amp or preamp NAM profiles

 

[Sascha Franck]

I'd either rather use a real pedal on the way in

This is what I'm usually doing. I've got quite some pedals hanging around and absolutely love the haptic feedback. Plus, it's a kind of a "semi commitment" to the sound I'm using, leaving enough headroom for post-recording tweaks while still forcing me to finish tracks as I couldn't recall the settings otherwise (I seem to need that, otherwise I'm not getting anything done).

 

[bikescene]

Is anyone regularly using pedal captures? Is there anything specific you'd look for with them (both good and bad)?

I dont really see much discussion about them. I'm personally not a huge fan of boosted all in one profiles for most situations - I'd either rather use a real pedal on the way in and choose something that matches my guitar/pickups/tuning to an amp model, or use a plugin/digital version, again for the same reasons.

IMO pedals need to have input and output calibration metadata embedded, the range of level available is enormous and things can quickly go weird if they aren't managed well.

I also can't see much point in capturing pedals at anything below maximum output level (unless lowering changes the behaviour of the pedals). I need to explore whether there's any interactivity between output level and other functions of the pedal.

One of my reamp boxes has a tone control that I could possibly use to try and make the impedance interaction a bit more accurate to a specific guitar. It's far from ideal but it's something that could be done during capturing to steer the tone towards something (again, I'd rather use a real pedal to have the real interaction in place).

Pedals don't really suffer from many of the problems of real amps - they're inexpensive, small, easy to mix and match, don't often break or need much servicing, easily available etc. But I also understand not everyone has a big stash of pedals, nor wants one. And there may be some users out there who are using modellers with real amps who only want to model pedals or FX to use with an amp.

I use calibrated pedals in front of a wide palette of amp captures. I think there are a fair amount of users who also boost amp captures with pedal captures, from what I’ve read from the NAM FB group.

When capturing, I go for usable volume settings that I would typically dial in. For example, I prefer the volume on something like a Rat or OCD around 2:00. The pedal capture then behaves how I expect in front of a low headroom clean amp. For something like an OD808 or 250, I’ll crank the volume.

I’ve run into some pedals that clipped my input at 11.5dBu send/return, and had to lower my input to compensate. This happened with a BBE Green Screamer with the volume cranked and the drive around 9:00, as well as with two treble boosters.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

I use calibrated pedals in front of a wide palette of amp captures. I think there are a fair amount of users who also boost amp captures with pedal captures, from what I’ve read from the NAM FB group.

When capturing, I go for usable volume settings that I would typically dial in. For example, I prefer the volume on something like a Rat or OCD around 2:00. The pedal capture then behaves how I expect in front of a low headroom clean amp. For something like an OD808 or 250, I’ll crank the volume.

I’ve run into some pedals that clipped my input at 11.5dBu send/return, and had to lower my input to compensate. This happened with a BBE Green Screamer with the volume cranked and the drive around 9:00, as well as with two treble boosters.

The levels thing is interesting, because IMO having the correct maximum output for the pedal counts a ton. An MXR distortion+ barely puts out anything - a TC Integrated Pre/Dirty Tree etc can boost like 30-40dB. To capture a J Rockett Archer I’ve had to capture it at 20.4dBu.

If the user knows where maximum is, then they can drop it down to their preferred level. If it’s captured at an arbitrary level in between, it’s very hard to know how much that pedal could drive an amp.

My plan was to do pedals maxed out, and possibly to include information on how much gain to trim to reach the 50% knob position on the pedal. Otherwise there just ends up being way too many models that are likely redundant (if all that’s changing is the output level).