NAM: Neural Amp Modeler

[northern_fox]

That's a slick board!

It'll be even slicker if he gets some more EQ options on there! I really enjoy having such a simple setup though - there's not much to tweak and I like it that way for practice and live, distraction free. I can swap the tonex in directly as a quick backup too. I tried pairing it with my gt1000 core for fun and it also works great with that. RTL of less then 2ms for that entire comination, and no level/noise issues!

Even though it's all done via USB stick, it still actually feels smoother than using tonex app, btw! Certainly appreciate being able to use captures and store/organize them on my PC as I like instead of the cloud and awkward local database system.

 

[Sedaxel]

Hey mates, how do you deal with interface noise with hi gain profiles in NAM at high volume?

I´ve been noodling around with NAM and realized that, at LIVE volume uses, the preamp noise of the interface can be a problem.

Using the input of the interface at minimum gain (as all of you know, for making easy the calibration of the profiles if you know the reference at which they were trained), it happens that a hi gain profile amplifies the signal too much, so the base preamp noise of the interface gets VERY audible (in my Zoom AMS-22, which has a little noisy preamps, honestly). It can be softened increasing the gain in the interface, and lowering in software before NAM. It works... but I can´t increase too much the gain in the interface because if I strum hard, I clip the input of the interface. So not a fully effective solution (apart from that, I´ve got to re-measure the headroom when tweaking the gain input).

Switching to my EVO4, which has much quieter preamps than the Zoom, it improves... but I realized that (remember, LIVE volume, not bedroom volume) some other noises get audible (interferences and whatnot... even when preamp noise is not nearly as bad as with the Zoom... which in turn, had absolutely no other noise nor interferences).

So, my question for those of you who use NAM live... did you notice this? Does it happen to you? In such that case, how do you deal with it? Do you use a noise gate (I didn´t like the result)?

 

[2dor]

Hey mates, how do you deal with interface noise with hi gain profiles in NAM at high volume?

I´ve been noodling around with NAM and realized that, at LIVE volume uses, the preamp noise of the interface can be a problem.

Using the input of the interface at minimum gain (as all of you know, for making easy the calibration of the profiles if you know the reference at which they were trained), it happens that a hi gain profile amplifies the signal too much, so the base preamp noise of the interface gets VERY audible (in my Zoom AMS-22, which has a little noisy preamps, honestly). It can be softened increasing the gain in the interface, and lowering in software before NAM. It works... but I can´t increase too much the gain in the interface because if I strum hard, I clip the input of the interface. So not a fully effective solution (apart from that, I´ve got to re-measure the headroom when tweaking the gain input).

Switching to my EVO4, which has much quieter preamps than the Zoom, it improves... but I realized that (remember, LIVE volume, not bedroom volume) some other noises get audible (interferences and whatnot... even when preamp noise is not nearly as bad as with the Zoom... which in turn, had absolutely no other noise nor interferences).

So, my question for those of you who use NAM live... did you notice this? Does it happen to you? In such that case, how do you deal with it? Do you use a noise gate (I didn´t like the result)?

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Hey mates, how do you deal with interface noise with hi gain profiles in NAM at high volume?

I´ve been noodling around with NAM and realized that, at LIVE volume uses, the preamp noise of the interface can be a problem.

Using the input of the interface at minimum gain (as all of you know, for making easy the calibration of the profiles if you know the reference at which they were trained), it happens that a hi gain profile amplifies the signal too much, so the base preamp noise of the interface gets VERY audible (in my Zoom AMS-22, which has a little noisy preamps, honestly). It can be softened increasing the gain in the interface, and lowering in software before NAM. It works... but I can´t increase too much the gain in the interface because if I strum hard, I clip the input of the interface. So not a fully effective solution (apart from that, I´ve got to re-measure the headroom when tweaking the gain input).

Switching to my EVO4, which has much quieter preamps than the Zoom, it improves... but I realized that (remember, LIVE volume, not bedroom volume) some other noises get audible (interferences and whatnot... even when preamp noise is not nearly as bad as with the Zoom... which in turn, had absolutely no other noise nor interferences).

So, my question for those of you who use NAM live... did you notice this? Does it happen to you? In such that case, how do you deal with it? Do you use a noise gate (I didn´t like the result)?

if you have enough headroom not to clip, turn the preamps up a bit and boost less in the plugin.

If you don’t have enough headroom, then find a quieter interface. are you sure the noise is the built in interface noise and not noise from the pickups?

Also +1 for Bertom

 

[northern_fox]

Also, NAM captures the "hiss" of the amp as well as the tone, and real amps are often noisier in this respect than models and sometimes that catches people by surprise with captures. If the real amp is loud, NAM will also be loud - sort of the cost of doing business. Check the noise floor with no gates and guitar volume rolled off (not channel input mute).

Not sure of your context, but also do note that the computer itself can induce quite a lot of noise (not specific to nam) if you're not facing at the correct room angle due to interference.

 

[Sedaxel]

Made a lot of tests with 3 interfaces (Zoom AMS-22, Audient EVO4 and Hifiberry).

Zoom noise is pure preamp noise (the same one that Julian Krause shows in his reviews of audio interfaces). The other 2 have much less preamp noise, but have other noises.

The amp is quieter than any interface.

As I said, I raised the gain on the zoom but I've got too little headroom, so it clips to early. Not enough to get rid of the noise... It just improves a little.

Measured the preamp noise at minimum gain setting, and the Zoom is 12 dB louder than the EVO4.

Maybe a full metal interface could have little interference noises, while having little preamp noise too.

I'll take a look at the Bertom thing. Thank you!

 

[Sedaxel]

Wow... The Bertom is just out of this world, isn't it?

It's unbelievable how it can remove noise even when the guitar becomes barely audible and keeps on quietly ringing, and without the open/close topical gate effect.

I'm speechless.

 

[2dor]

Wow... The Bertom is just out of this world, isn't it?

It's unbelievable how it can remove noise even when the guitar becomes barely audible and keeps on quietly ringing, and without the open/close topical gate effect.

I'm speechless.

It's become an "always on" thing for me

 

[Los-D]

Finally had time to jam today but had to use headphones. Tried all my plugins on my Mac, as well as the QC. Nothing beats NAM*+ Valhalla for me. Daaaamn!

* Since Tonocracy has been mostly abandonware, switched back to NAM but still using captures from the usual suspects.

 

[northern_fox]

Anytime I use anything other plugin-wise than NAM, I end up back on NAM captures eventually once I do A/B. Sometimes use the fx from those though. The feel is just there

 

[Orvillain]

I've stopped using NAM and plugins in general to be honest. Nothing to do with the sound quality. Just purely a workflow thing. I'd honestly rather mic up a cab with a real amp, and a pedalboard; in 99% of situations.

The only plugin I am using is Helix Native. And that is because it is easy to use and to get up and running quickly, and I don't have to mess around with huge plugin chains.

NAM is a great proof of concept. But really, one of these companies needs to put it into a hardware multi-effect for it to be of any use to me, when it is all said and done.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

NAM is a great proof of concept. But really, one of these companies needs to put it into a hardware multi-effect for it to be of any use to me, when it is all said and done.

I kind of feel like this about the plugin too. All of the 3rd party implementations of NAM into a plugin have basically focussed on the bits that aren’t broken and added some bits I’m unlikely to use.

Would love to see software that handles the entire process of training (I have friends that haven’t even tried NAM because they just assume it’s too complicated). Likewise, something that really focusses on cataloguing and filtering the models on the computer.

So far (if I’m using NAM), I always end up back on the OG NAM plugin. Less clutter=faster to use.


For capturing tech, it’s the only platform I use but I don’t really use NAM more or less than real amps or other plugins, it’s just another option. Generally I prefer the process of dialling something in than playing lucky dip with files.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Fwiw, I still think that the NAM implementation of Two Notes' Genome is quite nice, just that it lacks any decent file organisation (same with the NAM Player and Tonocracy), which is just plain bad.

The only plugin I am using is Helix Native. And that is because it is easy to use and to get up and running quickly, and I don't have to mess around with huge plugin chains.

I actually often prefer individual plugins as I a) don't think HXN is particularly funny to operate (and we all know the shortcomings pretty well...) and b) because I often stack some things such as compressors, EQs, drives and amps - and to simply switch them on/off it's just nice not having to deal with any plugin UIs but simply do it in Logic's channel strips.

But really, one of these companies needs to put it into a hardware multi-effect

Too bad the Dimehead unit failed so badly on many levels (IMO at least) because in terms of latency and accuracy it's simply astounding. Could've easily been the best thing ever since the KPA, but unfortunately they apparently didn't ask the right folks for their opinions beforehand.

 

[2dor]

Too bad the Dimehead unit failed so badly on many levels (IMO at least) because in terms of latency and accuracy it's simply astounding. Could've easily been the best thing ever since the KPA, but unfortunately they apparently didn't ask the right folks for their opinions beforehand.

I wouldn't say it failed outright; they probably wanted to to be "first to market" with a product so they seemed to have focused on getting the bare-bones stuff down to have a product people could stick onto their pedalboards which, in itself, was a good decision (although the price of admission is still a bit of a hard pill to swallow even if you have the income to accommodate the purchase).

They're still developing the unit and I see some good turnarounds (like the FX loop using the TRS-to-2xTS cable, running stacked NAM captures for boost pedal etc) on features. Still, a little bit too barebones for my liking (at least in that price range).

But I do think whoever comes out with a decent NAM-enabled multi-FX unit with a decent UI and easy file management is going to hit the home run.

 

[Sascha Franck]

I wouldn't say it failed outright; they probably wanted to to be "first to market" with a product so they seemed to have focused on getting the bare-bones stuff down to have a product people could stick onto their pedalboards which, in itself, was a good decision (although the price of admission is still a bit of a hard pill to swallow even if you have the income to accommodate the purchase).

Wouldn't even completely disagree, but IMO even their hardware choices were bad to start with. Switches too close (way too close?) to each other, too close to the encoders. Encoders aren't endless (which makes absolutely no sense on programmable units, but hey, even Boss still has it wrong on their ME units...), lack of connectivity (even if they now try to "hack" some more life into it).
For all these, the price is too steep.
Either give me a truly feature reduced box (such as the Tonex pedal or even the Tonex One), maybe allowing me to load two captures at once, or give me the whole enchilada. Well, at least something competitive. As is, in terms of live usability, even the cheapest chinese modeler knockoffs beat this unit left and right. Which is a shame, really.

 

[Orvillain]

I actually often prefer individual plugins as I a) don't think HXN is particularly funny to operate (and we all know the shortcomings pretty well...) and b) because I often stack some things such as compressors, EQs, drives and amps - and to simply switch them on/off it's just nice not having to deal with any plugin UIs but simply do it in Logic's channel strips.

I should clarify that I'm talking purely about songwriting sessions. If I'm doing a deeper mixing session or finalizing songs in some way, then yeah, give me the complexity.

But that initial experience of sitting down, having an idea, and recording it.... I try to use as little stuff as possible, and I try to use the stuff that isn't going to ruin my flow state. The Helix Native presets I use probably won't end up being the final tone. I probably won't even use Helix Native for the final production (although I have done in the past) - it really is about keeping everything simple with no distractions. Native works fine for that.

 

[Sascha Franck]

But that initial experience of sitting down, having an idea, and recording it.... I try to use as little stuff as possible, and I try to use the stuff that isn't going to ruin my flow state.

And that's precisely why I prefer to not even open any plugin UI but have some inserts giving me certain variations of a basic tone. Click insert #1 and the compressor is somewhat pushing things. Click #2 and there's more drive. Same with #3, just a more angry drive. #4 has a modulation in it. Etc. Same with sends. #1 is always a delay, #2 is always a reverb, #3 is a spacey delay, #4 a somewhat larger reverb.
Realising all these variations within HXN is no fun.

 

[bikescene]

I'm still enjoying the regular NAM plugin for my DAW-based needs. It loads up quickly on my older computer and its minimal GUI is unobtrusive. Couldn't get into Tonocracy. I'd rather use my other specialized plugins for effects in the DAW world.

I need to use collections with multiple captures though. For my workflow, I can't stick to a single go-to sound. I do wish the drop down selector worked a little differently for this reason.

I like the novelty of capturing my own equipment. I reamp while doing chores, and magically get snapshots of my own gear in the end. I can see how it is unintuitive and time consuming to do so for many users.

 

[[Nathan]]

The tech is amazing, vst players are good enough (we dont need more imo) but I'm still not using it much....

Like everyone says it really needs to be harnessed properly and ideally placed into a modelling/fx ecosystem. IMO 70-80%+ of the reason playing back NAM profiles is hit and miss is because of random capture levels. A hardware capturer would solve this or a software guided trainer checking levels along the way would also solve it (in my mind like if NDSP made the tonex/tonocracy walkthrough). Even with all that you're still at the mercy of the user dictating "whats good", and then you also only have so much lateral movement with a single profile (the lateral movement with gain and EQ is actually respectable, but still nothing like modelling).

If something can even nail all that stuff then we still ideally want custom routings / fx / stompboxes / reverbs etc etc.

It takes me 3 seconds to fire up an ampsim and have a fully modelled amp at my fingertips with everything else ready to be engaged to build a final tone. When so much of NAM is hit and miss its kind of a cool thing I like to mess around with but aren't using day to day. Where it shines for me is when I grab an amp and reamp a tone for a track, I'll grab a snapshot of that exact tone to pull up later if something needs to be retracked I can slot it in very easily. I guess I can also just pull up those tones for messing around with, but they've been created around a mix already so its hit and miss in the cold light of day.

TLDR Best capturing tech but needs to be harnessed top to bottom by a new vst, or adopted into an existing mature platform.

 

[Sedaxel]

For me, NAM is fantastic when you want a lightweight version of your own amp. In my world, it's just this, full stop.

My captures are only useful to me (so to speak), because I tweak my amp for the sound I need, with my specific guitar and effects. And this sound is not necessarily a standard setup of my amp or for usual rock tones... So, if someone else loads my capture, and he doesn't put the post EQ that I use, and he uses a Strat instead of a PRS, the sound won't be like the one I get. It would sound, probably, as a weirdly tweaked amp. If someone would want to play a capture of my amp with a "more standard" setup, I should tweak the amp on that way and generate a new capture. And still, nobody would know that unless I make a good description of the capture for people to read and understand (which AFAIK is very uncommon). Otherwise, people won't know what kind of amp setup they're playing at all.

And I'm not even talking about the input gain Kaos of online captures.

So I have zero interest in tonehunt or others captures. And it's not because I might think they're rubbish (of course I don't), but because I don't want to guess what setup of the amp was used, and what the input gain was.

The only way for me to be interested in that, would be the kemper approach. Standardized gain, professional made profiles with description of each setting of the amp for each profile. And that's in my opinion the biggest advantage of Kemper... There are tons (and then another ton of tons) of professional quality profiles, with full setup spectrums of each amp, and zero guesswork.