- Messages
- 1,664
I will try it. I have my 50th Triple setup now. Love this amp.
NDSP Quad Cortex
- Thread starter Jarick
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,984
this thing is so awesome, almost feels a bit like cheating lol. obviously you still gotta play and write the parts thats still the hardest part by far but to think that back in the day people had to spend so much time and money testing out different combinations of stuff or figuring out what worked with what with the actual physical gear and mic placements and all that very intricate stuff and now we just *click* download and its live coming through your speakers. what. the. fuck. hahahaha
For the extra dummy parts I have a scene that adds a chief oc2 (quite a bit more dry, less of each octave) into a -1 pitch block w pretty low mix before the amp block.
Another really good capture is the Tonehub whitechapel mark lewis. That one to me seems good to go on its own. might be built for 7s or 8s but sounds great in drop C to me.
For the extra dummy parts I have a scene that adds a chief oc2 (quite a bit more dry, less of each octave) into a -1 pitch block w pretty low mix before the amp block.
Another really good capture is the Tonehub whitechapel mark lewis. That one to me seems good to go on its own. might be built for 7s or 8s but sounds great in drop C to me.
deadpool_25
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,224
The metronome is cool. I'm digging the soft kit setting.
deadpool_25
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,224
Not that I'm aware of.
deadpool_25
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,224
Just rambling here but I was thinking about this after reading some comments about folks not caring about capturing, and realizing I used to think that way too but I obviously changed my mind on that.
I used to be pretty biased towards modeling over captures but I've since come to value captures as much as modeling. In my QC, while I do use some models, they've mostly been the ones from the plugins. On the other side, I've found some captures I really like. This is especially satisfying when those captures are of amps that I've been really interested in trying but not seen modeled anywhere (and certainly don't want to shell out actual money for).
I used to be pretty biased towards modeling over captures but I've since come to value captures as much as modeling. In my QC, while I do use some models, they've mostly been the ones from the plugins. On the other side, I've found some captures I really like. This is especially satisfying when those captures are of amps that I've been really interested in trying but not seen modeled anywhere (and certainly don't want to shell out actual money for).
fiftyshadesofslay
Roadie
- Messages
- 174
I’ve almost universally hated modelling on any device. Captures of your own rig always sound way better to me.
I really dislike amp models and IR’s, and dislike captures of the amp only plus IR’s. It’s got to be the full chain, mic and all IMO.
That’s probably part of the reason I always preferred Kemper at the time. I know it has its detractors here but when it was the only device that could do this, it was night and day better to my ears.
deadpool_25
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,224
That makes sense provided you have your own rig to capture and the means to do so. And if your own rig is the one you want to use.
I like modeling for its ability to give me the basic experience of trying amps I might never try IRL.
IRs have mostly been a necessary evil for me now that I've found an FRFR I actually enjoy. For a long time before that built my modeling setups around a power amp and cab.
I was gravitating towards amp-only captures because I felt like having the IR baked in would be too limiting. And though I still kinda feel that way, that full-chain Dual Rec capture (and a few from Jon Kaneshiro) gives me the feeling that I should be more open to those than I have been.
Mongillo19
Rock Star
- Messages
- 7,165
I bounce back and forth. Right now I'm in the "prefer captures" mindset. They just seem more natural to me and sit in the mix better
Dez
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,532
This is 50% why I like captures, and the other 50% is like you said - I can try obscure amps that likely won’t make it into a modeler. Also for dual rec tones because I’ve never liked any dual rec model that I’ve tried lol
deadpool_25
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,224
Wait. What? You mean captures and models? Or....?
Jynx
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,375
Yes. That's what I meant.
Dez
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,532
I was blending captures with my amp when I had the QC. I’d use the DI from a loadbox in path A and path B was Nameless or a capture of some sort - it was fun.
laxu
Rock Star
- Messages
- 8,452
I still don't like captures. Not my own, not someone elses. They can sound good but I just dislike working with them. It's like working with a pile of IR files vs working with a movable cab sim mic. File browser vs intuitive user interface.
I'll take amp models that behave like that amp - even if they are imperfect - over the snapshot + generic EQ nature of captures.
Captures can be useful to demo rare amps that will never be digitally modeled.
deadpool_25
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,224
I'm with you on everything except the bold parts. Those are how you (and many others) feel and there's nothing wrong with that obviously. I used to kinda feel that way too (although maybe not quite as strongly). I just don't so feel so negatively about them anymore. For me they can sound good and can be useful so I find it nice that they exist so I can use them when it suits me.
So basically I would prefer to have a good model of an amp, but since models don't (and won't) exist of all the amps I'm interested in it's nice that captures can fill that gap. And they can sometimes fill that gap quite nicely. And every now and then, if I'm lucky, I might find a capture of an amp that is modeled where I might even like the capture as much or more than the model.
Last edited:
Chocol8
Rock Star
- Messages
- 2,527
Having a model allows you to dial in the tone traditionally, but unless you tweak often, I still see an advantage to the capture's low processing overhead. If you were to dial in a model, and then convert it to run as a capture, you could in theory open up processing power for effects, or other things in the chain.
For me, I have found that I can sort through well done captures very quickly to find the tone I am looking for, or get close and tweak the controls to get me there. I would say on average it takes about the same time as dialing in a model, and both take slightly longer than dialing in a real amp. Perhaps it is my experience with the real amps, and knowing what I am looking for that helps it go quickly, but for me it is nothing at all like sorting through IR's with different mic's and mic placement.
- Messages
- 12,619
While I had some great, unexpected experiences with the ToneX stuff for my first capture/profile experience, there's no way I could ever rely on just captures simply on the basis of it removing a huge part of the fun for me. I love turning knobs and finding out what happens and the majority of tones I've put in my back pocket over the years are the result of going for something specific and hearing things along the way I didn't expect or want, but love.
That notion is the complete opposite of why I find the digital world appealing; no limitations.
I found with the ToneX caps there’s enough tweakability that if you find something you dig, you can use the onboard EQ to get it to sit in a mix well enough and since I did find some caps I really enjoyed, that aspect of it is what made me realize they weren’t a total waste of time for me.
That notion is the complete opposite of why I find the digital world appealing; no limitations.
I found with the ToneX caps there’s enough tweakability that if you find something you dig, you can use the onboard EQ to get it to sit in a mix well enough and since I did find some caps I really enjoyed, that aspect of it is what made me realize they weren’t a total waste of time for me.
