There’s the biggest influx of capital maybe in human history for legitimate Ai tech the past 5 years. No hardware at your feet will ever be able to do what could be done when sent off to a server running even basic stuff. NAM was created with google tools meant for speech recognition and that was years ago now. It can almost perfectly replicate an amp down to -60db difference. I would assume, and this is an assumption, that Neural and/or IK have also not written their latest stuff from scratch and are likely using tools available to them in a similar manner repurposed for their usage. It’s going to be pretty hard to outdo companies worth multiple hundreds of billions of dollars and teams of thousands of the smartest people on the planet with a team of 3-4 writing your own code. This is also why I feel (despite being shot down every time I mention it) that ultimately the end game of this space will not be component modelling but entire amps made with a dataset of captures fed into these models.
I think the answer is….kinda, but not really? same result, slightly different way to arrive there. Get to the same website from multiple search engines kinda thing. Honestly I think the tech will become so accessible that hardware, support, user experience and effects will be the main deciding factor. It’s kinda already been sliding that direction with the latest gen stuff anyways. The thing about amp modelling that exists and doesn’t in other tech is that there is an end game….when you can exactly replicate the sound of the amp with ZERO discrepancies then you can’t do better unless you make new creations. We’ve already passed the point of really anyone being able to tell in a blind test but it will continue to get better until it’s replicated exactly. Then we’ll all have to argue about something else
I’m not! Right now I’m using my Stomp, I plan on getting a Stadium (non XL). If the QC gets Mesa PCOM by then though…
I wouldn't be too sure about that actually. As soon as Neural goes under, or the product is deprecated, then potentially bye-bye servers.
No idea as to your question, but according to NDSP's website, the limit is 40 captures per day.
Absolutely. There's going to be a ceiling where just throwing more hardware at it won't do anything but make the capture creation faster.
The test signal is likely to change so no. The QC V2 capture signal sounds totally different from the V1 sweep.
NAM's capture process is not so complicated that others wouldn't be able to just make their own that is similar. They might use a different neural net model, with different settings etc. I'm sure they've done their own research on what they think will give the best quality to performance ratio. For cloud based solutions they will utilize the tools their cloud provider (e.g Amazon) provides.
Sweet - I watched the Sweetwate vid yesterday & I recall they said the limit was lower; could have been I misheard, thank you.
To be fair, up until this week, no one who had paid £1600 for their QC had the option to do anything other than capture on device, which obviously you can still do.
It comes down to simply the cost of running that training on the cloud. They can subvent it with that 1600 price but aren't going to let power users go crazy with it where they might need to be e.g at a more expensive price bracket due to volume of trainings.
True - 40's a lot but maybe you do 1 amp and several pedals & you'd hit that threshold faster than you think; I'm just curious if they allow you to reamp but process the next day.
