Neural DSP Nano Cortex

[Cellomangler]

No, I use a standard DIN midi controller, through a usb-host box (DoreMidi), which converts DIN to USB MIDI to control devices that only listen to computers, or the like.

I've used it that way lots of times, with lots of pedals that supposedly don't listen to midi messages through their usb port.

The NC accepts midi in from computers. Why doesn't it accept them from host boxes (which are, actually, micro computers)?

Well this is new to me then because the two host boxes that I have, the Kenton and the MIDIplus/Miditech, they only convert from USB to DIN and not the other way around. I believe you also must power the Nano from a 9-volt source when using USB MIDI - at least that's what I had to do.

 

[Sedaxel]

Well this is new to me then because the two host boxes that I have, the Kenton and the MIDIplus/Miditech, they only convert from USB to DIN and not the other way around. I believe you also must power the Nano from a 9-volt source when using USB MIDI - at least that's what I had to do.

Yes, of course. The USB port in the Nano would be plugged to a MIDI controller, which doesn´t supply power... so you need to power the NC with the 9V socket.

I would say the midi hosts main purpose is the other way around of that you are saying. allowing DIN midi devices to comunicate to USB midi devices that are not hosts. If you only needed to pair them to a computer/smartphone (which acts as a midi host), a simple $5 MIDI-USB interface (no need for a host box since you´re already connecting to one) works perfectly.

But yeah, the other way around is normal use too, for controlling a classic DIN device with a modern USB controller. BUt, since MIDI controllers that only have USB port (not DIN) are very few in the market, I guess the main goal of the host-boxes is the other one.

 

[Cellomangler]

But yeah, the other way around is normal use too, for controlling a classic DIN device with a modern USB controller. BUt, since MIDI controllers that only have USB port (not DIN) are very few in the market, I guess the main goal of the host-boxes is the other one.

My experience is that most standalone controllers only have USB output these days. I have to search long and hard to find controllers with MIDI DIN output, that's why I need host boxes to convert from USB to DIN. But that's just my experience. I have a couple of mini keyboards, a breath controller as well as 3 Keith McMillan controllers that all require converting USB to MIDI DIN and not the other way around. Fortunately most foot controllers come equipped with MIDI DIN. But you know your situation and your gear and I don't want to come across argumentative, just trying to help. I just wish it wasn't so difficult to move the presets around, that is, to put them in the order you want.

 

[norminal]

Ehhhhh there's nothing confirmed cus over the years Doug Castro's contradicted himself all the time.

I asked him directly if his “models” were a collection of captures at different settings. He said yes. Then there’s the technical papers. Then there’s TINA. It’s pretty obvious if you ask me.

 

[Sedaxel]

My experience is that most standalone controllers only have USB output these days. .

Yeah, maybe. I was thinking about foot controllers... But yeah, what you say makes sense.

Anyway, the thing that is getting me confused is that a midi host box doesn't work with the NC. It has no sense to me. I wish some midi expert chimed in to throw light into this subject...

 

[yeky83]

I asked him directly if his “models” were a collection of captures at different settings. He said yes. Then there’s the technical papers. Then there’s TINA. It’s pretty obvious if you ask me.

Did you even click on the links I posted? You asked him, he gave one answer. Others asked him, he's given different answers. Technical papers and media ad pieces say one thing. The actual output of amp models produced says another.

If what you get outta that is "pretty obvious," mmkay.

 

[norminal]

Did you even click on the links I posted? You asked him, he gave one answer. Others asked him, he's given different answers. Technical papers and media ad pieces say one thing. The actual output of amp models produced says another.

If what you get outta that is "pretty obvious," mmkay.

Yes, I did. But why design and utilize a “robot” that turns knobs if you weren’t using captures as your “modeling” process?

 

[mikah912]

Yes, I did. But why design and utilize a “robot” that turns knobs if you weren’t using captures as your “modeling” process?

I suspect the answer makes about as much sense as the answer to "why build physical versions of your plugin amps in order to remodel them for "X" versions?"

Best not to ponder any "Why?" questions regarding Neural DSP for long...

 

[yeky83]

Yes, I did. But why design and utilize a “robot” that turns knobs if you weren’t using captures as your “modeling” process?

Why use Tina to promote QC plugin compatibility? Why pretend Captures use neural networks? Cus it's cool bro and it sells.

I'm not saying they're not using Tina, I'm saying they've contradicted themselves left and right. Who knows what they're actually doing? It's anything but obvious. And if you can't see that even after looking at the receipts, dunno what to say to try to convince you, I'm going to shrug and move on.

 

[GTR37]

Why use Tina to promote QC plugin compatibility? Why pretend Captures use neural networks? Cus it's cool bro and it sells.

I'm not saying they're not using Tina, I'm saying they've contradicted themselves left and right. Who knows what they're actually doing? It's anything but obvious. And if you can't see that even after looking at the receipts, dunno what to say to try to convince you, I'm going to shrug and move on.

my guess is they are and always have been using TINA to collect capture samples and data , that does a large part of the heavy lifting , in the case of certain amps that maybe the captures don't full handle , then they are likely sending in a dev to get further measurements and comparing to the amp and do som post EQ tone matching , but the core models are probably very similar to something like MIKKO in which there are so many captures, that they put them all together so you have a smooth transition in the range of the controls .

That very different to Fractal component level modelling and getting into things like impedance modelling behaviours

 

[mikah912]

my guess is they are and always have been using TINA to collect capture samples and data , that does a large part of the heavy lifting , in the case of certain amps that maybe the captures don't full handle , then they are likely sending in a dev to get further measurements and comparing to the amp and do som post EQ tone matching , but the core models are probably very similar to something like MIKKO in which there are so many captures, that they put them all together so you have a smooth transition in the range of the controls .

That very different to Fractal component level modelling and getting into things like impedance modelling behaviours

This would seem like a logical take based on available data, but it begs the question as to why they are so slow in adding amps to the platform.

Only company that has taken longer to release new amps has been Line 6, and they're likely to fix that presently with the fall/early winter launch of 3.8 (whereas Neural has mentioned no new amps on the horizon).

 

[namathan_zirwir]

This would seem like a logical take based on available data, but it begs the question as to why they are so slow in adding amps to the platform.

Only company that has taken longer to release new amps has been Line 6, and they're likely to fix that presently with the fall/early winter launch of 3.8 (whereas Neural has mentioned no new amps on the horizon).

I would rather NDSP focus on other developments, first... besides more amp models. It has amp tones covered pretty well with tons of captures out there. They should beef the effects up fo sure and make that a priority imo

 

[mikah912]

I would rather NDSP focus on other developments, first... besides more amp models. It has amp tones covered pretty well with tons of captures out there. They should beef the effects up fo sure and make that a priority imo

Oh, definitely. But they should be able to do both. They're the only company with Tina, after all...

 

[norminal]

Oh, definitely. But they should be able to do both. They're the only company with Tina, after all...

 

[GTR37]

I would rather NDSP focus on other developments, first... besides more amp models. It has amp tones covered pretty well with tons of captures out there. They should beef the effects up fo sure and make that a priority imo

which FX would you say they are missing? I think the mod section is pretty good .

The New wah coming , if they do the 6 different range settings will be a nice addition IMO

The biggest one I would say would be a quality Spring reverb

 

[Mongillo19]

which FX would you say they are missing? I think the mod section is pretty good .

The New wah coming , if they do the 6 different range settings will be a nice addition IMO

The biggest one I would say would be a quality Spring reverb

Yeah the reverbs could be improved...and delays.

I don't expect it to get to FAS level but look at the multi tap and Plex delays in the FAS compared to the QC.

Honestly, for what 99 percent of us need for delay reverb, the QC offers

 

[GTR37]

Yeah the reverbs could be improved...and delays.

I don't expect it to get to FAS level but look at the multi tap and Plex delays in the FAS compared to the QC.

Honestly, for what 99 percent of us need for delay reverb, the QC offers

I just realized he was probably talking about the Nano

In that case

it would be nice to have an TS808 or if they can't add a drive block maybe add a second capture block with a bank of drive captures

it would be nice to have the delay section have types the Analog and add the Dual

Reverb it would be nice in addition to the Mind Hall to have the plate as a second type

for Footswitching options since you already have switch 2 w a hold for tuner

have switch one use a hold to Bypass a selected Fx or FX combo so you can actually turn on/off FX

I think these things would be most useful and not a metric crap ton of work , it would also bring it more in line with recent ToneX development

 

[[Nathan]]

IAbsolutely disgusting behaviour. I would be FUMING with anger if I had such half-assed amateur children representing me publicly.... and again, that is ME saying that.... and I'm a fucking edgelord!!!

These guys... man... these guys.....

Isn’t it amazing how some of us are retired (or in your case, active) edgelords… you join something reasonably innocent like a ndsp discord and see C tier bait behaviour from mods. My reaction to it is a combo of

“How is this happening in an official discord“
“Coming off as massively insecure because any minor comment is expanded into some thing that it doesn’t need to be”
“Could be doing a better job at being an edgelord mod if that’s the route you’ve clearly chosen, c grade effort”

The mental gymnastics around defending those nano cortex marketing fail videos was amazing. One bad comment and “you obviously don’t understand humor”. Spending your free time defending a company 24/7 who doesn’t pay you or know your name, yikes

Anyway I’d been warned about that discord and when I joined it delivered. Nowhere’s perfect but it’s a unique place

 

[[Nathan]]

Everything NDSP does points to some sort of capture stitching. Whether they pair that with some other amp modelling for some portion of the final result I don’t know…. But it’s either all capture based or majority capture based, it’s just what’s in line with what they talk about all the time

In comparison to the uafx lion where I’ve watched a bunch of random videos. Multiple times they’ve talked about modelling components, switching things out… the amp they modelled had a bad component which they accurately modelled so they fixed the amp and also fixed the model… that’s the kind of talk where it’s a no brainer it’s component based. I mean they could have lied in a bunch of videos but seems more likely that it’s just what they used.

 

[norminal]

Everything NDSP does points to some sort of capture stitching.

Yeah, are we rally supposed to believe that Doug or the other developers are cracking open an amp chassis, probing, comparing to schematics, and modeling?

Or is it more likely that they’re mounting TINA to the front panel of an amp and clicking “start?”

Using TINA would arguably take longer to “model” because of how many combinations of knob settings and subsequent captures there are. That’s only speculation when comparing to how quickly someone like Cliff Chase can model an amplifier. But perhaps that’s the reason why it takes so long for NDSP to bring new “models” to their platform.