Should NAMM amp simulation be considered a standard going forward by all manufacturers?

[Boudoir Guitar]

Yea I definitely see that. I think that challenge is what made me ask the question. Is there going to be a tipping point when their competitors, say Atomic, puts together a great piece of hardware that does both really well and has good effects menu as well.
Im wondering if it is inevitable that they will have to adopt it or is there enough wrong with captures that the tipping point will not arrive?

Nah. If its going to happen, its not going to be Atomic (they've been making multi-effects devices with amp modeling for a decade or so now and...you've used Toneocracy and see just how (not) far they've come on the effects front. I want to root for the underdog (and did, for that particular underdog, for quite a while), but at somepoint the underdog grows old enough to be...the loser).

Maaaaaaaybe Nux/HoTone/etc.,

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

Except that I just want to use my own captures, so none of that matters.

It doesn't matter to you. But put yourself in the position of somebody putting 10+ years developing a product platform. Are you gonna wanna put that thing out in the world and let people judge it based on some idiot loading in a NAM capture of a QC capture of a POD where the input signal was set waaaaay lower than instrument level?

 

[Sedaxel]

Except that I just want to use my own captures, so none of that matters.

If someone told you that you can try any amp in the world with impressive accuracy by just loading a profile in your device... Wouldn't you be interested?

I get what you say. I use profiles of my own amp because I just wanted a "smaller copy of my rig". Fine.

But, if in a couple years I start different projects that require some amps that I don't have, and buying them is really expensive... It'd be just awesome to know that I can sound really close to that amps with easy to find-and-use profiles.

Or simply for the pleasure of playing great amps without having them.

Yeah, that's what both modelling and capturing is about, and what they will end up being, for sure.

 

[TubeStack]

It doesn't matter to you. But put yourself in the position of somebody putting 10+ years developing a product platform. Are you gonna wanna put that thing out in the world and let people judge it based on some idiot loading in a NAM capture of a QC capture of a POD where the input signal was set waaaaay lower than instrument level?

Not really a line of reasoning that makes sense to me. People can make amp models sound crappy, too. Crappy captures existing doesn't seem like a reason not to include the option of captures at all.

 

[Sascha Franck]

I would welcome NAM to become a standard (or any other accurate capturing format). And I think it inevitably will at some point, just like IRs.
However, personally I'd likely only use it once it's really accurate enough to capture some oddball stuff, because that's what I'm actually interested in.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Nammda Nammda Nammda and...Omega Moo

 

[norminal]

Nammda Nammda Nammda and...Omega Moo

 

[Enchilada Jones]

It doesn't matter to you. But put yourself in the position of somebody putting 10+ years developing a product platform. Are you gonna wanna put that thing out in the world and let people judge it based on some idiot loading in a NAM capture of a QC capture of a POD where the input signal was set waaaaay lower than instrument level?

I don't think Fractal or Line 6 would suffer any kind of negative judgement by new or old customers if tomorrow the systems they have been putting out there for a decade included the 'capture block' to be added to a signal path if the user wanted it.
Not nearly as much as they will likely suffer if they don't have it and other potential rivals rise up offering everything plus captures.
Quad Cortex made a lot of sales and looks to be considered a solid rival in the market and did it with lots of negative reaction buzz.

 

[TubeStack]

Not nearly as much as they will likely suffer if they don't have it and other potential rivals rise up offering everything plus captures.
Quad Cortex made a lot of sales and looks to be considered a solid rival in the market and did it with lots of negative reaction buzz.

 

[norminal]

 

[Jarick]

as neat as the concept is I just don’t like profiles or captures as primary modeling. It seems better for drive pedals or for amp without cab.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Whatever you do; do NOT correct the spelling in the thread title.

 

[Enchilada Jones]

Was that reverse psychology because it bugs you I didn’t fix it? Or is your inner Loki just punking me (or someone else) and I’m too dumb to figure it out? I’ll do whichever you want but I need guidance lol

 

[bikescene]

Can NAM capture drive pedals, like the QC?

Yes NAM can capture pedals. It does overdrives and distortions fine. Fuzzes are less than 100% accurate from my own capturing experiences.

 

[ragingplatypi]

I think a NAM capture block makes sense in Helix, and won’t actually cause a stir.

I’ll never make my own IR, but used some made by folks more talented than myself for a while. Then Line 6 redid the cabinets, and it sounded just as good as the IRs I was using, plus it’s more intuitive to use. And I understand why folks still use their IRs with the Helix.

The difference of having a capture block is that it’s just in reverse order, that Line 6 has already made the great sounding amps and effects that are intuitive to use. But I don’t blame someone wanting to load in that Joe Bonamassa Dumble (or whatever toots your horn) into their Helix.

Half the greatness of the good gear is not about the sound anyway (hardware, routing, digital I/O etc).

 

[luckymethod]

I understand that, for example, Line 6 didn't want to 'poach' amp profiling out of respect for Kemper...and I remember Fractal was accused of getting too close to that with some kind of 'EQ Matching'...

I doubt that's the reason. Either patents or not believing your market is focused on that use case.

 

[SKU]

I understand that, for example, Line 6 didn't want to 'poach' amp profiling out of respect for Kemper...and I remember Fractal was accused of getting too close to that with some kind of 'EQ Matching'...
However NAMM I believe, is developed and distributed as a free technology and it looks like it is going to be around from now on.

If my understanding as I laid it out above is correct my thought is companies like Fractal and Line 6 should incorporate 'NAMM Blocks' as a an option just like they would incorporate 'tape delay' blocks.
Am I just being greedy to have what I want in those systems I love or is NAMM tech the low hanging fruit they seem to be refusing to add to the menu?

Out of respect?

 

[Enchilada Jones]

Out of respect?

Well you read it and tell me what he meant then…

I've answered this before, but the gist is that we've looked very closely at it and understand both the theory and the math. I will say we have zero plans to give up on proper component-level modeling, however.

The thing with NAM is that it's not particularly scalable. Other methodologies like what're found in IK and QC tend to work better in embedded, non-desktop environments.

It wasn't so much Kemper's patent that's kept Line 6 from pursuing profiling as us having respect for Christoph. And not wanting to be copycat douchebags.

 

[BenIfin]

Short answer ... no ... no-one will ever agree or concede that someone else's "process" is better than theirs.

Long answer ... well ... for static captures you've already Kemper, Tonex s/w and a Tonex Hardware Pedal and a few others. And for s/w only users .. NAM is very-marginally " the most null test accurate ".

Industry standard for capturing / profiling ? Closest we've had is Kemper ... it was / is / and will continue to be ubiquitous for quite some time I'd conservatively suggest.

From an A.I perspective ..... Tonex is the runaway market leader .... what the Tonex Pedal and included software delivers at the price point it delivers it has made it an "instant" classic.

Once A.I or non-A.I capturing can accurately and easily capture the full range of an Amp at all its settings and all their interaction levels ... then that will be the "new" King ... but it wont be a "standard"

I don't know about TH-U ... but so far the only one supplying a solution in this space is Kemper L.P's.

We don't have an "industry standard" guitar lead or "industry standard" 59 PAF Pickup .... and these a just ultra-basic things made from wire, plastic and some magnets

Ben

 

[Orvillain]

It is all garbage. Throw it all in the bin and get yourself a Dual Rectifier.