- Messages
- 7,751
Me too. Because fundamentally I think the Kemper sounds bad. Not subjectively bad. Objectively bad. The Neural captures are WAY better. If I can't have NAM, then I'd rather have Neural's. Even over ToneX probably.
The NDSP Nano Cortex…
- Thread starter fiftyshadesofslay
- Start date
2dor
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,121
NC captures would definitely be more consistent than the bulk of the stuff you get on the Tone.net cloud simply because Neural's hardware is in charge of the profiling process & owns the I/O.
laxu
Rock Star
- Messages
- 6,667
Unfortunately that doesn't help that much. I found with the QC that the levels into the unit would matter for how good captures you got, and it wasn't intuitive to dial them in using any onscreen indicators.
While you would likely solve issues like different reference levels (requiring input gain compensation), the captures can still be all over the place depending on how they are made.
2dor
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,121
What I found is just leaving all levels (in the I/O section) and Impedance at their defaults gets the best results.
Another critical piece I discovered by accident is that the Neural Capture renders the best results when it's not connected via USB (and I'm using UDG cables) during the process; so just have the minimum stuff connected:
- IN1: guitar
- IN2: mic or loadbox
- Capture Out: to amp
- Headphones Out / Out1/2: for monitoring
Whenenever I did this, the results consistently turned out better.
Last edited:
AFKAEjay(retired)
Roadie
- Messages
- 548
Honestly I hope neither gets beaten..so they both can continue to deliver stuff we like
NAM..I saw the measurements where it rolls on top, but I can’t actually hear it myself. Between Kemper and QC capturing….both deliver to my ears, to the point where I don’t care if I play original or capture. So atm, it’s not really part of considerations for me. Plus..if NAM really takes a leap in use, I expect that all hardware manufactures would have no choice but to support it on their hardware..QC and Kemper included.
laxu
Rock Star
- Messages
- 6,667
Which proves my point, lots of unintuitive stuff to the process. I can understand USB could introduce extra noise in some cases, but for levels you'd think that a high level without clipping would be beneficial for the process due to a better signal to noise ratio. But weirdly that doesn't seem to be the case and if I remember right, leaving the level a bit lower resulted in more accurate captures.
BenIfin
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,166
OK ... pretty sure I get it now.
If you put a full amp+cab Capture in Block 3, block 4 must remain empty as the only thing it can run is an IR which is not what you want if you already have the amp+cab in Block 3 (?)
I would think a future update could/might free-up Block 4 from only ever being an IR Block (?)
2dor
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,121
Even so, that IR block would be useful for something like a headphone corrective-EQ IR. That said, having the flexibility to use the blocks freely is the better option.
paisleywookiee
Rock Star
- Messages
- 6,462
Acoustic guitar patch, with an acoustic guitar IR.
deadpool_25
Roadie
- Messages
- 896
I agree that it would be better if that block was not limited to just IRs since it's pretty common that an IR will be baked into an amp capture. With that said it's also fine as-is imo.
I think it's more goofy that the other blocks are limited in the way they are. It's not horrible, but it does seem somewhat arbitrary. Why can't you put the delay, reverb, and modulation effects in any pre or post spot?
Again, it kinda looks fine as-is after this update. Yes, it's still limited but far less so and in what seems like acceptable ways.
I think it's more goofy that the other blocks are limited in the way they are. It's not horrible, but it does seem somewhat arbitrary. Why can't you put the delay, reverb, and modulation effects in any pre or post spot?
Again, it kinda looks fine as-is after this update. Yes, it's still limited but far less so and in what seems like acceptable ways.
paisleywookiee
Rock Star
- Messages
- 6,462
Yeah, it’d be nice to be able to put the phaser in front of the amp.
- Messages
- 5,877
Ironically, the arbitrary, fixed block order kind of brings us full circle to where the Kemper toaster was on launch.
deadpool_25
Roadie
- Messages
- 896
The only reason I never tried the toaster was because it looks like a damn toaster. Pfft. By the time they came out with something I didn't hate the look of I was already into Fractal and had no powerful desire to change.
- Messages
- 5,877
I kind of liked the way it unabashedly looked like exactly what it was: a well-engineered computing device. And it looked nothing like any of its competition, which was refreshing.
But I wasn't crazy about the fact that they silk-screened labels like MOD, DLY, and REV right over some of the buttons, suggesting (as with many things KPA) that it was going to be CK's way or the highway.
deadpool_25
Roadie
- Messages
- 896
And now I've moved from Fractal to QC. Having a QC, I haven't yet convinced myself I need a NC. I might get one as a backup if I was gigging, but I'm not.
laxu
Rock Star
- Messages
- 6,667
It's possible they'll add support for a modulation effect in the pre-fx later. Usually they are less demanding than drive models.
If the NC uses a multi-core design it could be that they have one core for pre-fx + capture and the capture is just too demanding to run delay/reverb + capture on that core. IRs tend to have their own accelerator afaik.
- Messages
- 5,877
Yeah, I think the NC is very cool, but it doesn't fit any of my "use cases". On the go, a full-fat onboard GUI is just as important to me as it is on my desk. And the NC's DSP/ routing isn't powerful or flexible enough - I'd have to build a whole pedalboard around it, which would ultimately increase my footprint, and possibly even the expense, compared with a QC.
In cases where I'm running a handful of effects to a real amp, I'd just as soon buy a few stompboxes and call it a day.
Similar threads
![[Nathan]](/data/avatars/s/0/613.jpg?1726885163){kind=avatar}
