TMP, Would it Swing You If…

[Shredder777]

What stuff is missing that you'd want to see in there?

If you want an idea of how many effect types are missing from the TMP, just look at the effect list for the Line6 Helix, Zoom G11, and the Boss GT1000.

 

[[Nathan]]

If you want an idea of how many effect types are missing from the TMP, just look at the effect list for the Line6 Helix, Zoom G11, and the Boss GT1000.

Missing is arbitrary because I could cherry pick any modeller and then list a bunch of pedals and effects that are "missing". It's why I was asking what he'd want to see in there... for his needs whats actually missing?

I have basic reverb/delay needs and whenever I pull up the effect types I can get the sound I want, but obviously that isn't going to be the case for everyone. I like drives and boosts and for example the TC Electronic Preamp (aka Dirty Tree) is "missing"... but that list could also be 300 pedals long if I name everything.

I guess I kept seeing this rhetoric on the QC and TMP but when you actually look into it they kind of mostly do the job. It's only really Fractal that has the kitchen sink of effects in there... and if you look at the fractal forums theres still people asking for new amps and effects so its really a never ending / open ended kind of conversation.

 

[Shredder777]

Missing is arbitrary because I could cherry pick any modeller and then list a bunch of pedals and effects that are "missing". It's why I was asking what he'd want to see in there... for his needs whats actually missing?

I have basic reverb/delay needs and whenever I pull up the effect types I can get the sound I want, but obviously that isn't going to be the case for everyone. I like drives and boosts and for example the TC Electronic Preamp (aka Dirty Tree) is "missing"... but that list could also be 300 pedals long if I name everything.

I guess I kept seeing this rhetoric on the QC and TMP but when you actually look into it they kind of mostly do the job. It's only really Fractal that has the kitchen sink of effects in there... and if you look at the fractal forums theres still people asking for new amps and effects so its really a never ending / open ended kind of conversation.

Too many missing effect types to list. Look through the fx list of those three modellers.

 

[texhex]

Helix as of 3.8, pretty well hung:

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

 

[Shredder777]

Helix as of 3.8, pretty well hung:

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

Helix has the most, but many of them are variations on a theme. The reason I listed the Zoom and Boss is because they both have a ton of "creative fx", things like synths, LFOs, sitars, doublers, etc.

But hopefully that answers his question. No one could look at the helix list and think the TMP has "enough".

 

[[Nathan]]

Helix has the most, but many of them are variations on a theme. The reason I listed the Zoom and Boss is because they both have a ton of "creative fx", things like synths, LFOs, sitars, doublers, etc.

But hopefully that answers his question. No one could look at the helix list and think the TMP has "enough".

You've missed the whole point of me asking TB3 what he thinks is missing....

 

[timbuck3]

Helix has the most, but many of them are variations on a theme. The reason I listed the Zoom and Boss is because they both have a ton of "creative fx", things like synths, LFOs, sitars, doublers, etc.

But hopefully that answers his question. No one could look at the helix list and think the TMP has "enough".

Tmp has such a long way to go and with fenders track record i dont think they have what it takes to evolve a platform

 

[Sascha Franck]

Once you start applying their inbuilt generic post-EQ Blocks and the Generic pre-Linear Gain Boosts and Cuts for their "gain" controls, they start to turn to shit and begin to sound very un-amp-like almost instantly.

I used to slap 2 EQs onto my amps back in the day (one pre, one post) and they didn't start to become all un-amp-alike. Why would that be different with captures?

 

[BenIfin]

I used to slap 2 EQs onto my amps back in the day (one pre, one post) and they didn't start to become all un-amp-alike. Why would that be different with captures?

If you keep the Static Profile or Static Capture unchanged as made, then running anything in front or behind it will respond very much like the real Amp at those statically profiled/capture settings.

Its once you start adjusting the device-built-in generic EQ and the device-built-in generic pre-Linear Gain Boost and Cut that they start to turn to shit and begin to sound very un-amp-like almost instantly - reason being simply that the devices-built-in generic EQ stack and device built-in generic linear gain boost or cut works and responds nothing like the actual real amps real EQ stack and real Gain stack.

The only exception [so far] seeking to mitigate this - and i.m.h.o and experience doing it really well - is Kemper's ~40 or so modeled stacks that are used for their L/Profiling.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Its once you start adjusting the device-built-in generic EQ and the device-built-in generic pre-Linear Gain Boost and Cut that they start to turn to shit and begin to sound very un-amp-like almost instantly

But that's literally exactly the same as using external EQs.
And besides, it's not exactly my experience, either. I've found a Dumble clone capture at ToneHunt which is pretty well suitable for anything from clean to mean.
There's very certainly captures doing this better than others, but some are absolutely fine.
Whether gain and EQ stacks work the same as on the real amp isn't too relevant for me, as long as the results are decent.

 

[Sedaxel]

The only exception [so far] seeking to mitigate this - and i.m.h.o and experience doing it really well - is Kemper's ~40 or so modeled stacks that are used for their L/Profiling.

While I mostly agree in the "spirit" of your reasoning, I don´t completelly agree in your affirmations.

I think We already know that captures are static snapshots of an amp setting. However, and please don´t misunderstand me cos I know null tests doesn´t necessarilly tells the absolute truth, said null tests say that several platforms behave quite well when tweaked the static capture (for instance, the new Ampero does it pretty well, according to Leo´s test).

And, again being devils advocate, Kemper is not the only one trying to solve this issue. Headrush has a different approach by interpolating captures taken at different settings. If it works or not, or if it stills sound meh or not, is another thing. It´s still to be seen, though.

 

[laxu]

Headrush has a different approach by interpolating captures taken at different settings. If it works or not, or if it stills sound meh or not, is another thing. It´s still to be seen, though.

Headrush doesn't seem to even interpolate, they just map different captures on different ranges of the gain knob, but they can't do the same thing for other knobs so it's not that useful.

 

[Sedaxel]

Headrush doesn't seem to even interpolate, they just map different captures on different ranges of the gain knob, but they can't do the same thing for other knobs so it's not that useful.

But the gain shots must be interpolated anyway, I guess. Well, in fact there is still very few info and reviews on youtube. I´m still curious to see a good test of it.

 

[laxu]

But the gain shots must be interpolated anyway, I guess. Well, in fact there is still very few info and reviews on youtube. I´m still curious to see a good test of it.

Interpolation would blend between models through the different gain ranges, but to me it seems it just swaps the model abruptly based on the demos I've seen.

 

[BenIfin]

And, again being devils advocate, Kemper is not the only one trying to solve this issue. Headrush has a different approach by interpolating captures taken at different settings. If it works or not, or if it stills sound meh or not, is another thing. It´s still to be seen, though.

Headrush doesn't seem to even interpolate, they just map different captures on different ranges of the gain knob, but they can't do the same thing for other knobs so it's not that useful.

I wont re-post [yet again] my "endless" list of the limitations of null tests

What is interesting in Leo Gibson's most recent test - if a person does think null tests are "it" - was that when he took a Soldano Profile/Capture and changed the controls, the Kemper Liquid Profile which uses the Kemper modeled Soldano Stack beat them all .... Ampero Catch, Quad/Nano Cortex Capture and ToneX Capture in the null test "game" ... the Quad/Nano Cortex null test result absolutely shat the bed

The KPA L/P is the only platform trying to apply full range eq and gain stack modeling to profiling. The HR process only works for the gain control and even then its gain stage change accuracy is complexly untested compared to making the same changes to the real amps gain stage.

Anyway .... this is all way-off-topic for the OP :)

 

[Sedaxel]

Interpolation would blend between models through the different gain ranges, but to me it seems it just swaps the model abruptly based on the demos I've seen.

Well... if it ends up being so, it´d be another fail from HR. GuitarML does "conditioned captures" captures since a couple years, and Keith Bloemer (the guy behind the project) told me it´s basically interpolation. So... it looks like it´s an accesible approach.

And, in the short-term, I feel it´d be a more accurate and flexible approach than simulating amp stacks (you wouldn´t be limited to the simulated amps, but have the posibility to capture them instead). For instance, I could capture my Mesa Boogie Studio22+, which couldn´t be "liquid profiled" with a Kemper, since it hasn´t the tone stack simulated.

But I agree that this has derailed too much from the OP!