Tonex aliasing

[paisleywookiee]

I was sorta kidding. Real question, how much more difficult is the ToneX and NAM than Kemper?

The cabling isn't difficult. The results from the captures vary wildly.

But also, most dummies already opt out of that kind of thing anyway. How many dummies do you know that want to learn computer programming for instance?

You're taking the "dummies" term too literally. Plenty of people would love to capture their own amps. It's not analogous to computer programming. At all.

This is like overclocking. In the PC review space, the enthusiast channels like to pretend that their audience can't overclock and thus never explore obvious settings that 99% of their viewers will make. As if the typical person who built a computer and plays guitar can't figure out how to set levels. They like to pretend that their reviews are for average "dummies" but their viewers are high information and experienced with computers.

No, it's definitely nothing like that either. It's using a computer. That's it.

 

[paisleywookiee]

So why do you think ToneX regressed in this space compared to Kemper? Yet they seem to be selling like gangbusters?

Lets stop pretending the average user is "average".

Regressed? It introduces the variable of interfaces and computers. While not difficult things to use, the leveling and such has been a problem. And I'm not pretending anything about what's average and what isn't.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Profiling on a Kemper is dead simple. Successfully capturing with a Tone-X where the end result matches the amp for me was Ugh-city. Using their own interface. There is enough of a tonesharing infrastructure and freebies combined with it's cheap point of entry that it has done well I'd say.

 

[paisleywookiee]

Profiling on a Kemper is dead simple. Successfully capturing with a Tone-X where the end result matches the amp for me was Ugh-city. Using their own interface. There is enough of a tonesharing infrastructure and freebies combined with it's cheap point of entry that it has done well I'd say.

Right. It's just a drag, IMO, to a own a capture-capable device that I can't easily turn around and capture stuff exactly how I want it. It's why this stuff will always be secondary for me.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Right. It's just a drag, IMO, to a own a capture-capable device that I can't easily turn around and capture stuff exactly how I want it. It's why this stuff will always be secondary for me.

Yeah I had 5 seconds of "hey it'd be cool to find a firesale stage and add the VP4 to it via spidf!" the other day. Profiles just aren't near as fun for me.

 

[paisleywookiee]

Yeah I had 5 seconds of "hey it'd be cool to find a firesale stage and add the VP4 to it via spidf!" the other day. Profiles just aren't near as fun for me.

Nor I. One of my main Fractal patches is a Recto 1 Red tweaked to hell, that just wouldn't be possible IRL, without a bag of cash and a donor amp.

 

[JiveTurkey]

FAS Rectos are GOAT tier modeling

 

[banned]

FAS Rectos are GOAT tier modeling

Really? I kinda like the L6 one better - feel it's got more of that buzz at lower MV.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Really? I kinda like the L6 one better - feel it's got more of that buzz at lower MV.

You poor child

 

[banned]

LOL....maybe just me :)

Something about the high-end that I feel sounds 'realer' on L6 on this model.

 

[JiveTurkey]

I like the L6 Recto as it's own thing! It doesn't hang with my IRL experience with the amp though.

 

[DLC86]

Nor does it means it sounds worse because you have measured more aliasing.

?? We were talking about amp tonestacks and the fact you can't easily replicate their behaviour with a generic EQ, what has aliasing to do with that?

Anyway, sounding better or worse is subjective, some people hear some stuff, some people hear other stuff... But aliasing is measurable hence objective, and it's a thing a real amp doesn't have, so the less a simulation has it, the (objectively) better it is.

My first question was, did you run the software or the pedal. If this problem is solved by more oversampling, certainly then can do that in the software.

I already answered that question. Not sure that can easily be done with AI captures, most likely not with already done ones.
E.g. NAM captures currently can be "oversampled" only by making captures at 96 or 192 kHz, but you can't change that afterwards

Your measurements indicate they are using less than 8x oversampling (because Fractal uses 8x ... they must be using less.)

My measurements indicate they're not using oversampling at all, harmonics reflect right at 22.1 kHz.
And there's other weird stuff caused by a wrongly implemented sample rate conversion too that appears if you run the plugin at 48 kHz.

As I already said, this is all covered in the original thread from last year, so go read that if you want to dive in.