Amp Capture (NAM, Tonocracy, etc) vs. Amp Models (Kuassa, Amplitube, Nembrini, Guitar Rig, etc)

A forum for discussion of all things guitar!
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

I tried neural amp modeler and i thought it was too simple for me. But at least it was free and easy and willing and loose
The only site for experimental amp sim freeware & MIDI FX: http://runbeerrun.blogspot.com
https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCprNcvVH6aPTehLv8J5xokA -Youtube jams

Post

tommyzai wrote: Mon Feb 19, 2024 5:00 am Is using amp capture software a dream or rabbit hole nightmare in comparison to amp simulator model software?

Thanks for any thoughts . . . .

Note: I adjusted the title and main question to be more universally useful and interesting.
IMHO, neither neural captures nor amp simulators are a dream or a rabbit hole. They are just two completely different technologies that are used to achieve the same purpose. There are pros and cons to both. Supposedly, the neural models are hyper accurate, and reproduce nearly exactly what was captured. That is its strength. If you like the sound of the capture, you'll love it. if you don't, you'll have to keep searching until you find a capture that suits you and your style. There is very little that you can edit in a capture, unlike amp models. Amp models on the other hand, give you the ability to adjust can shape the sound to become what you would like it to be. However, the sound quality and realism of the amp sim models vary and may not be as accurate as the neural captures. These are the major differences between the two. You can still add dirt pedals (FX VSTs) before your amp captures or amp sim models to evolve the gain of the sound. You can still add FX pedals FX VSTs) after the cab models for both captures and models as well. That's basically it in a nutshell. It's just two ways to accomplish the same thing.

People always capture their favorite chains, which to me can be an instant dream if that's exactly what you are looking for. But if not, there is not much that you can do to change things once the capture is done. Personally, I think the ultimate flexibility for Neural captures is to capture the amp channels clean. Some may disagree with me, but capturing the amp channels clean gives me the ability to utilize the basic tone of the amp, while allowing me to put whatever drive affects in front of the capture I want--it's more flexible. But it's all really up to you. To me, I use both and enjoy both.
C/R, dongles & other intrusive copy protection equals less-control & more-hassle for consumers. Company gone-can’t authorize. Limit to # of auths. Instability-ie PACE. Forced internet auths. THE HONEST ARE HASSLED, NOT THE PIRATES.

Post

audiojunkie wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 2:18 pm
tommyzai wrote: Mon Feb 19, 2024 5:00 am Is using amp capture software a dream or rabbit hole nightmare in comparison to amp simulator model software?

Thanks for any thoughts . . . .

Note: I adjusted the title and main question to be more universally useful and interesting.
IMHO, neither neural captures nor amp simulators are a dream or a rabbit hole. They are just two completely different technologies that are used to achieve the same purpose. There are pros and cons to both. Supposedly, the neural models are hyper accurate, and reproduce nearly exactly what was captured. That is its strength. If you like the sound of the capture, you'll love it. if you don't, you'll have to keep searching until you find a capture that suits you and your style. There is very little that you can edit in a capture, unlike amp models. Amp models on the other hand, give you the ability to adjust can shape the sound to become what you would like it to be. However, the sound quality and realism of the amp sim models vary and may not be as accurate as the neural captures. These are the major differences between the two. You can still add dirt pedals (FX VSTs) before your amp captures or amp sim models to evolve the gain of the sound. You can still add FX pedals FX VSTs) after the cab models for both captures and models as well. That's basically it in a nutshell. It's just two ways to accomplish the same thing.

People always capture their favorite chains, which to me can be an instant dream if that's exactly what you are looking for. But if not, there is not much that you can do to change things once the capture is done. Personally, I think the ultimate flexibility for Neural captures is to capture the amp channels clean. Some may disagree with me, but capturing the amp channels clean gives me the ability to utilize the basic tone of the amp, while allowing me to put whatever drive affects in front of the capture I want--it's more flexible. But it's all really up to you. To me, I use both and enjoy both.

Perfectly stated
We jumped the fence because it was a fence not be cause the grass was greener.
https://scrubbingmonkeys.bandcamp.com/
https://sites.google.com/view/scrubbing-monkeys

Return to “Guitars”