banner

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Neural DSP Users?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Masta' C View Post

    That's totally fair. Figured some of the vids might hit on the features you were wondering about. I haven't had time to watch them yet.
    Thoughts today...

    *It looks like it has a patch/scene switching scheme like the Helix.
    *Doesn't have instant patch switching or spillover.
    *The UI looks like the Helix.
    *Someone on TGP made a good point that this costs 1600, while an FX3 with a footswitch costs 3K. If this has similar processing power to the FX3, it is price competitive on "horsepower". This has the potential to run really expensive reverbs for less than an FX3. The FM3 apparently doesnt have enough processsing to run the expensive verbs with much else.
    *Its roughly the size of a GT1000, which is sweet spot form factor. Small enough to stuff in a bag and take with you, yet has a full compliment of switches.
    *Seems thin on features and FX.
    *No one has tested USB interface performance.



    It makes a good case against both the Fractal and the Kemper. It has a nicer interface than the Fractal and wins in price comparison against the FX3. It has a MUCH nicer interface than the Kemper and better FX.

    It still costs twice what I can get a Boss GT1000 for and has far fewer features. It doesn't sound "better" to me from demos I've heard, and I dont care about profiling, so I'm still not interested in it. But I understand where they are coming from. They are taking a bite out of Kemper and Fractal sales.

    Interesting question, what will Fractal and Kemper do next? Fractal has a 1K box which will continue to win customers on price. In a few years they will need a serious UI redesign. They could build a successor to the AX8, but it would look an awful lot like the QC, minus the pretty interface. I suspect they will pass on that.

    I suspect Kemper will ride off into the sunset.






    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Top-L View Post

      I suspect Kemper will ride off into the sunset.
      Dang, that's harsh! I think Kemper will come up with something once they start to feel the squeeze. Besides, many musicians are brand-loyal and "Kemper" is the OG profiler. Watch...that green paint and monochromatic LCD display will become as "classic" and desirable as a 50's Tele!

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Top-L View Post

        *Someone on TGP made a good point that this costs 1600, while an FX3 with a footswitch costs 3K. If this has similar processing power to the FX3, it is price competitive on "horsepower". This has the potential to run really expensive reverbs for less than an FX3. The FM3 apparently doesnt have enough processsing to run the expensive verbs with much else.
        *Its roughly the size of a GT1000, which is sweet spot form factor. Small enough to stuff in a bag and take with you, yet has a full compliment of switches.
        *Seems thin on features and FX.
        *No one has tested USB interface performance.


        It makes a good case against both the Fractal and the Kemper. It has a nicer interface than the Fractal and wins in price comparison against the FX3. It has a MUCH nicer interface than the Kemper and better FX.
        I think that kinda nails it - it kinda hits a few sweet spots on price/features/etc. It may not be the best at any one thing right now (again we're comparing a 1.0 of a totally new product - which isn't fair to compare even against a 1.0 of the FX3 or similar for example as those are still building upon the versions that came before them) but I do believe it will get better, the hardware itself seems very capable and I imagine things like gapless switching (which depending on your needs scene mode might work just fine for, or clever use of a split between multiple rigs running in a single preset as I've suggested a few times on the neural discord) will improve. Everything I've seen says it WILL do FX tails but I just don't think we've seen it demo'd yet.

        And I think it is a bit thin, especially on FX at launch, but again, I don't think, and I'm not sure why anyone else would, that they're' "done" that what it ships with is all you're going to get - far from it. Now if you absolutely NEED a specific reverb from moment one - then yeah, wait (or buy a pedal for it and put it in the FX loop). But I think the people realizing it's really a nexus of a few things, better than X at Y and better than A at B (but perhaps not better than EVERYTHING at EVERYTHING) while being priced kinda in the middle of the pack is exactly the niche I think Neural was trying to carve out here. So far I think they're pretty close to hitting it. More videos coming and hopefully a clearer picture will emerge as soon as "regular" people get their hands on it. I definitely plan to test it as an interface (8in/8out) and see how it holds up.

        I think there's drama and religion around any new piece of gear in music, everyone has a side and their beliefs and holy wars will be fought. It's half the fun, but it can also be awful. I think Neural has a solid platform (hence why I bought in) and I truly believe they're trying to make the "best" product - maybe that means the best THEY can make, maybe at some point the best in the industry (for a brief time anyway till the next thing gets released), but it's not a "bad" product, and I genuinely think the price is fair. When you consider a good high-end tube head can go for 2-4k and if you really want THAT sound it's worth it, but this is less than that and will at least get you close (and maybe very close at least in a blind test) but also get you much more capability beyond that one sound, I think it's fair.



        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by RexRemus View Post

          I think that kinda nails it - it kinda hits a few sweet spots on price/features/etc. It may not be the best at any one thing right now (again we're comparing a 1.0 of a totally new product - which isn't fair to compare even against a 1.0 of the FX3 or similar for example as those are still building upon the versions that came before them) but I do believe it will get better, the hardware itself seems very capable and I imagine things like gapless switching (which depending on your needs scene mode might work just fine for, or clever use of a split between multiple rigs running in a single preset as I've suggested a few times on the neural discord) will improve. Everything I've seen says it WILL do FX tails but I just don't think we've seen it demo'd yet.

          And I think it is a bit thin, especially on FX at launch, but again, I don't think, and I'm not sure why anyone else would, that they're' "done" that what it ships with is all you're going to get - far from it. Now if you absolutely NEED a specific reverb from moment one - then yeah, wait (or buy a pedal for it and put it in the FX loop). But I think the people realizing it's really a nexus of a few things, better than X at Y and better than A at B (but perhaps not better than EVERYTHING at EVERYTHING) while being priced kinda in the middle of the pack is exactly the niche I think Neural was trying to carve out here. So far I think they're pretty close to hitting it. More videos coming and hopefully a clearer picture will emerge as soon as "regular" people get their hands on it. I definitely plan to test it as an interface (8in/8out) and see how it holds up.

          I think there's drama and religion around any new piece of gear in music, everyone has a side and their beliefs and holy wars will be fought. It's half the fun, but it can also be awful. I think Neural has a solid platform (hence why I bought in) and I truly believe they're trying to make the "best" product - maybe that means the best THEY can make, maybe at some point the best in the industry (for a brief time anyway till the next thing gets released), but it's not a "bad" product, and I genuinely think the price is fair. When you consider a good high-end tube head can go for 2-4k and if you really want THAT sound it's worth it, but this is less than that and will at least get you close (and maybe very close at least in a blind test) but also get you much more capability beyond that one sound, I think it's fair.


          All fair points, I hope you enjoy it.

          Reading the TGP thread, the only thing that stood out was the videos of the aliasing performance, apparently the QC isn't great at it, which afaict, means there is unaccounted background noise; a side effect of trying to model analog signal in digital realm. Apparently Neural plugins have had some issues, but this may be fixed in software updates, increased sampling rate, etc.

          I don't fully understand it (haven't studied it specifically), but that is a technical area that separates various MFX processors.

          When I tried the Helix Native, I was very disappointed in the character of the distortion, there was something unmusical about it, something wrong with the top end that I didn't perceive until I had played it myself. That might have been aliasing?? Then there are all the reports about squirrels, which tells me modeling with perfect fidelity is not a trivial problem. Maybe on something like the Helix, they are CPU bound and have to make compromises with sample rate, which 97% of the users won't hear. But something like the QC should have enough power to process at a much higher sample rate, or at least have that capability in the future.

          That said, I really can't judge the QC character until I have played it myself. Initial listening to youtube demos were telling my ears there was some similarity with Helix, I am hearing some kind of hashing, some kind of blur, that *might* be the same thing I disliked about the Helix, which might be aliasing. Or it could be youtube compression algorithm and have nothing to do with the QC.

          IOW, I think its possible for a modeler to make mistakes or compromises on the math, that might make it sound inauthentic to some users. I don't think the QC is a slam dunk. Its not clear that it is better sounding, and the feature list is currently thin. In fact it might take years of tweaking and development to get it equivalent to some of the others. Verdict is still out. If you buy it now, you are entering into an extended waiting game of "when will they add ______?" It doesnt have a computer interface/patch manager atm, which tells me this is a hard pass, at least until they have that.
          Last edited by Top-L; 02-02-2021, 11:30 AM.

          Comment


          • #35
            I've been following the TGP discussion on the QC, but don't have an account over there. The conversation has taken a negative turn; it seems that Neural may intend to gate access to profiles. There are assurances that it will remain open (in that users can free trade profiles through their cloud), but it seems they are setting it up as a store front, so people/companies can sell profiles.

            This reminds me of something I read a couple years ago about the Kemper, that there were legal ramifications of "copying" an analog device and selling a digital copy of it. At a minimum there would be trademark and/or potential copyright issues.

            How I see this playing out is that Neural has anticipated the legal side of the profiling business, and will have a store front already set up when courts decide that profiles of specific amps are violating trademarks and/or copyrights. They will have the ability to license and sell digital "copies" of physical properties. When this happens the message to users will be, "so sorry, this is totally out of our control... but we cant allow this profile to stay on our cloud service because it violates copyrights/trademarks." Of course they will have liscencing agreements worked out with the amp builders, and "will be there for you", when the **** hits the fan. Which I suspect, they know it will.

            IMO, the whole thing stands to be very costly, depending on how certain legal battles play out. Its OK for someone to build a model that "sounds like" a Fender or a Marshall, and give it a clever name, but when its an "actual" profile of the "actual" amp, giving it a clever name won't be enough to avoid copyrights.

            The interesting thing I wanted to point out, is if the profiling world takes this legal turn, Neural will be positioned to benefit from it. In fact, they are probably pushing for this outcome.

            Still not a fan of the whole profiling schtick. All it shows is that a computer can match EQ and choose gain staging so that the profile matches what it was listening to through the mic. You can do all this by ear with a good modeler and in the end it is more versatile that a folder full of profiles.


            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Top-L View Post
              Its OK for someone to build a model that "sounds like" a Fender or a Marshall, and give it a clever name, but when its an "actual" profile of the "actual" amp, giving it a clever name won't be enough to avoid copyrights.
              Completely disagree.

              First, modeling technology has been trying to do just this since the beginning, including Fender's own modeling technology. Advanced iterations of modeling software have literally tried to recreate entire (patented) circuits digitally, right down to the board-level components and have gotten away with it.

              Additionally, all recorded music is essentially a capture of the specific character and sound of real life products. Yet Fender doesn't have the right to my music simply because I used their amp to create my own sound "profile" and record it digitally.

              There's plenty of precedence to keep lawsuits at bay, such as the longstanding Kemper technology, but also plenty of other reasons ($$$) why licensing arrangements could be a valuable tool for Neural in the future.
              Last edited by Masta' C; 02-12-2021, 05:25 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Masta' C View Post

                Completely disagree.

                First, modeling technology has been trying to do just this since the beginning, including Fender's own modeling technology. Advanced iterations of modeling software have literally tried to recreate entire (patented) circuits digitally, right down to the board-level components and have gotten away with it.

                Additionally, all recorded music is essentially a capture of the specific character and sound of real life products. Yet Fender doesn't have the right to my music simply because I used their amp to create my own sound "profile" and record it digitally.

                There's plenty of precedence to keep lawsuits at bay, such as the longstanding Kemper technology, but also plenty of other reasons ($$$) why licensing arrangements could be a valuable tool for Neural in the future.
                Its not a matter of disagreeing. It hasn't been tested in court. What I read is that it probably will be, and then the whole landscape will change.

                If I am selling a trinket, and you make a mold of that trinket and recast it, is that legal? What if it was made with brass, and you recast it in tin. Even through it was made with different material, it would still be a copy.

                I'm not just playing devils advocate, there was a discussion about this regarding Kemper.

                With the QC, because they have control over the cloud distribution, it would actually benefit them, and badly hurt Kemper if a legal decision decided profiles violated copyright. Keep your eye on this over the next couple years. It will play out in the courts. Until then we are just guessing the outcome, but its clear to me that Neural would benefit.

                Comment


                • #38
                  I see Neural benefiting either way from the model they are proposing, just possibly for a different reason than you imply.

                  Your assumptions about infringement haven't played out in court, either. Kemper, Line6, and other modelers have been at the same game for nearly 2 decades now.

                  Also, your "making a mold and recasting it in a new material" analogy isn't accurate. They aren't buying a Fender amp and creating a physical clone just with a different label on the front or a different color of tolex on the cab (cough::Bugera::cough). They are modeling a non-physical, digital audio profile after a sonic footprint produced by a physical product.

                  I suppose a better way to think about it is this...if I take a photo with my cell phone of a Fender amp, is it infringement? It's obviously a "snapshot" of the real product, but it's fully digital and nothing like the product itself, which only exists in physical form. Thus, Fender can't come along and claim that my picture of their product is equivalent to the product itself, because it's an entirely different medium.

                  The other analogy I already used is music...Fender doesn't own all music made with their amps simply because the audio effectively "captures" what their amp sounds like, even when this audio gets shared/sold for profit.

                  The fact that Fender, Marshall, Peavey, etc. have also dabbled with modeling of competitors products in their own products strongly weakens their case.

                  I guess what I'm saying is, you can assume all you want, but there is far more precedence to suggest there's little that amp manufacturers can do to stop this direction of modeling/capture than to fight it. Not saying lawsuits won't arise, because this emerging tech is definitely a threat to the big companies, but I think Fender will end up approaching Neural to willingly offer a "licensed" suite of amp profiles before they ever win in a legal battle.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Masta' C View Post
                    I see Neural benefiting either way from the model they are proposing, just possibly for a different reason than you imply.

                    Your assumptions about infringement haven't played out in court, either. Kemper, Line6, and other modelers have been at the same game for nearly 2 decades now.

                    Also, your "making a mold and recasting it in a new material" analogy isn't accurate. They aren't buying a Fender amp and creating a physical clone just with a different label on the front or a different color of tolex on the cab (cough::Bugera::cough). They are modeling a non-physical, digital audio profile after a sonic footprint produced by a physical product.

                    I suppose a better way to think about it is this...if I take a photo with my cell phone of a Fender amp, is it infringement? It's obviously a "snapshot" of the real product, but it's fully digital and nothing like the product itself, which only exists in physical form. Thus, Fender can't come along and claim that my picture of their product is equivalent to the product itself, because it's an entirely different medium.

                    The other analogy I already used is music...Fender doesn't own all music made with their amps simply because the audio effectively "captures" what their amp sounds like, even when this audio gets shared/sold for profit.

                    The fact that Fender, Marshall, Peavey, etc. have also dabbled with modeling of competitors products in their own products strongly weakens their case.

                    I guess what I'm saying is, you can assume all you want, but there is far more precedence to suggest there's little that amp manufacturers can do to stop this direction of modeling/capture than to fight it. Not saying lawsuits won't arise, because this emerging tech is definitely a threat to the big companies, but I think Fender will end up approaching Neural to willingly offer a "licensed" suite of amp profiles before they ever win in a legal battle.
                    I liked my analogy, but this is an argument for lawyers.

                    You're right there may be liscenced packs before direct challenges. But that will bolster later challenges. They will assert they have been selling licensed packs of ____ amp for ____ years and then ask, how can it be legal for other people to give them away? The only people who wont be on board that line of thinking will be Kemper. It will be Kemper vs everyone else. I hope you can see how this will play out.





                    Comment


                    • #40
                      The discussion on TGP is a dumpster fire - "Cloud Gate" - and everything else is people seriously going off the rails making massive speculations about things for no reason and more than half the people doing it seem to be the ones who are "out" who have decided NOT to buy, etc etc, and yet NEVER stop ****posting in the thread - It's not an airport, you don't need to announce your departure, just GO, thanks. But they never go. Whatever else, I've gained a lot of respect for Doug for dealing with the disaster over there and remaining pretty calm and neutral.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Soon enough, the gear forum talk will strictly be:

                        "Dude, my amp has a Quad Core and 64GB of RAM!"
                        Lefty Lounge Lizard's Guitars & Amps Extravaganza

                        Fastest ears in the West

                        "The truth comes out eventually"

                        My Soundcloud

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by LLL View Post
                          Soon enough, the gear forum talk will strictly be:

                          "Dude, my amp has a Quad Core and 64GB of RAM!"
                          I miss the days when PC's had real tube power sections

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Yeah, but those VTPC's were really heavy...and had a much larger footprint.

                            Vacuum Tube Computer

                            I miss the '80s (girls) !!!

                            Seymour Duncans currently in use - In Les Pauls: Custom(b)/Jazz(n), Distortion(b)/Jazz(n), '59(b)/'59(n) w/A4 mag, P-Rails(b)/P-Rails(n); In a Bullet S-3: P-Rails(b)/stock/Vintage Stack Tele(n); In a Dot: Seth Lover(b)/Seth Lover(n); In a Del Mar: Mag Mic; In a Lead II: Custom Shop Fender X-1(b)

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              For anyone interested, I've been keeping a playlist of QC videos and update it as new ones come in:

                              https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL...P714OawaycdGma

                              There will be another update today on release dates. If things hold as they are (no more delays) then Tier 1&2 orders should get billed in the next week or so, with shipments to follow and arrive by end of March and then retailers following pretty much immediately after that. I'm very much looking forward to getting this thing in-hand

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                The entire industry is experiencing delays. Seems to be the theme of the year

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X