Posts by pippopluto

    There are four things I'd like to see in RM.

    The first one would be the "service window" (not sure how to properly call that) that opens when for example RM updates to not float on top of everything else: very annoying when it takes time to do its things and you want to do something else.

    The second request: currently, RM's left column shows Rigs, Presets and Performances as main entries, each one divided into "MyProfiler" and other assorted entries.

    I'd love to have the possibility to set things so that MyProfiler is consolidated as an entry by itself, divided into Rigs, Presets and Performances.
    This would make working on the KPA's contents more efficient IMO.


    I'd love to be able to see separate folders for the various types of presets, so that for example all my cabinets are shown in their own.

    Last, when in the Editor, right-clicking for example on the Cabinet slot gives access to the specific preset list. I've noticed that the windows that opens has no vertical scroll bar, making things very slow in the case of a long list. I'd love to have one, or at least to have the PageUp/Down keys available so that scrolling would be (much) faster.

    Thanks :)

    There is a future money-maker; change the Neural Cloud to be a subscription service with varying levels of cost based on the storage space you use.

    Well, we don't have info about that yet tho. We are acting as if we had just discovered a big conspiracy... I don't know about NDSP's plan, but this doesn't sound fair to me :)

    a direct profile of an amp paired with a full profile of a cabinet with a clean amp

    As other pointed out, there's a specific interaction between any given power amp an cab tho. It's not (only) a matter of how much "neutral" is the amp: every cab will make an am sound in a specific way depending on the cab's impedance curve (module and phase).

    On stacking Captures: Might be handy if you can capture a pedal and then stack it, but we'll have to wait and see if the system works as advertised.

    They published demos about that already. Pete Thorne IIRC.

    Sounded legit to me.

    I'd just be surprised if the QC's full rig captures did not allow you to separate the cab from the amp. That would seem like a step down from the Kemper's amp+cab modus operandi.

    I believe the QC's mind flow is different. Think more like a modeller where some components are captured. If you start thinking like a Fractal user you'll see the potential.

    In general, no unit on the market does everything others do, and while Studio profiles are something great, the possibility to stack captures looks great as well to me.

    No reason to believe the QC will be intrinsically inferior overall IMO.

    Before long term friendships are harmed

    Oh, don't get me wrong :) I just stop discussing things when no matter what you write the other one responds the same things as before: this just means you are not really building anything... this bores me the most :D

    A block can be moved around in the fx chain, but there are no separate components.

    The key element of discussion here seems to me to be the fact that the QC can run several captures in series or parallel: you can assemble a rig with one or two captured pres, one or two captured power sections, several captured pedals and an IR. You can also capture a whole rig (in the fashion of a Studio profile), whose components would of course be non-detachable.

    So it depends on what blocks you use.

    You're talking as if somehow, other kinds of Captures existing and other features, somehow makes the drawbacks I mentioned non-existent and that's just ridiculous lol.

    Oh, I did not mean to feel ridiculous...

    This discussion has turned in a sort of competition where one has to show that the other is "wrong"; not my interest. I like to bring thoughts and elements on the table and discuss them.

    Nothing wrong in you having your ideas. I am out :)

    the only threads I removed from other gear were copy & paste posts of press releases of some keyboards IIRC

    I couldn't say it was you sir or other mods. I remember quite clearly the specific answer given by that person tho.
    Anyway, it's not an issue since things have gone a different route.
    Speaking in general, IMO you guys are right to let members discuss about everything, even when a comparison is somehow unfavourable or critic for the Profiler: because the same discussion is certainly going on elsewhere in the Net anyway, and because those who don't are just cutting a bad figure for themselves IMO.

    Christoph posted this in this thread:

    "Don't worry! It's absolutely fine for us to discuss even competition here!"

    Yep, this is what I said

    If you end up finding a Capture you like and want to start working with, and the person who did the Capture only did a full rig Amp+Cab Capture (which will probably be about half of the Captures that are around due to that being the most efficient and simple way to Capture a setup and it takes up the least CPU with one block), then you're stuck with that Cab in that Capture. THAT is my point, my friend.

    Well, this means that - in your projection - at least half of the captures will be separated modules. So every user will have things the way they like best. Don't forget that Neural is already going to make several captures available at launch, and their declared plans are that other will come regularly.

    Yep, I am assuming things... like you are :) No-one is able to draw conclusions about any strategic flaws in the device and its planned development ATM. Your critiques may end up being a real issue or not: we just don't know.

    What I am saying - again - is that QC users won't have to be stuck with "Studio" captures. IOW, the imitation of not being able to detach the cabinet is not going to be an issue for them as it would be for the Profiler.
    Also, they have models that they can mix with captures.

    All in all, I don't see in the concept any serious limitation that would make the QC not enjoyable for anyone: each device has its characteristics, no device can do everything all the others can, and each one has got something others haven't. I am sure many will be happy with the QC, and they will be willing to give something up in favour of its strengths.

    I believe there's room for anyone and anything :)

    BTW, talking about what "Other Gear" means, I remember one of the mods closing a thread (not sure it was about the QC already... or was it Fractal or Atomic?) with the reason that by "other gear" they merely meant other hw to be used in conjunction with the KPA.

    Glad they have apparently changed their mind on the matter :)

    When you're talking about the whole full rig Capture thing, there's literally no way to use IR's with a "full rig" (AMP+CAB) Capture, no matter what way you spin it. You can't turn off or swap out that Cab portion of the Capture if the Capture has a Cab in it to begin with. That's all I meant

    I am pretty well aware of what the differences are between the two approaches ;)
    What I am saying is that QC users won't have to change cab in a "studio capture" hence missing the whole original thing, because the possibility to stack captures allows them to just choose any pre, any power section and any cab/IR and create a rig. So they can profile the whole chain and also its parts, and play with the block as they like.

    Hope this clarifies :)

    I'm most curious about the speculation that the Neural QC's capture technology will somehow obviate the need to mic up an amp properly. Does anyone have the skinny on how that would work?

    No, as others I think this is just related to direct captures actually.

    Maybe Kemper even sounds better. But if you focus on "authenticity" it is not 99 % and only 1 % missing here.

    We have examples of perfect profiles tho, where the player themselves was not able to tell which as which.

    See for example the films about the Nashville Profiling Sessions

    I imported a few IR's directly into Rig Manager via drag and drop from a Windows Explorer folder and then drag and dropped one of them onto the Cab section in Rig Manager, then compared it with the same IR in the Axe-Fx III. I'm honestly not hearing any notable difference. What kind of differences are you hearing?

    I don't use IRs (I find this to be one of the greatest features of the KPA LOL), but I've actually often heard about Cab Maker not respecting the original IRs in the conversion.

    Things may have changed nowadays tho.


    I'm talking about a full rig capture. In the Captures equivalent of a Studio Profile, there's no way to turn off that Cab or to try a different one with that Capture without using 2 cabs on top of each other at that point.

    Sure. But from what I have been gathering the typical (perspective) user loves to play with IRs and components.

    Look at Kemperland: since the KPA can use IRs, the majority of users from the USA (which are always a most important basin for such products) likes the idea of... changing the Cab with an IR.

    The same stands for other blocks IME.

    At least half of the Captures available at the start will be full rig Captures with Cabs in them and if you don't like that Cab, tough stuff cos you're stuck with it lol. That's my point.

    My point is that people will just wait, and enjoy models and what's available at launch. And the library of captures will grow, like it did for the Profiler. Heck, at the beginning there was no Performance mode, no Editor, no merged profiles...

    what I mean by stacking Captures, is that it's only an advantage if people want to stack Captures of Drives in front of amps or do complex routing, which is a small percentage of users.

    Mhhh... no, I've already read of a lot of users who love the idea to be able to stack a pre and a power amp. And capturing those "sub-parts" is way easier than profiling a Studio rig.

    I'm sure people will feel differently and you seem to and that's okay :) we can still be homies haha

    Absolutely, I don't aim at winning any sort of competition :)

    As I see it, we can express different ideas without having to conclude that "we agree to disagree", as if a "victory" (or its ghosts) were anyway inescapable ;)

    the lack of ability to seperate Amp+Cab in full Captures

    The only advantage is that you can stack Captures

    Strategically speaking the two statements of yours cancel each other: you can stack a pedal, a pre, a power section and a cab, something the KPA can't do. Hence the versatility to separate amp and cab. And this came quite late in the KPA's timeline.

    One major thing a lot of people haven't considered is that the 3rd party Capture market will be extremely small and limited at the start

    Well, if this had stopped Kemper users at its time we wouldn't possibly be making this discussion... ;)

    for Pete's sake

    Now, now... forJosh's sake, who the hell is this Pete?!

    I like the Kemper ON BOARD Pedals and capture a pedal would be never a reason to buy the QC!

    Well, that would not be the only reason for sure.

    You can capture many amps and mix them in series or parallel, for example.

    Further more, Parallel Path in the KPA is really basic and doesn't allow for much versatility.

    Also, I like the QC's ability to freely place fx before or post the amp(s).

    I don't really understand how anyone could use more than one instrument into a single device live.

    I mean, Helix supports this, Axe FX supports this ... I haven't seen such a setup ever in my life.

    I understand this for vocals + guitar or for busking but for shows ...

    Well, it depends on what kind of show... Not everything is RnR! The QC would be perfect for two guitars and two mics, for example. Also, there are instruments with multiple outputs, and the QC would come in handy.

    Personally, I'd have no problems in sharing a processor with bandmate anyway :)

    Yes this is something i dont like! Why the hell the QC is still not on the market? The people are talking over 1 Year about this unit. When you search it on the Thomann site then you can read that the QC arrives in 2 months. Not a cool thing.

    I think we should give value to the fact that 2020 has been a horrible year for the whole world. Many people have been dying, many manufactures have been closed for months, the need to switch to remote working has indeed slowed down many processes... Ah, and there's a lack of availability for integrated circuits worldwide for related reasons.

    Be sure NeuralDSP are more concerned than any of us about delays!

    where is anal retentive detail oriented YouTube Demo guy who walks down the amp models? They all exist, ad infinitum for Axe, Helix, and the others ...........

    Well, the unit is not out yet...

    My opinion is that ndsp is not trustworthy

    How? Doug Castro is a player, and they have been selling stomps for years

    The QC doesn't significantly do anything that other units don't already do.

    How? It's the only device in the world that can mix profiles in series and parallel

    I think you missed my whole point. People like what they like, regardless of how "linear and transparent" it is on paper. I was just saying that if he's having to fight it so much, maybe look for something he doesn't have to fight. I didn't see anything in the original post about looking for the most linear and transparent cab. He just wanted to sound good, which is subjective to everyone.

    I hear you, I am just pointing out a different perspective, if you will.

    If I decide to not use a guitar cab it's because I want the most faithful sound to what my KPA outputs with full profiles. I see no reason for spending money in a linear solution that's... not linear, and colours my tone outside my control: this way, I'd have to deal with three variables: how the profile was made, how I tweak it and the cab's sonic signature.

    Also, if I tweak on a linear system I am most likely to have to do the least adjustments when I use different PAs in different venues.

    As for the OP, he asked whether the CLR has an intrinsic issue: playing harsh at high volume. The answer is definitely not, because it is (for my experience, many's reports and by design) the most linear and transparent solution your money can get. Basically, if you don't like what comes out of a CLR (properly set and placed in the room), you are not liking what's coming out of your Profiler.
    OTOH, if the quest is for a cab that alters the sound in a way that one likes, that's another story; but the OP was about perspective issues in a CLR.


    OP: from the discussion it seems likely that your issue is that you make your sounds at low volume; also, check for the cab placement in the room, specially if there're a lot of reflecting surfaces (naked walls, windows, large desktop(s), ceiling, floor... this will increase "disturbs" at the reflecting frequencies.

    Its also possible that the CLR doesn't sound good to you. Just because it's popular and expensive doesn't mean it's perfect for everyone. A lot of people love Mission Engineering active cabs, and when I tried one, I didn't like it one bit. Also had a bad experience with another high end FRFR, the Friedman ASM-12. I ended up with a Laney FR-112, and it's great. I would say that if you keep having to fight it for good sound, then try something else out.

    I know where you're coming from, but a linear cab is not like a guitar cab and, when properly designed and built, its function is to translate what the device amount outputs into moving air without colouring the tone.

    In this respect, if the outcome is unpleasant it's the profile that needs to be tweaked (provided that the placement and the room aren't adding some issues).

    The CLR is very linear and transparent; certainly there are some other so called "FRFR" cabs

    out there that aren't so much.

    I realise that if someone doesn't like the sound then they don't, but if what a user is after is a cab that faithfully translates the profile's sound, then they don't want a guitar cabinet's personality and should be using the most linear cab they can afford.
    I doubt there's something more linear and transparent than a CLR out there for the money.