# Add ability to run .NAM models in the QC
**URL:** https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994
**Category:** Feature Requests
**Created:** [May 2, 2024, 7:56am UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994 "2024-05-02T07:56:14Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@2dor](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/2dor)
#### Post date: [May 2, 2024, 7:56am UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/1 "2024-05-02T07:56:14Z")
I know it’s a long shot but since Line6 and Two-Notes seem to be entertaining the idea of allowing their next hardware units to load .NAM models, just throwing this out there:
Would Neural DSP be open to allow folks to incorporate .NAM profiles in their Quad Cortex units / signal chains?
I think if this gets accommodated, QC could see a surge in adoption. The Neural Capture works ok for some stuff but not so much for other use-cases; having the option to run either a Neural Capture or a NAM model would make the QC a lot more attractive.
What do you folks think?
---
### Author:  [@BenM](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/BenM)
#### Post date: [May 2, 2024, 8:51am UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/2 "2024-05-02T08:51:21Z")
For an ‘end user’ perspective, it would be a huge plus to to be able to run NAM profiles on the QC.
But, I can imagine that NDSP is reluctant to do this, because:
- It would inevitably allow a direct comparison of NAM / QC profiling capabilities, and thus depreciate the current profiling technology of the QC. (_albeit, for me, it is very different : the QC is way faster, but NAM is more accurate and based on actual IA technology_)
- If NDSP creates a Marketplace one day, it would perhaps cut some revenues from the marketplace, since there’s a lot a quality NAM profiles for free. (_mind you, there’s also good quality QC captures for free, so I don’t see this point as important_)
- There might be some legal / copyright issues (_even if NAM is open source, it doesn’t means that everyone can ‘steal’ the code for their own profit, but I haven’t checked the NAM licence kind…_)
- As a company that is (_has been?_) seen as ‘cutting edge’ in modeling, it would be an admission of weakness to incorporate ‘foreign’ technology in their ‘flagship’ modeler.
- NAM is _currently_ the promising technology, but we don’t know what awaits us tomorrow… If NDSP invest in this technology, they’ll have to maintain it during years, and it has a cost.
It would be much more interesting for NDSP to enhance the current capture capabilities of the QC in order to stay at the level of the competitors (ToneX, NAM) , but there is currently nothing that indicate that they will enhance anything in this area… Perhaps after the CorOs 3.x releases ? (Plugin integration is consuming a lot of resources)
My $0.02 anyway, only NDSP knows.
---
### Author:  [@2dor](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/2dor)
#### Post date: [May 2, 2024, 8:57am UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/3 "2024-05-02T08:57:53Z")
Getting NAM models in (not using the tech to train models) should not be any more alien than importing an IR into the unit.
There’s value in both takes: improving Neural Capture and allowing users to import their already-trained NAM models into a QC signal chain.
There’s been a lot of talk about a Marketplace for years but nothing has come to fruition yet and even if it does, I don’t suspect it’s too much trouble to restrict that Marketplace to NDSP-proprietary Neural Capture format files.
The NAM license allows commercial products to make use of the software through the MIT license.
IRs were a “Fractal” thing right before they got wide adoption. NAM files could end up the same. If you think about it even with IRs - some are great (same goes for NAM profiles), while some have you looking elsewhere.
---
### Author:  [@NYdeathgrind](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/NYdeathgrind)
#### Post date: [May 4, 2024, 8:33pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/4 "2024-05-04T20:33:09Z")
Had this thought when i saw two notes implemented nam models into their genome app. I think neural def should give us the option to use them. Otherwise alot of people will choose nam and whatver hardware options come out. Allowing nam models will only help keep people on the qc more.
---
### Author:  [@DeedeeRamone](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/DeedeeRamone)
#### Post date: [May 11, 2024, 5:26am UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/5 "2024-05-11T05:26:06Z")
No! Option paralysis will end productivity for ever.
---
### Author:  [@2dor](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/2dor)
#### Post date: [May 11, 2024, 9:14am UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/6 "2024-05-11T09:14:13Z")
How is it any different than Neural Capture? I’d like to accurately profile & use my gear in the QC
---
### Author:  [@NYdeathgrind](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/NYdeathgrind)
#### Post date: [May 15, 2024, 12:35am UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/7 "2024-05-15T00:35:10Z")
NAM’s profiling algorithm is more accurate but also takes longer to accomplish. Able to capture fuzz is big plus. Tonex says it’s able to capture fuzz pedals too but i havent done it personally. This is the main plus i see in adding the nam algo into the QC.
---
### Author:  [@bedroomrockstar89](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/bedroomrockstar89)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2024, 8:00pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/8 "2024-12-14T20:00:57Z")
This would be so amazing! Another application would be the ability to load neutron quantum speaker cabs which use NAM to model cabs in a much more realistic way than tradition IR’s
[https://www.neutronstudios.com/quantumspeaker](https://www.neutronstudios.com/quantumspeaker)
---
### Author:  [@userjones](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/userjones)
#### Post date: [April 15, 2025, 3:06pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/10 "2025-04-15T15:06:59Z")
The hotone AMPERO II stage does capturing of amps and runs NAM profiles.
---
### Author:  [@MP\_Mod](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/MP_Mod)
#### Post date: [April 15, 2025, 4:42pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/11 "2025-04-15T16:42:17Z")
It actually converts them into their own format
---
### Author:  [@Bredala](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/Bredala)
#### Post date: [April 15, 2025, 7:10pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/14 "2025-04-15T19:10:27Z")
I tried the NAM stuff as I did think it was special. I think the QC needs it.
---
### Author:  [@2dor](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/2dor)
#### Post date: [April 19, 2025, 6:49pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/16 "2025-04-19T18:49:44Z")
The problem with the Sonicake is it degrades (noticeably so) the quality of the profile so in that sense, there’s nothing gained from running NAM on it vs Neural Captures on the QC.
The only hardware unit which does not degrade NAM profile quality is the Dimehead NAM player for now.
Supposedly, the Darkglass Anagram (to be revealed Tuesday, April 22nd) will be able to load NAM profiles as well; if it preserves the profile quality or not is something I’m very curious to find out.
---
### Author:  [@2dor](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/2dor)
#### Post date: [April 19, 2025, 8:22pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/18 "2025-04-19T20:22:51Z")
It’s actually measurable & vids on YT showcase it. I’m not holding my breath for this feature nowadays but figured I’d at least post so folks are aware of the quality hit during NAM profile conversion on some of the new wave of NAM loaders that have hit the market recently.
---
### Author:  [@Kfletcher](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/Kfletcher)
#### Post date: [April 20, 2025, 9:05pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/20 "2025-04-20T21:05:56Z")
Very intriguing. Is this the unit you have?
> **[Sonicake Pocket Master Compact Multi-effects Processor (QME-10)](https://www.sonicake.com/products/pocket-master?gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAAobKibrvh18y053dpHtrM_mfiks90&gclid=Cj0KCQjwtpLABhC7ARIsALBOCVr72-qYCWTpEhWUeIVWh1XD9V0GgvcKWJIf4jHyn0g8PgnuVPPGi9IaApEsEALw_wcB)**
>
> Pocket Master is a compact multi-effects processor with potent circuit design and high quality digital effects. It contains 100+ various effects suitable for different musicians, whether you play electric guitar, acoustic guitar, bass, even keyboard,...
---
### Author:  [@Stinger22](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/Stinger22)
#### Post date: [April 20, 2025, 11:25pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/21 "2025-04-20T23:25:53Z")
Yesssss sirrrrrr.
---
### Author:  [@Drjoeljr](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/Drjoeljr)
#### Post date: [April 21, 2025, 5:48pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/22 "2025-04-21T17:48:46Z")
The pm sounds great. NAM player sounds better, but the pm isn’t THAT far off.
\*\*\*Update - I take it back, the Pocket Master compresses it a lot. I ran the same NAM file in pocket master thru mixbus side by side with NAM Player, and it was quite different. ITs still pretty good, but PM loses more than I thought it did.
Lots of room for improvement.
---
### Author:  [@Drjoeljr](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/Drjoeljr)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2025, 5:16pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/23 "2025-04-22T17:16:58Z")
One of the “biggies” are going to add a nam block at some point. Fractal, Tonex, Headrush, Kemper, Line6… whoever does it is gonna rule. There are a lot of NAM profiles and a lot of interest.
I hope NDSP gets there first.
---
### Author:  [@Kfletcher](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/Kfletcher)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2025, 5:34pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/24 "2025-04-22T17:34:53Z")
Did anyone see the release today of the darkglass anagram? It runs NAM models. I’m not sure if that should give us QC users hope or not?
---
### Author:  [@xush](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/xush)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2025, 5:36pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/25 "2025-04-22T17:36:41Z")
I wouldn’t think so unfortunately, since Korg now owns DG.
It looks like everything the Nano should have been. It’s going to tempt a lot of bassists, I’m sure
---
### Author:  [@Stinger22](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/u/Stinger22)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2025, 8:21pm UTC](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994/26 "2025-04-22T20:21:54Z")
I saw the one for bass but also being played with a guitar. Are they going release a dedicated guitar one?
[Next page](https://unity.neuraldsp.com/t/add-ability-to-run-nam-models-in-the-qc/13994.md?page=2)