With cheaper players like Sonulab coming out that can run native NAM, I think the Nano Cortex may need built-in amp modeling to stay competitive.
Can you name a capture player, that could not load amp models when it was released but can do it now?
It’s a new model called StompStation PRO, and they say it supports both the NAM A1 and A2 models.
So, … no? Not really an answer to my question.
Sorry. I thought you were interested in the capture player I mentioned.
No problem. I was reacting to your statement here:
Because to my knowledge, no capture player later on became a modeller.
Yeah. And I think the Sonulab is a different product. If one wants NAM, then it´s a good option. In my case, I find much more interesting the Nano. Not only V2 captures are a step ahead of NAM in my opinion (it captures compression, being the only platform featuring it currently), but also offers on-device capturing and more advanced effects (pitch transpose, wah, noise gates…). The case itself is in another league… the Nano is luxurious, while the Sonulab is as simple as it gets and has those cramped footswitches… I´ve seen some screenshots of the manual that doesn´t show continuous MIDI parameter control either. It can only do on/off effects, it seems. There´s no word about outputs being balanced either.
I mean, in this moment, the Sonulab is not on par to this offering, at least for my taste.
Besides, I bought the Nano knowing it was only managing captures. If it had modelling, it obviously would be a plus, but I don´t need it at all (if I needed it, I wouldn´t have bought the Nano).
Well, again, this is not a rule. If you program a unit to be a capture player, then it becomes one.
If you change your programming later, you can add, remove capabilities.
It has nothing to do with processor limits.
AMD, Intel, ARM Processor etc.. all has low level programming languages.
Then there are other languages like C, C++, Python etc.. that you can program and they all are converted to processor language.
DSP has no limitation for any specific feature.
Maybe you do not know much about this and it’s OK.
Yeah… but they decided it´s only a capturer and capture player. Of course, you can re-program the thing… just the same as you can re-program a Line6 HX Stomp to turn it into a NAM player if you want.
I never said it’s a rule. I was asking for an example. Because while there are modellers (Hotone Ampero II for example) that got the feature to load captures, I know of no capture player, that became a modeller.
Arguably, Kemper added some modelling (tone stack) with liquid profiling.
That stuff still isn’t really modeling fully. It is the best example of a profile player that sort of got modeling. Their implementation of it is super convoluted and doesn’t seem that great
Neural stated the Nano is a capture player in the post I screenshot, and that it doesn’t do amp modeling. It probably has super limited DSP and RAM, so loading an amp model would make it so the other effects wouldn’t be able to run. It only has a very limited amount of effects and signal path.
Yes, exactly. So it is a business decision which can change and we respect if it does not.
However, there was a suggestion that modeling was DSP hungry and it was a DSP limitation.
That is what the debate started from. Check back messaging and you’ll see.
Frankly, I haven’t found any direct statements from NeuralDSP that the Nano Cortex was intended solely as a capture player. It seems to me that all the arguments regarding the insufficient DSP power to implement the modeling technology are based solely on an interpretation of NeuralDSP’s statement that plugins will not be added. My understanding is that NeuralDSP plugins are a truly unique story. I’m not sure that the Quad Cortex basic amplifiers and plugins are similar in terms of DSP power.
As far as I know, Reverbs are very power hungry. However, I do not know how heavy is an amp model. Even if it was the case, there could be a DSP limit meter and it would show the user how much was used or UI could say not enough DSP etc… Then again, they did Nano with fixed signal chain and that may mean allocation of certain blocks could use only certain amount of DSP and that would need a major rewrite to change. Or maybe not. We simply do not know. So here we are 
Frankly, mate… if this doen´t state that the Nano is solely using capturing, then it´s clear than you and I have quite different reading comprehension:
I´m not going to keep on this discussion, I think it´s not even depending on what you, me or anyone thinks about the subject… it´s just a matter of what NDSP thinks, which is that of the pic above.
2 Likes
“Neural DSP plugins use amp modeling technology, which differs significantly from the Neural Capture technology that Nano Cortex uses.” Which means it won’t have amp modeling l and the Nano uses Neural Captures
You just need to read this statement correctly (even though it’s contradictory). “The modeling technology used in PLUGINS is significantly different from the capture technology used in NANO.” I assume because the term “modeling” here clearly refers to deep capture technology. The entire statement is dedicated to plugins. This is QC’s selling point, something that goes above and beyond the basic amp models. The guys at NeuralDSP are well aware that every single effect in Nano uses modeling technology. Let everyone have their own opinion. In any case, the more noise here, the more likely NDSP will notice and consider the proposal. I wouldn’t be surprised if amp models simply appear in the next firmware update..)
Ok, mate you win.
Next firmware will bring us amp modelling to the NC.
1 Like
Yes, true so I agree that it was irrelevant to what we were discussing.
As far as modeling goes, it may depend how deep you do a behavioral study.
Let’s say you want to study the behavior of a rectifier tube and make your software respond the same way? Or.. take the most important, sound changing components. Obviously, speakers are other components we know as IRs so they are not in this.
However, every pedal ( drive, or distortion ), every chorus and delay and most DSP hungry reverbs are models of course. So, it depends on the depth of the modeling I guess.
Then again, If I was in Neural DSP’s shoes, I would add it if it was a quick win. Meaning, models are already programmed and used in QC. So, if they could plug that in to our fixed signal chain, it would be a quick win for them. It would certainly help NC sales.
Then again, like our friend said, it does not matter what we think.
We do not know what their plans are.
Maybe they are working on a Nano Sized QC called QC Nano.
Smaller Screen ( NC Size ) with 4 buttons and same UI priced just below $1000 ( $950 ).
This is a speculation I know but so is what we are doing about their NC plans.
However, I agree that they could look at these posts and get ideas.
This is the perfect use of forums. Get feedback from users and pick the quickest wins.
1 Like