Still a Nano Newbie. But there have been some audio observations when it comes to Factory vs. User Captures. As has already been noted in this forum, or any amp modeler forum, loudness levels of many “non”-NeuralDSP created user captures can be all over the place when it comes loudness levels. But when I audition NeuralDSP Captures and Presets, all of them sound perfect, or nearly perfect, both in loudness as well as frequency spectrum. This observation goes even deeper though. I have my Nano Settings set for Latching Mode, which allows the unit to display the knob LEDs exact position as saved.
So with that in mind, I noticed all Factory Preset’s, Gain, Bass, Mid, Treble are consistently at 12 noon. The FX Amount LEDs are the only ones to change. What this seems to tell me is that NeuralDSP Captures are done in a manner where the tone they’re capturing has been dialed in perfectly as far as loudness and frequency response. So it’s like, literally taking the time to get the amp/stomp/etc. sounding exactly as you want it to sound and making sure the capture process is capturing that sound identically. So there’s no real (or significant) tweaking required after the fact, because everything was dialed in before the capture occurred.
Obviously, NeuralDSP has their Capture process down to scientific perfection. And that’s what users need, a very detailed account of “How To Capture the NeuralDSP Way” A technical guide would help us users out greatly, rather than by trial and error. When I go online to the Cortex Cloud and see 13,000+ captures, I’m like, I don’t have time to audition all of these. So I start searching online to see which Cortex users get the highest praise for their captures.
Okay, enough of my rambling…seems like the Cortex has the same issues as TONEX, too many disappointing captures.
The capture block on the Nano Cortex, the slot on the unit that can load and use a Neural v1 or v2 capture, does have gain, bass, mid and treble setting that can be tweaked. However these settings aren’t stored in the capture itself rather are settings that are stored and recalled on the preset level.
So that’s why they don’t move or change when you try out various captures.
About the Neural Cloud my advice is to checkout the Neural Captures first. All are shared on their account, read the details about each capture and gainstage the preset.
“The capture block on the Nano Cortex, the slot on the unit that can load and use a Neural v1 or v2 capture, does have gain, bass, mid and treble setting that can be tweaked. However these settings aren’t stored in the capture itself rather are settings that are stored and recalled on the preset level…So that’s why they don’t move or change when you try out various captures.”
You’re right, it’s the PRESETS where the capture is tweaked. But to me, this shows how non-intuitive and challenging it can be to wrap your head around what exactly is occurring on the Nano when auditioning captures and presets.
However, I need to make some clarification about the Factory Presets, since everything is all intertwined. My observation has been that when auditioning Factory Presets, the Gain, Bass, Mid, and Treble LED indicators do not change, only the FX Amount parameter LEDs change value. So if my description is accurate, NeuralDSP does not use those parameters to tweak their captures used with their Factory Presets. That’s why the LEDs on those parameters always display at 12 noon. You can see this for yourself while editing with Cortex Cloud. Select each Factory Preset and take notice that all LEDs remain at 12 noon (except for the FX, that changes). To verify this further, load a Factory Preset, then tweak all the parameters to where the LEDs are not positioned at 12 noon, but don’t save the preset, select another Factory Preset, LEDs all display at 12 noon. Now reselect the Factory Preset you tweaked earlier (but didn’t save), all the LEDs are at 12 noon.
So, this behavior is “part” of what I was observing. But I took that a step further (in my mind) and it dawned on me that if the Factory Presets all load with parameter values at 12 noon, then NeuralDSP Factory Captures are captured with such precision that there is no need to tweak their captures when they create Factory Presets. The only real tweaking done on Factory Presets is through the FX blocks. But they still allow you to tweak their captures.
I’m sure I’m over analyzing this, as I do with most music gear, but all of my thinking was trying to discern why so many User Created Captures sound so drastically different from the NeuralDSP ones.
The factory captures in your Nano Cortex has been carefully selected by Neural to give a very pleasant experience. The captures you can find on the Cortex Cloud are not. Even the captures made by Neural are more “all over the place”.
Exactly, you summed up my observations and experience perfectly. I agree, the Default Factory Presets and Captures that come with the Nano are very well done. So much so, that I’ve made a list of the Presets and Captures I liked best, which was mostly all of them. In fact, I was so impressed that I was excited to hit the Cortex Cloud to audition additional NeuralDSP Captures, only to experience disappointment and confusion. How could NDSP’s Cloud Captures be so “all over the place” as we’ve both noticed.
I haven’t dismissed auditioning Cortex Cloud captures, but I came to realize that the best approach (and quickest) for creating great sounding presets would be to tweak and modify the default factory ones. I guess I’ve grown accustomed to downloading complete rigs/presets like on the FM3 and Tone Master Pro. But those units are modelers vs NDSP captures.
Thinking about the Nano, I was expecting to go online and download some more great sounding NDSP created “presets” just to find out, it’s only captures which can be downloaded and not presets. I would like to think that the ability to share presets with their specific captures is something all users desire. And perhaps in a future update, the Nano will have that functionality.
Actually I think that a lot of amp captures in the Capture Cloud are very well done but they don’t match my guitar, my guitar pickups and my lacking know-how for gain staging and preset building.
Take the “Brit 1987” series of amp captures by Neural for example. If you preview them on the Nano you’ll likely get a quite loud and bumpy ride.
I think the “Brit 1987 6” suits my LP with humbuckers very nicely and the “Brit 1987 5” is more crunch making them a great pair for “clean” and “crunch” through an 412 Brit TB impulse response.
So does this mean that the rest of the captures are poorly made? No, this was made by Neural with their latest v2 capture tech. Surely other people are loving and using the other captures in the “Brit 1987” series.
The part about gain staging is spot on — I think a lot of the “all over the place” feeling with Cloud captures comes down to the fact that different users record their captures at different input levels, with different guitars, different pickups. So even if the capture itself is technically good, you’re comparing apples and oranges before you even touch the tone controls.
What I’ve noticed personally is that the loudness problem goes even deeper than just dB levels — a dense high-gain capture and a cleaner one can measure identically on a standard LUFS meter and still feel completely different in volume. The ear weights spectral density, not just amplitude. It’s a bit like the Fletcher-Munson thing you mentioned.
I ended up going down that rabbit hole far enough that I built a small browser tool to measure perceived loudness across my own presets. Nothing to do with the Cloud specifically, more for my own recording workflow — but it was eye-opening to see just how far apart things that “measured the same” actually sat perceptually.
Anyway, l4rs3rik’s advice about starting from the factory presets and tweaking from there is probably the most practical path for the Nano. The Cloud is a bit of a jungle right now.
I think Guns and Roses were looking towards the future when they wrote “Welcome To The Jungle” and you’re so right, it’s a mess of loudness differences. A significant part of my Nano volume issues comes from the fact that I’ve been using modelers for the past 15+ years. Started with Line 6, then moved to Fractal (which was/is my gigging rig), then added the Fender Tone Master Pro. I’ve always purchased “presets” created by individuals that I know they know what they’re doing. Like Marco Fanton and AustinBuddy, or any presets created by Pete Thorn, etc. I eventually dipped my toe into the TONEX gear to try out “captures” and was immediately turned off from what I heard, so the TONEX gear was sent back.
I’d written “capture” technology off as a not for me platform. That was until the beginning of this year, 2026. I heard the Factory Presets on the Quad Cortex and was actually astounded. And my mind was opened enough to give capture technology another chance. Then the Nano came out and was a less expensive way to dive into NeuralDSP technology. And it was a winner. So I’m concentrating on selling some music gear to afford a Quad.
Something related worth mentioning. UA’s Guitar Paradise Studio. I’ve owned just about every software/plugin “Guitar Amp/Fx” apps, of which many are really good. But when I tried UA’s amp plugins, they were the best sounding I’ve ever heard in my life, far better than any hardware mentioned in this thread. UA amp modeling only exists in their individual amp stomp pedals. I purchased their UA Enigmatic ‘82 Stomp, but it wouldn’t integrate easily into a Nano rig, so a Quad rig is required. However, if UA has plans to release their own multi-amps-effects pedalboard (and it was affordable) I’d be looking into that as well.
But at the end of the day, we know it’s best to tweak the Factory Presets on the Nano.
That’s quite a journey. Line 6, Fractal, Nano, with TONEX in between. The volume inconsistency problem follows you across every platform because it’s not really a device problem, it’s a psychoacoustic one. The Preset Leveling tools in Fractal and the output block adjustments help, but they measure dB, not how the ear actually perceives loudness so a clean preset and a high-gain one can measure identically and still feel completely different in a mix.
That’s actually what pushed me to build something to address it from the recording side. You record the same passage through each preset, drop the files into the tool, and it gives you the exact correction in dB based on perceived loudness not just LUFS. Works on any modeller, any DAW. I’ve been using it on my own QC presets and it’s saved me a lot of mix headaches.
If you’re curious I can share the link might be useful once you get the Quad.
I dont know what you mean by affordable, but I don’t associate UA with that word. The enjgmatic is a $400 digital pedal. The QC is $1800. The QC mini is $1400.
You’re right, what does “affordable” actually mean, since it’s very subjective. And I completely agree, UA isn’t in the easily affordable at all. In fact, I was going to return the Enigmatic to zZounds and went as far as to get the Return Authorization Number. Unfortunately, some unexpected health issues arose and I ended up missing the return window. And while it’s a great sounding pedal, the $400 could have been put to better use on other gear. But to kinda explain my thinking in regard to affordable guitar gear, I was focused more on the lower cost of the Nano vs. the QC and QC-mini. So I guess in my mind, any multi-effects pedalboard around $500 or less seems like it’s in a somewhat more affordable price point. But again, that too is so subjective. $500 is a lot of money for many players. Heck, the only way I’ve been able to buy any guitar gear is through zZounds 12-Monthly Payments Plan (or their 6-Month Plan).