5 ms·

NAM lets you essentially copy the sound/tone of a guitar pedal (no time based effects like reverb) or guitar amplifier. This means I can share a copy of my $350

NAM lets you essentially copy the sound/tone of a guitar pedal (no time based effects like reverb) or guitar amplifier. This means I can share a copy of my $3500 amp to people for free. Before this and a paid product called Tonex came out, it cost $1500+ to “profile”/copy digitally a guitar amp. The price floor for this stuff just became $0-400 depending on what solution you go with and what gear you have. This will be highly disruptive to the market. People can also clone paid plugins with this software and share it on Facebook. This is like when mp3s came out, but for guitar gear.

TomWhitwell 4y ago
Is it fair to say this clones a device with one specific set of knob positions? So if I want to clone a 5 knob fuzz pedal in every possible setting, that’s a lot of cloning to do? I may have misunderstood.
- ofalkaed 4y ago
  You understand correctly. All of the amp modeling and virtual analog stuff is still fairly limited and they largely focus on getting the stereotypical sounds of the source, not the full range. Modeling things more fully is not difficult but it is very processor intensive, many spice programs can do it quite well but are far from real time. So simple analog amp modelers like the sans-amp offerings still out perform the digital emulations in some ways, they might not be as accurate but they tend to be more versatile, which is best depends on what you are after. I have been on again off again doing a fairly intensive write up on this topic going into all the technical details (primarily the hardware side) complete with a fairly full featured/accurate digital recreation of the original MiniMoog VCF in PureData but it is not exactly a priority and progress on that is rather slow. Edit: I should mention that despite the models not providing the full range of the source they still do provide a full range of their own. You still have your volume and tone controls but they operate on the model, they are not part of the model. They have gotten fairly good at faking things and the tone controls do not sound so much like post recording EQ like they did in the early modeling amps but they also do not interact with the sound like they do in the real amps where changing the bass level does not only change the bass but also affects the gain/distortion/frequency characteristics of the tubes on either side of it as well.
  - Archit3ch 4y ago
    > I have been on again off again doing a fairly intensive write up on this topic going into all the technical details (primarily the hardware side) complete with a fairly full featured/accurate digital recreation of the original MiniMoog VCF in PureData but it is not exactly a priority and progress on that is rather slow. I'd be very interested to see your approach. So far, the most promising (non-NN) technique I've seen requires taking a symbolic inverse of a sparse matrix, which is just barely possible for a simplified pedal model.
    - ofalkaed 4y ago
      I am doing things in just about the most idiotic and inefficient way, break the circuit down into easy to emulate blocks then emulating how they interact by adding in stuff which mimics that interaction. Essentially I break down the circuit into a series of blocks which are easy to model in isolation and then show how the interactions between these blocks are very complex and difficult to model. The starting point is essentially the classic simple moog model with some extra stuff and I add in bits between those blocks to mimic the interactions while comparing it to various digital models of the filter, spice simulations and the real deal. So I slowly make up a big massive mess of a patch in PureData that eats my entire CPU but does a fairly solid job of the emulation then try and simplify things down to show how each part affects the whole.
      - Archit3ch 4y ago
        > The starting point is essentially the classic simple moog model with some extra stuff and I add in bits between those blocks to mimic the interactions while comparing it to various digital models of the filter, spice simulations and the real deal. Yup, there are two main philosophies: start from a very accurate (e.g. SPICE) model and simplify it enough that it runs in real-time or start from a simple model (e.g. biquad) and add nonlinearities as required. If you want talk more about the other approach, I just added an email in my profile. ;)
        ofalkaed 4y ago
- Bad_CRC 4y ago
  With the Kemper Amp (a profiling amp) it goes through a series of "noises" to get a profile: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL7tWFhH8E8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL7tWFhH8E8 But yes, you get the sound of a specific EQ settings.
  - earthnail 4y ago
    The Kemper amp is mathematically super elegant. Two matrices A and B, and one nonlinearity in between. That’s it. All the noise profiling does is figure out A and B, which correspond to the impulse response before and after the distortion. When you send through a clean signal, you measure A*B. When you get distortions, you know you’re only measuring B (because they are introduced after A). Then you derive A from that.
    - jononor 4y ago
      That is very interesting. So you have any resources to learn more about this approach to modelling?
    - klipklop 4y ago
      Yeah the newer approach NAM used is much more accurate. Especially for high gain stuff. There are still some aliasing problems with NAM though. Even with that most would never hear about the difference of the real $3500 amp and the free NAM plug-in. Playing feel on the other hand I guess is a different argument. Not sure if that is a placebo though. I do prefer the zero latency of all analog gear.
      - gizajob 4y ago
        I always think part of the ongoing use of valve amps is because of their transient response. It would be impossible to check in practice, but I think the transient latency is lower than solid state, because they're amplifying in a free field inside the tubes. I'm not sure how digital physical modelling and class-D power amplifiers is ever going to fully replicate this. The Kemper is naturally more convenient and feature-packed, but a valve amplifier will always do the one job that really counts, basically perfectly (until it breaks or catches fire).
- klipklop 4y ago
  With the current state of the tech it’s best to do several captures with the various “sweet spots” a player is likely to use. You will often see files describe the gain or tone knob position or what channel was used on an amp. It’s also not uncommon to create a capture with your pedal plugged into the amp as well. Popular for high gain heavy metal profiles to have a tube screamer in front of the amp. Stuff like the Kemper/Tonex/NAM work great with this kind of setup.

TomWhitwell 4y ago

Is it fair to say this clones a device with one specific set of knob positions? So if I want to clone a 5 knob fuzz pedal in every possible setting, that’s a lot of cloning to do? I may have misunderstood.

ofalkaed 4y ago
You understand correctly. All of the amp modeling and virtual analog stuff is still fairly limited and they largely focus on getting the stereotypical sounds of the source, not the full range. Modeling things more fully is not difficult but it is very processor intensive, many spice programs can do it quite well but are far from real time. So simple analog amp modelers like the sans-amp offerings still out perform the digital emulations in some ways, they might not be as accurate but they tend to be more versatile, which is best depends on what you are after. I have been on again off again doing a fairly intensive write up on this topic going into all the technical details (primarily the hardware side) complete with a fairly full featured/accurate digital recreation of the original MiniMoog VCF in PureData but it is not exactly a priority and progress on that is rather slow. Edit: I should mention that despite the models not providing the full range of the source they still do provide a full range of their own. You still have your volume and tone controls but they operate on the model, they are not part of the model. They have gotten fairly good at faking things and the tone controls do not sound so much like post recording EQ like they did in the early modeling amps but they also do not interact with the sound like they do in the real amps where changing the bass level does not only change the bass but also affects the gain/distortion/frequency characteristics of the tubes on either side of it as well.
- Archit3ch 4y ago
  > I have been on again off again doing a fairly intensive write up on this topic going into all the technical details (primarily the hardware side) complete with a fairly full featured/accurate digital recreation of the original MiniMoog VCF in PureData but it is not exactly a priority and progress on that is rather slow. I'd be very interested to see your approach. So far, the most promising (non-NN) technique I've seen requires taking a symbolic inverse of a sparse matrix, which is just barely possible for a simplified pedal model.
  - ofalkaed 4y ago
    I am doing things in just about the most idiotic and inefficient way, break the circuit down into easy to emulate blocks then emulating how they interact by adding in stuff which mimics that interaction. Essentially I break down the circuit into a series of blocks which are easy to model in isolation and then show how the interactions between these blocks are very complex and difficult to model. The starting point is essentially the classic simple moog model with some extra stuff and I add in bits between those blocks to mimic the interactions while comparing it to various digital models of the filter, spice simulations and the real deal. So I slowly make up a big massive mess of a patch in PureData that eats my entire CPU but does a fairly solid job of the emulation then try and simplify things down to show how each part affects the whole.
    - Archit3ch 4y ago
      > The starting point is essentially the classic simple moog model with some extra stuff and I add in bits between those blocks to mimic the interactions while comparing it to various digital models of the filter, spice simulations and the real deal. Yup, there are two main philosophies: start from a very accurate (e.g. SPICE) model and simplify it enough that it runs in real-time or start from a simple model (e.g. biquad) and add nonlinearities as required. If you want talk more about the other approach, I just added an email in my profile. ;)
      - ofalkaed 4y ago
Bad_CRC 4y ago
With the Kemper Amp (a profiling amp) it goes through a series of "noises" to get a profile: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL7tWFhH8E8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL7tWFhH8E8 But yes, you get the sound of a specific EQ settings.
- earthnail 4y ago
  The Kemper amp is mathematically super elegant. Two matrices A and B, and one nonlinearity in between. That’s it. All the noise profiling does is figure out A and B, which correspond to the impulse response before and after the distortion. When you send through a clean signal, you measure A*B. When you get distortions, you know you’re only measuring B (because they are introduced after A). Then you derive A from that.
  - jononor 4y ago
    That is very interesting. So you have any resources to learn more about this approach to modelling?
  - klipklop 4y ago
    Yeah the newer approach NAM used is much more accurate. Especially for high gain stuff. There are still some aliasing problems with NAM though. Even with that most would never hear about the difference of the real $3500 amp and the free NAM plug-in. Playing feel on the other hand I guess is a different argument. Not sure if that is a placebo though. I do prefer the zero latency of all analog gear.
    - gizajob 4y ago
      I always think part of the ongoing use of valve amps is because of their transient response. It would be impossible to check in practice, but I think the transient latency is lower than solid state, because they're amplifying in a free field inside the tubes. I'm not sure how digital physical modelling and class-D power amplifiers is ever going to fully replicate this. The Kemper is naturally more convenient and feature-packed, but a valve amplifier will always do the one job that really counts, basically perfectly (until it breaks or catches fire).
klipklop 4y ago
With the current state of the tech it’s best to do several captures with the various “sweet spots” a player is likely to use. You will often see files describe the gain or tone knob position or what channel was used on an amp. It’s also not uncommon to create a capture with your pedal plugged into the amp as well. Popular for high gain heavy metal profiles to have a tube screamer in front of the amp. Stuff like the Kemper/Tonex/NAM work great with this kind of setup.