Pete's statement that he made a couple of times is the actual fact. It's like having 5 of the same amp. Each one may have a slight variation, but they all sound fantastic. Each of these modelers has finally achieved that point where they are equivalents to the physical amp. This is even more true in the mix of a band. And the best thing about this is now guitarists with almost any budget constraints can finally get amazing tones. This is great for the future of the electric guitar and guitar-centric music.
Yeah that’s why the top guitarists in the world all play modelers now. Cause Lee made a video. Lol Not so fast champ. It still has some time to go. They have got amazingly better.
@@Nightjar726Many of the top guitarists *are* playing modelers, actually. Especially in studio settings. And in death metal for example, it's super common to have the entire band play gigs on DI with modelers and no amps.
@@Nightjar726 Metallica, Steve vai, Joe satriani, A7x, Def Leppard, Megadeth, Neal Schon, Steve lukathor, Plini,cory wong etc.. all uses modeler live or studio. Many touring musician uses kemper or fractal. Dunno what you meant by top guitarist though.
One thing to point out about TONEX: if you have an Nvidia GPU in your PC, the Advanced capture can take less than 20 minutes. The multi-hour thing only applies when no CUDA cores are available.
That's awesome. Tonex are clearly forward thinking and smart as all hell. Using AI api on GFX cards is awesome forward thinking. Much Respect. Luv and Peace.
@@jonathankessler9853 No they meant GPU, GPUs have been available for a lot of processing beyond graphics for over a decade now (hence the recent rise of machine learning) but only certain software takes advantage of it. A mid range GPU can do certain processing far faster than even having 2 of the best CPUs would.
@@jonathankessler9853 All the hubbub about ChatGPT and other AI is driven by GPU processing. For anyone that’s interested, it’s because 3D graphics processing for games utilizes the same type of base math calculations as neural network training, matrix algebra at the most basic level. Clearly there are far more math tricks than this, but these are the math processes AI or computer graphics has to do over and over, which is why GPU’s are handy for this. They are doing the same thing to create amp captures. It’s the reason for the name “Neural DSP” that makes the Quad “Cortex” device. They are use neural network used in also AI, to train captures.
BTW, Captain kept asking why you would want to profile your own amp... I got a really nice 50's hand-me-down that my dad bought new, great little amp that I don't want to lug around, so I got me some tonex... very happy with it.
@@RICO_SUAVE21somewhat pointless as it's very likely that the expensive amp you're looking at already has a hundred profiles uploaded from other users with more expensive microphones, preamps, and interfaces too.
@@Espresso101 This is a great point, as the benefits in these digital platforms aren't only in the accuracy and practicality of the actual devices, it's also in the community-based resourcing and contributions.
@@RICO_SUAVE21 NGL, I can legitimately see gear-rentals experiencing a short-term increase in business from people doing exactly this, if the tech takes off - rent an amp and cabinet for a day, profile it, and keep the sound of that amp for as long as the data survives.
@@RICO_SUAVE21lol a industry person I know might be letting me profile their dumble and train wreck amps on top of letting me physically clone them. Like full on studio gear level profiling.
I guessed the real amp and kemper correctly. I own a QC (purchased from Andertons!) and thought it was 4 because of the way it reacted on clean with the drive pedal. Was actually surprised but pleased that QC was 5! I think all are good options and without A/B comparison I wouldn't know anything. The main obvious benefit of the modellers is i spent £1600 on a QC and now i have got a collection of virtual amps which would cost £50,000+ for the real amps which i cant afford and don't have space for. So far i have profiled precisely nothing myself and paid nothing for all the downloads. Thanks Neural and the Cortex cloud users!
Yes, like Lee said it’s so much easier to plug into an amp, but this way we get to play through a virtual Marshall JCM one day and a Fender Twin the next then a 5150 the day after. TBH if I was a professional guitarist and I’d like a Tonex in the studio and a quick and simple plug and play amp for small gigs.
@@shumailkhan7205 I’d most likely go for an orange or victory head for a super clean sound with a few pedals to dirty it up. I have a Marshall 1965A-4x10 cab to pair with either.
I love the the idea of profilers, but it seems to lack the ability to adjust sounds on the fly. With the price though I really need to try out this tonex thing.
From a producer perspective, owning any one of these devices and potentially having loads of high end amp profiles that sound 95% like the real thing is a no brainer. Obviously the real amps are that tiny bit better, but cost-wise it’s diminishing returns unless you stick to one amp. Plus the casual listener won’t notice the small details in difference between digital and tube.
Pretty close, yeah. I find it hilarious that most people can now afford gear that’s in most cases superior in sound quality to what the Floyd had when they recorded Dark Side. But they act like only the most expensive stuff is worth using. Ridiculous. Go make music.
Exactly, all these old heads think they hear major differences between a modeling units and actual amps when they're actually listening with their eyes
@@isaacvelasco6498what an ageist comment. Old heads? Pray tell, what exactly does that mean? Also, compare a modeler going through studio speakers to a head through 4X12 at moderate level and you “feel” the difference. Age has nothing to do with it, name-caller. It’s about physics. Have you heard of physics?
@@tusharjamwal I agree with you. But I don’t think the jerk who made ageist comments is listening at levels loud enough to move a lot of air. And I doubt he has a 4x12. You make a valid point, though, and I agree with it. I don’t think many modeler users do that, though. The obvious point I want to stress is that, without an amp, there is nothing to model.
Thanks for taking time and consideration to creating and publishing this eye opening video. I think the biggest challenge with doing these comparisons is that perception of volume becomes a big factor. It's been shown that if the sounds are very similar, whichever one sounds louder will seem to have better ratings from the listeners.
@@johnnewton1830 yes, but his point is that one of the clean profiles was a little quieter than the other (to my ears) which made it sound a little "less." But I agree with you, if this is the only difference, then buy the one you like, crank it up, and go for it!
as pete said, the tonex software standalone is incredible thanks to the tonenet, as a hobbyst guitarist who can't get cabs and valve amps for volume problems im sooooo much happy to get even an 80% accurate profile of a real big amp. i can't spend enough good words for all the people that spend time profiling their amps and sharing it to us casuals for free on the tonenet
@@LordBransty yeah i think in my case is a problem because i live in italy, basically in an old city like rome or naples (where i live) single houses are not as common as in america, 90% of the average population lives in condominiums, the only ways to get privacy are: 1. You buy a villa in residentials places (which is crazy expensive) 2. You buy an entire building 3. You go in the countryside but then you lose all city comforts and can't get to work without doing 40 kilometers minimum.
Kemper is the George Foreman of profiling units - we write him off as being too old and bam! Wins back the heavyweight title.... with that being said - Kemper was definitely the worst in this shootout - it was actually the only one I knew for sure was a profiler.
I thought the toneX closeness to the amps sound (probably why it takes an age to profile) was surprisingly accurate! I think realistically tone, sound, feel are all subjective and if you like one thing or the other it’s not wrong just as long as you’re playing
for me Amp 1 was so clearly the Kemper. The change in eq is really recognizable. I owned the Kemper, Quad Cortex (which I found having too much bass) and now still have the Tonex as addition to my two real amps. As something to just play with in a studio, that things for all reasons mentioned such a good thing to have in your kit and one that is available to all. They have done a great job! I still like the Kemper for its old school looks and amazing how they keep on reinventing themselves.
Loved that you did this, the first Tonex video was really overlooking how awesome this device is. Lee did a video where he said that the best desktop/home setup was an amp and a Torpedo Captor, but now I really think it's just a guitar and a Tonex pedal. FYI, for me it takes less than 15min for an Advanced training capture, not 4-5h, but it depends on the computer. In the blind test I got 3 out of 5 (real, tonex, QC), I was pretty sure about the QC as it always has more gain when capturing, real vs tonex was just luck as they were both incredibly close. I thought that the Kemper sounded pretty bad in the chug test.
Great video as always guys! One point that I think you may not be considering... I bought one of these because I want to play through amps I'll never see in person or be able to afford. I have a selection of lower priced amps like a 6505+, JCM900, Krank Rev Jr and some others that I managed to find used. I'm never going to find an affordable Diezel Herbert or an SLO100 or a Bogner Shiva (and the list goes on for a while). I don't gig, I rarely even jam with friends and I have some real amps going into 4x12 cabs. I still bought a modeling tool so I could get other people's models of amps I'll never own. I haven't really heard you mention much about that aspect of the devices. fyi... I don't futz around with knobs either. I don't even use pedals!! I plug straight into the front of every amp I own. However, once I twiddle around for a few hours I can create complex cool effects heavy presets to mess with occasionally while still just plugging into the front of one thing. ...just some food for thought on a use case you may not relate to. Cheers!
Finding an affordable expensive amp isn't the issue. The odds that you can buy an extremely rare limited number custom shop boutique amp is way higher than you having the ability to properly set up and mic your real amp in the way these profiled amps were already set up for you by a professional with decades of experience. Sure, it won't matter if you need sound in the room. But if you want to record that sound, then this is huge. Instead of buying two expensive mics, put them both at different positions near the cab, and then mixing then both in the right way with expensive preamps, you can just send the amp profiling sound straight to your PC and record it. And it will be almost identical to how the pro set up the real amp.
I have a Kemper Amp and it´s the best for me. The Kemper Amp is ultra flexible with no noticeable latency and I can pick up the sound anywhere to resample it or just mix in the effects after recording. The most important thing is that I don't have to worry about the software update being bug free because the Kemper Amp has been around since 2011 and they know what they are doing.
I went for the Tonex. What's crazy is that the real amp stuck out a bit so that I thought it was a profile😂 Ultimately, any differences could be ironed out with eq - IN MY PERSONAL OPINION
Using an EQ to adjust to profile so it sounds like the real amp defends the purpose. That's what the modeller is supposed to be doing for you. Any really skilled person can adjust two amps with EQ and other settings to make them sound really similar. It just takes a ton of work and skill. I wonder if the Kemper was badly profiled because it did sound quite different, but it did seem to have more richness to it that some of the other modellers who were closer in EQ terms were missing.
I've never owned anything with amp captures before, I've always been more of a modelling or real amp kind of player but this video just showed why I purchased a ToneX recently. At the price you really can't say no. It's got some of the best sounds I've ever heard and I'm shocked to be able to have picked one up for such low money. The capturing is a pain but to purchase or download other people's captures and have them in such a small package. It's sort of a hybrid between a Strymon Iridium and a QC. The only downside is that the tones aren't tweakable like a real amp or model is, but the tones themselves are a step above modelling in my opinion. It's like the tone of a real amp but without being able to tweak it. Which is fine as long as you capture it with the right settings in the first place. I made some notes during the blind tests.. I knew straight away that Kemper was 1 because it has a slight harshness and nasally midrange boost. It's not a bad sound but it adds it's own flavor to the capture. I'm shocked that 2 was the real amp, I thought it was Headrush Prime. I liked 3 the most and thought it was the real amp. I thought 4 and 5 were ToneX and QC. I thought QC was 5 because I thought it sounded slightly better. I was wrong and ToneX was 3 (a nice surprise) but what was consistent is that 3 and 5 sounded similar and both sounded very good. This has been the case for the last few months whenever I hear these shootouts. I just thought in this case, that 3 sounded the best. It's hard to explain.. it sounded organic and when digging in it sounded good without sounding digital, bright or overly harsh. The capturing is faster if you have a NVIDIA video card. But even if you don't, you can enjoy the pedal without ever capturing anything. The software can be annoying but once disconnecting it from the PC.. the tones you take with you on the pedal are very good. If the people doing the capturing know that they are doing, it's even better. The tech in this area is advancing very quickly, it's like.. the newer the technology, the higher resolution the capture is.. if that makes sense. But what is odd is that they are figuring out ways to make an accurate capture but also make it sound better than the original amp. In this case I thought 3 and 5 both sounded better than 2. And you could even argue that 4 sounded better as well.
In my opinion, you should make a video comparing real amps vs the digital stuff BUT DO NOT REVEAL which is which, wait a few weeks until people give out their answers. Do the reveal in a separate video.
They would blame it on a mic recording the amp as the problem. Then the “if I was there in the room” arguments would start. You can’t argue with people who know everything 😂
Well done gentlemen... Can you guys do a shoot out of FRFR cabinets. Headrush vs. Laney Vs. Line 6 vs. ???? Is there a difference ... Thanks, and Greetings from Georgetown Ontario Canada :)
You did a great job, very interesting to follow. In a live situation, with drums, bass and vocals, an average listener won't notice a difference. I wonder who will buy a real amp now...
I actually have all of these they've tested except the Headrush prime. The ToneX isn't bad for the price at all, Great job IK Multimedia. The Quad Cortex is really like buying a half-baked Apple Pie that shares all your social media info. Compared to others in the same price range, not enough bells and whistles. Actually sold it, wasn't impressed at all. I think I'll hang on to my 11 year old tech in the Kemper, that's holding it's own and in some cases spanking that hind-end against said new tech. German tech is always top notch. Great Video Cap and Pete! Well worth the watch regardless.
16:50 The time it takes for TONEX to train a model is entirely dependent on the GPU of your computer. If you have a recent Nvidia GPU like an RTX4-- series, it does not take anywhere near 5 hours to train the advanced models. But if all you have is a laptop that doesn’t even have a discrete GPU, then yes, it will take a long time.
@@Gummmibaer GPUs are often used for complex calculations. Cryptocurrency mining for example. Or a more positive contribution for society: proteine folding (folding@home project).
Yes this was the brilliance of the Tonex solution. People like me can buy a less expensive unit and just purchase other people’s captures, but even the capture unit is cheap if you have a computer, which most people do. Totally a smarter solution that forcing people to spend $1500 to get the basics.
Yeah, IK recommends a Maxwell (Nvidia 900 series) GPU or newer, so any Nvidia GPU since ~2014 should be able to get the training time down to minutes rather than hours. Granted that a lot of creative professionals seem to own Apple computers (which don't have Nvidia GPUs), so I can see this being a problem for many. Nvidia has a pretty good strangle hold on AI training and inference acceleration, so any new applications with AI acceleration are going to be Nvidia by default for the foreseeable future. That said, for most people it's not like you're going to be capturing amps on a weekly basis -- it's something you do a couple times for your own gear and getting to download everyone else's.
Thanks for suffering through this process guys...lol. I knew you'd do a deep dive on Tonex Lee. If you've got a lot of pedals already and just want a variety of amazing amp tones, it's a solid option. And a plugin...cool little device. So great to be able to play a cranked Marshall stack at a whisper volume...lol.
My conclusion, as i kinda expected: they all get the job done well enough sound-wise to be viable options...its down to price, other features and personal preferences really.
Great video. I’ve used them all. Gigged most of them and they all do the job depending on the work or gig. The bottom line is what’s your favourite tool and what’s best for the job? I’ll use all of them my favourite “tool” will always be a tube/valve amp and couple of pedals. It’s the whole playing experience. But going in ears I prefer the the Kemper or QC. No better time to be a guitar player considering what I had when I started. Find a tone and play more and leave the knobs alone. Option paralysis is a thing.
ToneX software seems really great in the home studio. Just profile your amps or use one of the existing ones and hear yourself play in context of the recording without an amp blasting in the same room (with a mic in front). It sounds impressive. For playing out live, nothing beats a real amp imo.
@@markntexas8265 I would like to try it and see how it feels / sounds. If one doesn't have a good (tube) amp than this is a good option. I don't like how tonex 'removes' the cab from a lot of profiles by using some kind of algorithm / interpretation. There's something a little off there I feel. The 'amp only' profiles are really good. I only tried the free version so far, so maybe the paid version is better, but I like your suggestion. Would love to try it, maybe paired with a simple class d amp through a cab.
Glad to see they thought the tonex captures are almost indistinguishable, cause it's the one I have. Lee is right I'd still rather play through my real amps and 2x12 cab. However, if I wanna record and use two amps(specifically two of my amps) then capturing them and running the models in amplitude is so much simpler. Or if I wanna play at night I could use a tube amp, attenuator, and ir into headphones but I'd rather save my tubes and use the computer model.
Obviously a cabinet that really moves all the air in the room is going to be more fun to play than a pair of headphones or studio monitors. That's true regardless of if an amp is the original or modeled. If they are indistinguishable, they should be indistinguishable both through headphones and through a 2x12 cabinet. So wtf are you talking about?
Thanks guys. That looked difficult. If I owned one of these it would be for the profiles other folks did. Or if I had a friend with a great amp I’d consider it. But I’m happy with my Helix LT. Bought it when it was considered “old” and got a floor model. It sounds great and works for what I need it for. Thanks again!
I liked number 3 and 5 the most, both the first and second time. I heard it through my Genelec 8040´s (Same as them), and I have to say i was really surprised by the sound and a bit disappointed that the Kemper wasn´t my favorite (especially as I own a Kemper myself). Great video, cheers guys.
It needs to sound like the original amp. Not different but better. If your original amp sounds like shit, your modeling amp should also sound like shit. Because if it doesn't, it can't accurately capture a great sounding amp either.
Ok I played along with headphone on through a laptop. I agree what Pete said, man this is hard and they all sound good. All slightly different but all good. So for the Lil Sister comparison I went for 1. Tone X 2. Neural 3. Kemper 4. Headrush 5. Amp During the chug test, I liked them all but would go for No.1. For the Victory test, it was even closer for me. My preference was either No3 or No5. So I won't spoil it for others, you got to watch to see what the answers are :)
I have a 2x12 cab taking signal from my Origin 20 or my valvestate 100. I have them running through a really amazing Audiostorm HotBox Attenuator that allows me to run the amps at quite a high load but not an ear shattering volume. It can handle all sorts of volumes and Attenuation modes. Really trick unit. Wholeheartedly recommend. Best Amp setup I've ever had. I used to use Amplitube with a very low latency soundcard Terratec 1010LT down at about 4ms coming out through Mission Pro SM25As. Very loud and quote bass responsive powered monitors, Sounded good but getting proper valve amps and a proper speaker cab has changed my mind. The immediacy of turning on your amp and hearing noise will always trump having to boot the computer and set up a channel in Ableton. I've yet to record with this setup but damn is it inspiring. Luv and Peace.
I preferred the Kemper (1). All the others were pretty similar with more low mids/bass similar to the real amp. The Kemper added some snap to the sound. Personally I still prefer modellers as you can tweak the sound to your taste rather than going for realism. I don't want my sound to be real, I want it to be good.
Thanks guys! I always love hearing Pete's playing in the morning and I love Pete's enthusiasm when trying these out! I just got a Headrush myself and I'm so excited to see you all playing it and hearing how it stacks up against the competition. I'm gonna keep playing along and listening now :)
wow, they are so close now, you can hear some differences, especially top end... I liked 4 for crunch & 3 for clean.... surprised to find out which was the real amp. Cool comparison
(I paraphrase:) Mick from TPS: "they may sound the same but it's important to me to have the real amp and that makes a difference to how I play amd how much I enjoy playing." Josh from JHS: "they sound so close now that I'm using the Kemper on all our videos." There's no genuine debate to be had based on sound quality any more, it's all about the task and personal preference.
@@gffg387 Well, one thing Mick has said is that the amp is the instrument that was played by the giants of musical history and the digital model isn't: he feels that he plays differently (or at least feels that he does) when he's playing the real thing, and he doesn't have to make the same compromises that a touring musician would in terms of the convenience of a digital setup. I don't think it's a dumb argument, however much you or I might approach the problem differently.
@@sordel5866 That argument makes him mentally weak. Having to use the same thing that your idols have used?? That's a weak mentality that will mostly stops him from progressing on his skills.
Fresh into this I'm going 2 or 4 before the reveal... and...... Woot! I was on 4 early but something in the mids drew me to 2 especially with the Dane engaged.. They all sound pretty good though. I thought the Headrush sounded the most natural when we could see the brands as well.
Well I was totally wrong. I like 1 and 5 most on both and 2 the least. I’ve got Qc as well as a couple of old school hand wired amps (Benson Monarch and Achillies Zephyr). The QC gets the most use. Just so easy.
Regarding the average person likely not profiling their own equipment, I profiled my amp (3rd Power British Dream) with a Rode NT-1 and it sounds amazing and I use it for every gig. What my Quad Cortex has done for me is let me use my amp, my overdrive and boost pedals, and QC’s effects and have an entire rig in one box. Edit to include: I also captured all of the amp tones in one day- the first time I tried and it was so easy! I messed up the gain on the first capture attempt but every one after was bang on immediately. Probably took around an hour all told.
what I hear on RUclips and what you hear live is completely different...but I trust your honest opinions. I'm in the buy an amp and cab bracket for live and an amp and load box for recording to make your own sound, after all that's what it is really about - your own sound.
Why would you profile your own amp? For touring or live shows of course! Or recording audio. Not having to lug things around, worry about the setup, the mic placement, all supremely valuable.
Yea seems like an airhead statement from Pete, who I'm sure I've heard talk about using modelers for gigs. Maybe I just wanna use clean from one amp drive from a 2nd and hi Gain from a 3rd. Or wanna run stereo amps without all the extra gear and cables. The capture process is annoying but if you've spent 1000+ on a good tube amp(or several amps) then it's worth the time to capture them, particularly if you've modified or upgraded your amps.
me at home cannot tell a difference. and PETE you have developed a GREAT Captain Swat movement with your hand, i love to see it! and nothing makes you two blokes swat harder than when a digital unit is indistinguishable from the real thing! love ya'll :D
When it is that difficult to tell them apart it simply means they are all good in my opinion. Personally, I prefer to plug into a real amp and it's what I've done for 30+ years and I enjoy it. If it benefits you in any way to go with a profiler it just boils down to cost, convenience, and options. No bad choice here in my opinion.
They all sounded good. The big advantage of all of these: I can have my amp sound anywhere. I love my valve gear, but it gets harder and harder to justify having big valve amps. My next project may be to just profile my favorite amp sounds and don't even switch on the valve gear anymore because it's not necessary.
I was never able to get a guitar sound I was remotely happy with so I never recorded guitar until I bought a little Line6 PodGo!! I created a few presets and double track with those presets panned hard left and right and it sounds awesome!! As much as I love to chug through a 4x12, I love the tech stuff too!!
On the clean amp I didn't have a clue. On the driven amp I chose 2 and though 2 sounded the best. There is just something on the Tele bridge pickup that sounds special through valves for me when overdriven.
I have an HX Stomp and a ToneX on my pedalboard with a MIDI controller. I don't want to profile my own amps. Well, I'd like to profile one of my amps, but I don't want to invest the money in the Capture box or the time to learn how / set it up / do the captures / etc. So I am buying captures from the guys that are really good at it. Of course the HX Stomp has amps, but the ToneX (or any of the profilers) gives me the freedom to use amps that Line 6 hasn't modeled. And as far s the whole amp-in-the-room thing, I play through a class D amplifier and a guitar cabinet exclusively. SO I am getting that experience.
Tried the quad cortex and the tone x. Tone x is clear winner as it takes pedals exactly the same. Sometimes if I use the tone x through monitors I lean over to switch my real amps and captor x off by mistake it’s that good
Wow, I liked 2 & 3 best and just guessed that 2 would be the real amp but not with much confidence. 5 was also very close for me. 1 & 4 lacked a bit of highs for the Friedmann amp on my speaker set. I have to rewatch with headphones later. Each sound for itself was totally fine. I would go on stage with any of these. When I play I am very sensitive to latency so I would have to test that. But from what I have heard, that's not a big problem for these devices.
I kid you not, my legit order, on both amps, was: 2 1 5 4 3 Not only are these priced correctly, but you can, if you really sit down and listen to it with your eyes closed, 2 has sm more warmth, depth, strange harmonics. 3 and 4 (Tonex and Headrush) sound great but very cold, 5 (Neural) is a bit closer, and 1 (Kemper) is damn close but has a slight thing missing.
Thanks for the blind shootout. The Tonex vid with Jon was not good. Nice to hear without bias. With a decent PC, Tonex will advance profile in 15 minutes.
Old school just plug into a real amp! But all the amp profilers. You have unlimited choices! And you can hold it on one hand! What an amazing time for guitarist. Tube amps are not the only choice anymore. I’m 61 years old and I’m going to learn how to use a laptop. Amplitude 5 max 80 dollars US Tonex software free with purchase of Tonex pedal. 399 dollars US. I’m all in!!!
FWIW, there is no reason you can't run any of those units through a 2x12 as well. Granted, for each, you need additional equipment Also, a Tonex pedal, coupled with an HX Stomp, and you have everything, except the expression pedal, that any of the other units provide, and imho top of class tone.
This. 99% of the "amp in a room" feeling is really about the cab, not the amplifier - plugging a modeler into a power-amp pedal and running that into a guitar cab is going to get closer to the "amp in a room" feeling than putting any valve amplifier through a load-box and small studio monitors.
I have a Tonex with an original Headrush with no modeling I use them together sounds cool because you can put Tonex via send and return of the Headrush in the chain and put pedals before and after the Tonex , so this could keep older Headrush pedal board owners from crying .they all sound good to me I wouldn't mind owning any of these units you demoed and compared , If I were starting from scratch I would go with the HR Prime because of price all the features and familiarity , Also I'm still attached to real tube amps. so it's all just a back up and optional world to me as of now and a new Hobby Lol.thanks great Video
I play guitar everyday with a Kemper profiler and I heard the kemper on #1. It's not about it sounding bad but it does have this weird super-real high pitch thing going on. I personally don't like it and I've been trying to remove it out with EQ trying out different profiles and its always there. I felt #2 as being the real amp but only because it sounded kind of bad ? The rest I couldn't tell apart at all. I feel I only noticed the Kemper because I use one. That being said they all seem to sound good on clean tones (as an overdrive/dist guy)
That was awesome, thanks guys for your hard work! There is a new amp modeler, profiler out, the Neural Amp Modeler (NAM), it is an open source software, it can do what all of these pedals do, but completely free. I hope one day you are going to make a new video including NAM.
I actually got the real amp right! I was torn first between it and the Kemper, but the chug test did it for me. The Kemper just sounded way off and weird while chugging. I didn't really like the Headrush and Quad Cortex and I was able to differenciate them from the real amp because they sound to broad in the frequency spectrum. To much low and high end. Real Guitar amps don't go over about 7000 Hz and under 100 Hz, but these digital units can, if you don't givew them a low/highcut. Keep in mind that with I don't like them I mean in direct comparison with the real amp, they stuck out to me. They still sound very good on their own and all of that is just my personal opinion. I wouldn't mind to gig with any of these sounds. Thank you Lee and Pete for going through all this effort for us! Very interesting and also very much apprechiated!
I correctly guessed the Kemper, but thought the real amp was the QC and the Tonex was the real amp, pretty sure I couldn't actually tell but just got a lucky guess.
My favorite sounds were 1 and 3. I really thought 4 was the ToneX because it sounded much less open than the others. 5 being the QC is odd. It wasn't necessarily bad but it didn't blow me away either. I much preferred the ToneX for example. Great video guys
I made a similar comment to Pete Thorn on his channel about the Tonex vs the real amp. And he replied that he felt it was the opposite, and that the Tonex was more open and less compressed than the real amps. I deferred to his opinion. 😂
Didn't have a clue at all for the cleans. But for the high gain: 2/3 was my favourite sounding, not a clue which was the real one, but had a really good guess that 1 was the kemper because it just seems to have a high end roll off (Glenn Fricker recently did a similar comparison in a high gain application and the kemper stood out like a sore thumb).
We've long reached the point where you don't need to choose between these based on the tone, but more based on what interface you like (touch screen, no screen, knobs...), size, flexibility, budget,... I like the small format of the Tonex and I like that you can basically use it like a three channel amp. Also, great price. It bothers me a bit that it doesn't have an XLR out. But then again, it doesn't have an FX loop, so reverbs etc. would go after it anyways and then you'd also need a DI box.
If you revisit the Tonex at all please consider some testing of it as a pre-amp into a clean power amp then into a cabinet. Some of us are luddites and don't have DAWs and studio speakers set up but do have cabinets and amps around. Right now I'm using my Tonex into the FX Loop of a Fender Mustang GTX but I would like to find out if buying a Seymour Duncan PowerStage amp would be worth it for going straight from my pedalboard into a 1x12 (or 2x12) cabinet. Eventually I should break down and get FRFR speakers but I'm not sure which way to go right now.
We've gotten to a point where I prefer the Captain's playing over Danish. The Captain now plays exactly what I'd be playing. No joke, it's like being there.
It's just getting harder and harder to tell what's real and what's not. OTOH, is a great sound still "special" if you can just dial it up on demand? As advanced as gear has become (modeling, guitars, etc) is there still any of the equation left to an individual's fingers? It's a lot to absorb.
Running PC into Yamaha RX A2040 Amp with Bowers and Wilkins DM601S3 speakers. For both tests I ruled out number one straight away as it lacked dynamics and had a sibilance that was unpleasant at times. To my ears I liked number 3 (Tonex) for the Friedman test as it was smoother and more refined than the others. For the Victory test they sounded really good and I struggled to pick any of them outright except for ruling out number 1.
Has anyone switched from Helix to Headrush? I switched from the gigboard to the Helix and haven't looked back, but the tone capture of Headrush Prime is unreal I think!
@@400_billion_suns Good idea and it's less expensive as well, having said that, I think Line 6 will come with something new soon. After all Helix has some years running now.
I have had the Tonex for some time and for pedals I would say, as cliche as it sounds, it depends on the model. I run a Matchless and paired with my Fuzz or TS pedals it sounds awesome, but I hate the way my Rat sounds through it. The Tonex cloud makes it my favorite version of these modelers on the market today.
These test always come down to comparing the amp vs profiler back to back. That’s something that you will do once, but that information is lost after the profiling, and even not existent for you if you buy or get profiles from the profiler community. If it sounds good to you it’s good. Many users will be happy just using existing profiles, some like to profile their own amps . I profile the amps that i design/ modify after each change use the Kemper for that. Works fine for me. Tonex would be a no go for this application
Pete's statement that he made a couple of times is the actual fact. It's like having 5 of the same amp. Each one may have a slight variation, but they all sound fantastic. Each of these modelers has finally achieved that point where they are equivalents to the physical amp. This is even more true in the mix of a band. And the best thing about this is now guitarists with almost any budget constraints can finally get amazing tones. This is great for the future of the electric guitar and guitar-centric music.
Back before crazy good modeler with amp clones n etc it was sooo much harder and more expensive to get the tones in our heads lol well said sir!
Yeah that’s why the top guitarists in the world all play modelers now.
Cause Lee made a video.
Lol
Not so fast champ.
It still has some time to go.
They have got amazingly better.
@@Nightjar726Many of the top guitarists *are* playing modelers, actually. Especially in studio settings. And in death metal for example, it's super common to have the entire band play gigs on DI with modelers and no amps.
@@Nightjar726LOL ignorance and arrogance is your specialty isn’t jt
@@Nightjar726 Metallica, Steve vai, Joe satriani, A7x, Def Leppard, Megadeth, Neal Schon, Steve lukathor, Plini,cory wong etc.. all uses modeler live or studio. Many touring musician uses kemper or fractal. Dunno what you meant by top guitarist though.
One thing to point out about TONEX: if you have an Nvidia GPU in your PC, the Advanced capture can take less than 20 minutes. The multi-hour thing only applies when no CUDA cores are available.
That's awesome. Tonex are clearly forward thinking and smart as all hell.
Using AI api on GFX cards is awesome forward thinking.
Much Respect.
Luv and Peace.
Call me an idiot but how does a graphics card affect the speed of a capture? Did you mean CPU* and not GPU?
@@jonathankessler9853 No they meant GPU, GPUs have been available for a lot of processing beyond graphics for over a decade now (hence the recent rise of machine learning) but only certain software takes advantage of it. A mid range GPU can do certain processing far faster than even having 2 of the best CPUs would.
keih?? man i need a days one on one tuition and brain picking pass
@@jonathankessler9853 All the hubbub about ChatGPT and other AI is driven by GPU processing. For anyone that’s interested, it’s because 3D graphics processing for games utilizes the same type of base math calculations as neural network training, matrix algebra at the most basic level. Clearly there are far more math tricks than this, but these are the math processes AI or computer graphics has to do over and over, which is why GPU’s are handy for this. They are doing the same thing to create amp captures. It’s the reason for the name “Neural DSP” that makes the Quad “Cortex” device. They are use neural network used in also AI, to train captures.
Funny, I just blindly picked the 4 and it is the HeadRush Prime which sounds so good. I just ordered it and I am so happy, thanks for the video!
BTW, Captain kept asking why you would want to profile your own amp... I got a really nice 50's hand-me-down that my dad bought new, great little amp that I don't want to lug around, so I got me some tonex... very happy with it.
I’d go buy a bunch super expensive amp profile them and then return the expensive amps.😊
@@RICO_SUAVE21somewhat pointless as it's very likely that the expensive amp you're looking at already has a hundred profiles uploaded from other users with more expensive microphones, preamps, and interfaces too.
@@Espresso101 This is a great point, as the benefits in these digital platforms aren't only in the accuracy and practicality of the actual devices, it's also in the community-based resourcing and contributions.
@@RICO_SUAVE21 NGL, I can legitimately see gear-rentals experiencing a short-term increase in business from people doing exactly this, if the tech takes off - rent an amp and cabinet for a day, profile it, and keep the sound of that amp for as long as the data survives.
@@RICO_SUAVE21lol a industry person I know might be letting me profile their dumble and train wreck amps on top of letting me physically clone them. Like full on studio gear level profiling.
I guessed the real amp and kemper correctly. I own a QC (purchased from Andertons!) and thought it was 4 because of the way it reacted on clean with the drive pedal. Was actually surprised but pleased that QC was 5! I think all are good options and without A/B comparison I wouldn't know anything. The main obvious benefit of the modellers is i spent £1600 on a QC and now i have got a collection of virtual amps which would cost £50,000+ for the real amps which i cant afford and don't have space for.
So far i have profiled precisely nothing myself and paid nothing for all the downloads. Thanks Neural and the Cortex cloud users!
I love these videos were you can see Lee and Pete losing the will to live, slowly but having to persist
Yes, like Lee said it’s so much easier to plug into an amp, but this way we get to play through a virtual Marshall JCM one day and a Fender Twin the next then a 5150 the day after. TBH if I was a professional guitarist and I’d like a Tonex in the studio and a quick and simple plug and play amp for small gigs.
Nailed it. I bought one of these to play through amps I'll never afford.
@@shumailkhan7205 I’d most likely go for an orange or victory head for a super clean sound with a few pedals to dirty it up. I have a Marshall 1965A-4x10 cab to pair with either.
@@halofour01 that’s why I got a fractal 🤘🏼….plus easy and portable
I haven’t watched the end of the vid yet, but #2 sounds like the real amp to my at least at 26:04
I love the the idea of profilers, but it seems to lack the ability to adjust sounds on the fly. With the price though I really need to try out this tonex thing.
You guys should post the profiles/captures you made. At least for the TONEX! :)
From a producer perspective, owning any one of these devices and potentially having loads of high end amp profiles that sound 95% like the real thing is a no brainer. Obviously the real amps are that tiny bit better, but cost-wise it’s diminishing returns unless you stick to one amp. Plus the casual listener won’t notice the small details in difference between digital and tube.
‘Better’ is entirely subjective and can’t eq fix any remaining differences?
Pretty close, yeah. I find it hilarious that most people can now afford gear that’s in most cases superior in sound quality to what the Floyd had when they recorded Dark Side. But they act like only the most expensive stuff is worth using. Ridiculous. Go make music.
You can hear Lees heart breaking when he realises tube amps are not the only great sound out there 😂
Right. Put the modeler in an old tube amp shell and be done with it. Looks right, sounds right.
Exactly, all these old heads think they hear major differences between a modeling units and actual amps when they're actually listening with their eyes
@@isaacvelasco6498what an ageist comment. Old heads? Pray tell, what exactly does that mean?
Also, compare a modeler going through studio speakers to a head through 4X12 at moderate level and you “feel” the difference. Age has nothing to do with it, name-caller. It’s about physics. Have you heard of physics?
@@Dr.JekyllYou could use a power amp and a 4x12 with any of these though
@@tusharjamwal I agree with you. But I don’t think the jerk who made ageist comments is listening at levels loud enough to move a lot of air. And I doubt he has a 4x12. You make a valid point, though, and I agree with it. I don’t think many modeler users do that, though.
The obvious point I want to stress is that, without an amp, there is nothing to model.
Thanks for taking time and consideration to creating and publishing this eye opening video.
I think the biggest challenge with doing these comparisons is that perception of volume becomes a big factor. It's been shown that if the sounds are very similar, whichever one sounds louder will seem to have better ratings from the listeners.
Given volume is easy to adjust then it doesn't really matter which you choose based on sound.
@@johnnewton1830 yes, but his point is that one of the clean profiles was a little quieter than the other (to my ears) which made it sound a little "less." But I agree with you, if this is the only difference, then buy the one you like, crank it up, and go for it!
I appreciate you guys going through the trouble making these types of videos. they're a lot of fun to watch. thank you!
as pete said, the tonex software standalone is incredible thanks to the tonenet, as a hobbyst guitarist who can't get cabs and valve amps for volume problems im sooooo much happy to get even an 80% accurate profile of a real big amp. i can't spend enough good words for all the people that spend time profiling their amps and sharing it to us casuals for free on the tonenet
I have thin walls and neighbours the size of gorillas. I can't agree with you enough.
@@LordBransty yeah i think in my case is a problem because i live in italy, basically in an old city like rome or naples (where i live) single houses are not as common as in america, 90% of the average population lives in condominiums, the only ways to get privacy are: 1. You buy a villa in residentials places (which is crazy expensive) 2. You buy an entire building 3. You go in the countryside but then you lose all city comforts and can't get to work without doing 40 kilometers minimum.
Grabs popcorn for the inevitable kemper vs. quad arguments. Welcome to thunderdome.
Neither: Axe Fx
😂 two units enter....only one unit leaves!
Fractal everyday everytime 😅
Kemper is the George Foreman of profiling units - we write him off as being too old and bam! Wins back the heavyweight title.... with that being said - Kemper was definitely the worst in this shootout - it was actually the only one I knew for sure was a profiler.
Great video guys
I thought the toneX closeness to the amps sound (probably why it takes an age to profile) was surprisingly accurate! I think realistically tone, sound, feel are all subjective and if you like one thing or the other it’s not wrong just as long as you’re playing
It's actually quite fast depending on the GPU in the computer. I've seen advanced option only take 15-20 minutes with a RTX 4090 GPU and R9 7950x CPU.
@@dwiii1635yeah but a 4090 ain't cheap.
for me Amp 1 was so clearly the Kemper. The change in eq is really recognizable. I owned the Kemper, Quad Cortex (which I found having too much bass) and now still have the Tonex as addition to my two real amps. As something to just play with in a studio, that things for all reasons mentioned such a good thing to have in your kit and one that is available to all. They have done a great job! I still like the Kemper for its old school looks and amazing how they keep on reinventing themselves.
Loved that you did this, the first Tonex video was really overlooking how awesome this device is. Lee did a video where he said that the best desktop/home setup was an amp and a Torpedo Captor, but now I really think it's just a guitar and a Tonex pedal.
FYI, for me it takes less than 15min for an Advanced training capture, not 4-5h, but it depends on the computer.
In the blind test I got 3 out of 5 (real, tonex, QC), I was pretty sure about the QC as it always has more gain when capturing, real vs tonex was just luck as they were both incredibly close. I thought that the Kemper sounded pretty bad in the chug test.
Great video as always guys! One point that I think you may not be considering... I bought one of these because I want to play through amps I'll never see in person or be able to afford. I have a selection of lower priced amps like a 6505+, JCM900, Krank Rev Jr and some others that I managed to find used. I'm never going to find an affordable Diezel Herbert or an SLO100 or a Bogner Shiva (and the list goes on for a while). I don't gig, I rarely even jam with friends and I have some real amps going into 4x12 cabs. I still bought a modeling tool so I could get other people's models of amps I'll never own. I haven't really heard you mention much about that aspect of the devices. fyi... I don't futz around with knobs either. I don't even use pedals!! I plug straight into the front of every amp I own. However, once I twiddle around for a few hours I can create complex cool effects heavy presets to mess with occasionally while still just plugging into the front of one thing. ...just some food for thought on a use case you may not relate to. Cheers!
Finding an affordable expensive amp isn't the issue. The odds that you can buy an extremely rare limited number custom shop boutique amp is way higher than you having the ability to properly set up and mic your real amp in the way these profiled amps were already set up for you by a professional with decades of experience. Sure, it won't matter if you need sound in the room. But if you want to record that sound, then this is huge. Instead of buying two expensive mics, put them both at different positions near the cab, and then mixing then both in the right way with expensive preamps, you can just send the amp profiling sound straight to your PC and record it. And it will be almost identical to how the pro set up the real amp.
@@Prometheus4096 money is an issue in the vintage amp game.
And sometimes volume
I have a Kemper Amp and it´s the best for me. The Kemper Amp is ultra flexible with no noticeable latency and I can pick up the sound anywhere to resample it or just mix in the effects after recording. The most important thing is that I don't have to worry about the software update being bug free because the Kemper Amp has been around since 2011 and they know what they are doing.
I went for the Tonex. What's crazy is that the real amp stuck out a bit so that I thought it was a profile😂 Ultimately, any differences could be ironed out with eq - IN MY PERSONAL OPINION
Using an EQ to adjust to profile so it sounds like the real amp defends the purpose. That's what the modeller is supposed to be doing for you. Any really skilled person can adjust two amps with EQ and other settings to make them sound really similar. It just takes a ton of work and skill. I wonder if the Kemper was badly profiled because it did sound quite different, but it did seem to have more richness to it that some of the other modellers who were closer in EQ terms were missing.
I've never owned anything with amp captures before, I've always been more of a modelling or real amp kind of player but this video just showed why I purchased a ToneX recently. At the price you really can't say no. It's got some of the best sounds I've ever heard and I'm shocked to be able to have picked one up for such low money. The capturing is a pain but to purchase or download other people's captures and have them in such a small package. It's sort of a hybrid between a Strymon Iridium and a QC. The only downside is that the tones aren't tweakable like a real amp or model is, but the tones themselves are a step above modelling in my opinion. It's like the tone of a real amp but without being able to tweak it. Which is fine as long as you capture it with the right settings in the first place.
I made some notes during the blind tests.. I knew straight away that Kemper was 1 because it has a slight harshness and nasally midrange boost. It's not a bad sound but it adds it's own flavor to the capture. I'm shocked that 2 was the real amp, I thought it was Headrush Prime.
I liked 3 the most and thought it was the real amp. I thought 4 and 5 were ToneX and QC. I thought QC was 5 because I thought it sounded slightly better. I was wrong and ToneX was 3 (a nice surprise) but what was consistent is that 3 and 5 sounded similar and both sounded very good. This has been the case for the last few months whenever I hear these shootouts. I just thought in this case, that 3 sounded the best. It's hard to explain.. it sounded organic and when digging in it sounded good without sounding digital, bright or overly harsh. The capturing is faster if you have a NVIDIA video card. But even if you don't, you can enjoy the pedal without ever capturing anything. The software can be annoying but once disconnecting it from the PC.. the tones you take with you on the pedal are very good. If the people doing the capturing know that they are doing, it's even better. The tech in this area is advancing very quickly, it's like.. the newer the technology, the higher resolution the capture is.. if that makes sense. But what is odd is that they are figuring out ways to make an accurate capture but also make it sound better than the original amp. In this case I thought 3 and 5 both sounded better than 2. And you could even argue that 4 sounded better as well.
In my opinion, you should make a video comparing real amps vs the digital stuff BUT DO NOT REVEAL which is which, wait a few weeks until people give out their answers. Do the reveal in a separate video.
Yes; let’s see the annoying ‘experts’ show just how expert they really are
And do the DSM Humbolt Simplifier MLK II
This is a great idea to weed out all the “experts” who say they can hear the difference. (AFTER the results were revealed 😂)
They would blame it on a mic recording the amp as the problem. Then the “if I was there in the room” arguments would start. You can’t argue with people who know everything 😂
These shootouts are all over RUclips if you look.
Newsflash: if its close enough you need to have a video like this, its CLOSE ENOUGH. To the viewers.
Well done gentlemen... Can you guys do a shoot out of FRFR cabinets. Headrush vs. Laney Vs. Line 6 vs. ???? Is there a difference ... Thanks, and Greetings from Georgetown Ontario Canada :)
You did a great job, very interesting to follow. In a live situation, with drums, bass and vocals, an average listener won't notice a difference.
I wonder who will buy a real amp now...
I actually have all of these they've tested except the Headrush prime.
The ToneX isn't bad for the price at all, Great job IK Multimedia.
The Quad Cortex is really like buying a half-baked Apple Pie that shares all your social media info. Compared to others in the same price range, not enough bells and whistles. Actually sold it, wasn't impressed at all.
I think I'll hang on to my 11 year old tech in the Kemper, that's holding it's own and in some cases spanking that hind-end against said new tech. German tech is always top notch.
Great Video Cap and Pete! Well worth the watch regardless.
Before seeing results I liked 2 & 3 on both amps. 3 had a warm, tube-like tone imo. Very impressed!
16:50 The time it takes for TONEX to train a model is entirely dependent on the GPU of your computer. If you have a recent Nvidia GPU like an RTX4-- series, it does not take anywhere near 5 hours to train the advanced models. But if all you have is a laptop that doesn’t even have a discrete GPU, then yes, it will take a long time.
It uses the GPU? Wow, shows me how little my knowledge of computers is.
@@Gummmibaer GPUs are often used for complex calculations. Cryptocurrency mining for example. Or a more positive contribution for society: proteine folding (folding@home project).
@@GummmibaerAI is very GPU dependent ChatGP uses racks of NVIDIA GPUS very fascinating
Yes this was the brilliance of the Tonex solution. People like me can buy a less expensive unit and just purchase other people’s captures, but even the capture unit is cheap if you have a computer, which most people do. Totally a smarter solution that forcing people to spend $1500 to get the basics.
Yeah, IK recommends a Maxwell (Nvidia 900 series) GPU or newer, so any Nvidia GPU since ~2014 should be able to get the training time down to minutes rather than hours. Granted that a lot of creative professionals seem to own Apple computers (which don't have Nvidia GPUs), so I can see this being a problem for many. Nvidia has a pretty good strangle hold on AI training and inference acceleration, so any new applications with AI acceleration are going to be Nvidia by default for the foreseeable future. That said, for most people it's not like you're going to be capturing amps on a weekly basis -- it's something you do a couple times for your own gear and getting to download everyone else's.
Really should have included neural amp modeller (NAM) in this since its literally free and incredible
Thanks for suffering through this process guys...lol. I knew you'd do a deep dive on Tonex Lee. If you've got a lot of pedals already and just want a variety of amazing amp tones, it's a solid option. And a plugin...cool little device. So great to be able to play a cranked Marshall stack at a whisper volume...lol.
My conclusion, as i kinda expected: they all get the job done well enough sound-wise to be viable options...its down to price, other features and personal preferences really.
This is insane! I thought the real Amp sounded the least good for both!!!! And the cheapest was my favorite!
Great video. I’ve used them all. Gigged most of them and they all do the job depending on the work or gig. The bottom line is what’s your favourite tool and what’s best for the job?
I’ll use all of them my favourite “tool” will always be a tube/valve amp and couple of pedals. It’s the whole playing experience. But going in ears I prefer the the Kemper or QC.
No better time to be a guitar player considering what I had when I started. Find a tone and play more and leave the knobs alone. Option paralysis is a thing.
ToneX software seems really great in the home studio. Just profile your amps or use one of the existing ones and hear yourself play in context of the recording without an amp blasting in the same room (with a mic in front). It sounds impressive. For playing out live, nothing beats a real amp imo.
Run the Tonex through a Katana Artist and boom real whatever amp you want Dumble Plexi Two Rock …..
@@markntexas8265 I would like to try it and see how it feels / sounds. If one doesn't have a good (tube) amp than this is a good option.
I don't like how tonex 'removes' the cab from a lot of profiles by using some kind of algorithm / interpretation. There's something a little off there I feel. The 'amp only' profiles are really good. I only tried the free version so far, so maybe the paid version is better, but I like your suggestion. Would love to try it, maybe paired with a simple class d amp through a cab.
I use tonex ALL the time, at home. Its good, and a fantastic tool.(vst) I Bring the real amp to the real band.
I did 2, 3, 5. Not trying to guess which was real. But in order of preference. Time to try the tonex.
Glad to see they thought the tonex captures are almost indistinguishable, cause it's the one I have. Lee is right I'd still rather play through my real amps and 2x12 cab. However, if I wanna record and use two amps(specifically two of my amps) then capturing them and running the models in amplitude is so much simpler. Or if I wanna play at night I could use a tube amp, attenuator, and ir into headphones but I'd rather save my tubes and use the computer model.
Obviously a cabinet that really moves all the air in the room is going to be more fun to play than a pair of headphones or studio monitors. That's true regardless of if an amp is the original or modeled. If they are indistinguishable, they should be indistinguishable both through headphones and through a 2x12 cabinet. So wtf are you talking about?
Thanks guys. That looked difficult. If I owned one of these it would be for the profiles other folks did. Or if I had a friend with a great amp I’d consider it. But I’m happy with my Helix LT. Bought it when it was considered “old” and got a floor model. It sounds great and works for what I need it for. Thanks again!
I liked number 3 and 5 the most, both the first and second time. I heard it through my Genelec 8040´s (Same as them), and I have to say i was really surprised by the sound and a bit disappointed that the Kemper wasn´t my favorite (especially as I own a Kemper myself). Great video, cheers guys.
It needs to sound like the original amp. Not different but better. If your original amp sounds like shit, your modeling amp should also sound like shit. Because if it doesn't, it can't accurately capture a great sounding amp either.
Ok I played along with headphone on through a laptop.
I agree what Pete said, man this is hard and they all sound good. All slightly different but all good.
So for the Lil Sister comparison I went for
1. Tone X
2. Neural
3. Kemper
4. Headrush
5. Amp
During the chug test, I liked them all but would go for No.1.
For the Victory test, it was even closer for me. My preference was either No3 or No5.
So I won't spoil it for others, you got to watch to see what the answers are :)
I have a 2x12 cab taking signal from my Origin 20 or my valvestate 100. I have them running through a really amazing Audiostorm HotBox Attenuator that allows me to run the amps at quite a high load but not an ear shattering volume. It can handle all sorts of volumes and Attenuation modes. Really trick unit. Wholeheartedly recommend.
Best Amp setup I've ever had.
I used to use Amplitube with a very low latency soundcard Terratec 1010LT down at about 4ms coming out through Mission Pro SM25As. Very loud and quote bass responsive powered monitors,
Sounded good but getting proper valve amps and a proper speaker cab has changed my mind.
The immediacy of turning on your amp and hearing noise will always trump having to boot the computer and set up a channel in Ableton.
I've yet to record with this setup but damn is it inspiring.
Luv and Peace.
I preferred the Kemper (1). All the others were pretty similar with more low mids/bass similar to the real amp. The Kemper added some snap to the sound. Personally I still prefer modellers as you can tweak the sound to your taste rather than going for realism. I don't want my sound to be real, I want it to be good.
most people aren't going to profile many amps... bought profiles are what will be used mainly, and in that case no profiling required :)
Thanks guys! I always love hearing Pete's playing in the morning and I love Pete's enthusiasm when trying these out! I just got a Headrush myself and I'm so excited to see you all playing it and hearing how it stacks up against the competition. I'm gonna keep playing along and listening now :)
wow, they are so close now, you can hear some differences, especially top end... I liked 4 for crunch & 3 for clean.... surprised to find out which was the real amp. Cool comparison
The first time you did this was the video that made me buy a kemper. No regrets
Wow…what a great vid! Well done guys. The day of profile amps being dissed just because is over and it had for a while. This just proves it again.
(I paraphrase:) Mick from TPS: "they may sound the same but it's important to me to have the real amp and that makes a difference to how I play amd how much I enjoy playing." Josh from JHS: "they sound so close now that I'm using the Kemper on all our videos." There's no genuine debate to be had based on sound quality any more, it's all about the task and personal preference.
There's a difference. First argumment is dumb as heck. "Important to me to have the real amp"???? That's a big nothing.
@@gffg387 Well, one thing Mick has said is that the amp is the instrument that was played by the giants of musical history and the digital model isn't: he feels that he plays differently (or at least feels that he does) when he's playing the real thing, and he doesn't have to make the same compromises that a touring musician would in terms of the convenience of a digital setup. I don't think it's a dumb argument, however much you or I might approach the problem differently.
@@sordel5866 That argument makes him mentally weak. Having to use the same thing that your idols have used?? That's a weak mentality that will mostly stops him from progressing on his skills.
I honestly picked 2 as the real amp, 1 and 4 as pretty equal, and 5 as the worst.
Listening on a decent amp and speakers.
i'm convinced with the tone x now, it's crazy considering you can get them for fracture of a price of hr and ndspqc
Fresh into this I'm going 2 or 4 before the reveal... and...... Woot! I was on 4 early but something in the mids drew me to 2 especially with the Dane engaged.. They all sound pretty good though. I thought the Headrush sounded the most natural when we could see the brands as well.
Well I was totally wrong. I like 1 and 5 most on both and 2 the least. I’ve got Qc as well as a couple of old school hand wired amps (Benson Monarch and Achillies Zephyr). The QC gets the most use. Just so easy.
I’m still watching, and I like #3 the best. Have not read any comments , nor have I heard any other opinions
At 36:14 you can immediately see that Pete used to be the kid that cheated off your homework in school and double checked his work afterwards 😂😂😂😂
100% 😂😂😂
Regarding the average person likely not profiling their own equipment, I profiled my amp (3rd Power British Dream) with a Rode NT-1 and it sounds amazing and I use it for every gig.
What my Quad Cortex has done for me is let me use my amp, my overdrive and boost pedals, and QC’s effects and have an entire rig in one box.
Edit to include: I also captured all of the amp tones in one day- the first time I tried and it was so easy! I messed up the gain on the first capture attempt but every one after was bang on immediately. Probably took around an hour all told.
what I hear on RUclips and what you hear live is completely different...but I trust your honest opinions. I'm in the buy an amp and cab bracket for live and an amp and load box for recording to make your own sound, after all that's what it is really about - your own sound.
Why would you profile your own amp? For touring or live shows of course! Or recording audio. Not having to lug things around, worry about the setup, the mic placement, all supremely valuable.
As a pro to sell the profiles, so that I can play amps, I could never afford!
Yea seems like an airhead statement from Pete, who I'm sure I've heard talk about using modelers for gigs. Maybe I just wanna use clean from one amp drive from a 2nd and hi Gain from a 3rd. Or wanna run stereo amps without all the extra gear and cables. The capture process is annoying but if you've spent 1000+ on a good tube amp(or several amps) then it's worth the time to capture them, particularly if you've modified or upgraded your amps.
me at home cannot tell a difference.
and PETE you have developed a GREAT Captain Swat movement with your hand, i love to see it! and nothing makes you two blokes swat harder than when a digital unit is indistinguishable from the real thing! love ya'll :D
This is crazy. My favorites were 1 and 3, and the real amp was my least favorite. I did not expect that at all.
When it is that difficult to tell them apart it simply means they are all good in my opinion. Personally, I prefer to plug into a real amp and it's what I've done for 30+ years and I enjoy it.
If it benefits you in any way to go with a profiler it just boils down to cost, convenience, and options. No bad choice here in my opinion.
Lee is comedy with his reactions lmao got him reevaluating the amount of tube amps in stock
They all sounded good. The big advantage of all of these: I can have my amp sound anywhere. I love my valve gear, but it gets harder and harder to justify having big valve amps. My next project may be to just profile my favorite amp sounds and don't even switch on the valve gear anymore because it's not necessary.
I was never able to get a guitar sound I was remotely happy with so I never recorded guitar until I bought a little Line6 PodGo!! I created a few presets and double track with those presets panned hard left and right and it sounds awesome!! As much as I love to chug through a 4x12, I love the tech stuff too!!
Lee, sounding soulful with yer licks man.
On the clean amp I didn't have a clue. On the driven amp I chose 2 and though 2 sounded the best. There is just something on the Tele bridge pickup that sounds special through valves for me when overdriven.
Excellent comparison video. That’s how it should be done.
I have an HX Stomp and a ToneX on my pedalboard with a MIDI controller. I don't want to profile my own amps. Well, I'd like to profile one of my amps, but I don't want to invest the money in the Capture box or the time to learn how / set it up / do the captures / etc. So I am buying captures from the guys that are really good at it. Of course the HX Stomp has amps, but the ToneX (or any of the profilers) gives me the freedom to use amps that Line 6 hasn't modeled. And as far s the whole amp-in-the-room thing, I play through a class D amplifier and a guitar cabinet exclusively. SO I am getting that experience.
Give that effects loading guy some love😊👍🏿❤
Tried the quad cortex and the tone x. Tone x is clear winner as it takes pedals exactly the same. Sometimes if I use the tone x through monitors I lean over to switch my real amps and captor x off by mistake it’s that good
Lol , you better get your ears checked.
@@benallmark9671 I’m correct
@@benallmark9671 turns out the tone x basically one. I tested for a long time
Wow, I liked 2 & 3 best and just guessed that 2 would be the real amp but not with much confidence. 5 was also very close for me. 1 & 4 lacked a bit of highs for the Friedmann amp on my speaker set. I have to rewatch with headphones later. Each sound for itself was totally fine. I would go on stage with any of these.
When I play I am very sensitive to latency so I would have to test that. But from what I have heard, that's not a big problem for these devices.
Thanks for putting in the effort to make this comparison.
I kid you not, my legit order, on both amps, was:
2
1
5
4
3
Not only are these priced correctly, but you can, if you really sit down and listen to it with your eyes closed, 2 has sm more warmth, depth, strange harmonics. 3 and 4 (Tonex and Headrush) sound great but very cold, 5 (Neural) is a bit closer, and 1 (Kemper) is damn close but has a slight thing missing.
Thanks for the blind shootout. The Tonex vid with Jon was not good. Nice to hear without bias.
With a decent PC, Tonex will advance profile in 15 minutes.
Today I tried my AMT Bulava preamp for 150 Euro and it sounds very good. In the future I will get a Tonex to capture my Rocktron Voodu Valve 😊
13:10 have you ever pick up an voc AC30.... trough 3 floors?? thats why its nice to capture
Old school just plug into a real amp! But all the amp profilers. You have unlimited choices! And you can hold it on one hand! What an amazing time for guitarist. Tube amps are not the only choice anymore. I’m 61 years old and I’m going to learn how to use a laptop. Amplitude 5 max 80 dollars US Tonex software free with purchase of Tonex pedal. 399 dollars US. I’m all in!!!
FWIW, there is no reason you can't run any of those units through a 2x12 as well. Granted, for each, you need additional equipment Also, a Tonex pedal, coupled with an HX Stomp, and you have everything, except the expression pedal, that any of the other units provide, and imho top of class tone.
This. 99% of the "amp in a room" feeling is really about the cab, not the amplifier - plugging a modeler into a power-amp pedal and running that into a guitar cab is going to get closer to the "amp in a room" feeling than putting any valve amplifier through a load-box and small studio monitors.
I can't get enough of these!
I have a Tonex with an original Headrush with no modeling I use them together sounds cool because you can put Tonex via send and return of the Headrush in the chain and put pedals before and after the Tonex , so this could keep older Headrush pedal board owners from crying .they all sound good to me I wouldn't mind owning any of these units you demoed and compared , If I were starting from scratch I would go with the HR Prime because of price all the features and familiarity , Also I'm still attached to real tube amps. so it's all just a back up and optional world to me as of now and a new Hobby Lol.thanks great Video
I play guitar everyday with a Kemper profiler and I heard the kemper on #1. It's not about it sounding bad but it does have this weird super-real high pitch thing going on. I personally don't like it and I've been trying to remove it out with EQ trying out different profiles and its always there.
I felt #2 as being the real amp but only because it sounded kind of bad ?
The rest I couldn't tell apart at all.
I feel I only noticed the Kemper because I use one. That being said they all seem to sound good on clean tones (as an overdrive/dist guy)
That was awesome, thanks guys for your hard work! There is a new amp modeler, profiler out, the Neural Amp Modeler (NAM), it is an open source software, it can do what all of these pedals do, but completely free. I hope one day you are going to make a new video including NAM.
they wont cuz they cant make money off it. thats why no major brands want to even support NAM captures.
No joke!!! I thought 1 was the amp but I liked 2 the best. I was literally saying it out loud. So stoked
I actually got the real amp right!
I was torn first between it and the Kemper, but the chug test did it for me. The Kemper just sounded way off and weird while chugging.
I didn't really like the Headrush and Quad Cortex and I was able to differenciate them from the real amp because they sound to broad in the frequency spectrum. To much low and high end. Real Guitar amps don't go over about 7000 Hz and under 100 Hz, but these digital units can, if you don't givew them a low/highcut.
Keep in mind that with I don't like them I mean in direct comparison with the real amp, they stuck out to me. They still sound very good on their own and all of that is just my personal opinion. I wouldn't mind to gig with any of these sounds.
Thank you Lee and Pete for going through all this effort for us! Very interesting and also very much apprechiated!
I correctly guessed the Kemper, but thought the real amp was the QC and the Tonex was the real amp, pretty sure I couldn't actually tell but just got a lucky guess.
2 and 5 were my favorites for both… I own 4 and 5. 1, 3 and 4 was close to last on all for me in about that order.
My favorite sounds were 1 and 3. I really thought 4 was the ToneX because it sounded much less open than the others. 5 being the QC is odd. It wasn't necessarily bad but it didn't blow me away either. I much preferred the ToneX for example. Great video guys
I made a similar comment to Pete Thorn on his channel about the Tonex vs the real amp. And he replied that he felt it was the opposite, and that the Tonex was more open and less compressed than the real amps. I deferred to his opinion. 😂
@@dezertson2011 I have tonex it is ver "open" sounding.
I find it interesting that I have the complete opposite opinion than you. 1 is the worst for me and 3 is second worst.
Didn't have a clue at all for the cleans. But for the high gain: 2/3 was my favourite sounding, not a clue which was the real one, but had a really good guess that 1 was the kemper because it just seems to have a high end roll off (Glenn Fricker recently did a similar comparison in a high gain application and the kemper stood out like a sore thumb).
I prefer the free NAM (Neutral Amp Modeler) program but I did buy a Tonex pedal for live.
We've long reached the point where you don't need to choose between these based on the tone, but more based on what interface you like (touch screen, no screen, knobs...), size, flexibility, budget,...
I like the small format of the Tonex and I like that you can basically use it like a three channel amp. Also, great price. It bothers me a bit that it doesn't have an XLR out. But then again, it doesn't have an FX loop, so reverbs etc. would go after it anyways and then you'd also need a DI box.
If you revisit the Tonex at all please consider some testing of it as a pre-amp into a clean power amp then into a cabinet. Some of us are luddites and don't have DAWs and studio speakers set up but do have cabinets and amps around. Right now I'm using my Tonex into the FX Loop of a Fender Mustang GTX but I would like to find out if buying a Seymour Duncan PowerStage amp would be worth it for going straight from my pedalboard into a 1x12 (or 2x12) cabinet. Eventually I should break down and get FRFR speakers but I'm not sure which way to go right now.
Great video! Thanks for going to the effort to do this!
We've gotten to a point where I prefer the Captain's playing over Danish. The Captain now plays exactly what I'd be playing. No joke, it's like being there.
It's just getting harder and harder to tell what's real and what's not. OTOH, is a great sound still "special" if you can just dial it up on demand? As advanced as gear has become (modeling, guitars, etc) is there still any of the equation left to an individual's fingers? It's a lot to absorb.
Running PC into Yamaha RX A2040 Amp with Bowers and Wilkins DM601S3 speakers. For both tests I ruled out number one straight away as it lacked dynamics and had a sibilance that was unpleasant at times. To my ears I liked number 3 (Tonex) for the Friedman test as it was smoother and more refined than the others. For the Victory test they sounded really good and I struggled to pick any of them outright except for ruling out number 1.
Has anyone switched from Helix to Headrush? I switched from the gigboard to the Helix and haven't looked back, but the tone capture of Headrush Prime is unreal I think!
Unless you want the other stuff in the Prime like the vocal effects, you'd be better served by putting Tonex in the effects loop of your Helix.
@@400_billion_suns Good idea and it's less expensive as well, having said that, I think Line 6 will come with something new soon. After all Helix has some years running now.
My favorites were the same as the captains! Fun video my dudes!
Well, no. 1 was my least favorite. I was pretty set on 2 and 3 being the amp or the Tonex, as they sound pretty close. No. 4 was my favorite actually.
I want to see how the Tonex takes pedals. I'd consider getting one if i knew it could take my overdrives and high gain pedals well.
I have had the Tonex for some time and for pedals I would say, as cliche as it sounds, it depends on the model. I run a Matchless and paired with my Fuzz or TS pedals it sounds awesome, but I hate the way my Rat sounds through it.
The Tonex cloud makes it my favorite version of these modelers on the market today.
I was between the 2 and the 4. I did enjoy this video.
Headrush is much better than I expected. Pleasantly surprised
Now we want another tonex video :-)
These test always come down to comparing the amp vs profiler back to back. That’s something that you will do once, but that information is lost after the profiling, and even not existent for you if you buy or get profiles from the profiler community. If it sounds good to you it’s good. Many users will be happy just using existing profiles, some like to profile their own amps . I profile the amps that i design/ modify after each change use the Kemper for that. Works fine for me. Tonex would be a no go for this application