New Amp modeller

huffcw · Post by **huffcw** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 11:39 pm

[ This Message was edited by: huffcw on 2003-03-20 10:19 ]

huffcw · Post by **huffcw** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 10:16 pm

Anymore news on this thing?

Anyone tried it out yet and have a review? How does it compare to the Celmo amp modeller?

$99 seems like a lot to spend without being able to give it a try first. So, I am wondering if anyone just went for it anyway. (It would need to be about half that price for me to just buy it without even trying it.)

[ This Message was edited by: huffcw on 2003-03-20 10:18 ]

krizrox · Post by **krizrox** » Sun Mar 23, 2003 7:59 am

I just purchased the Amper. I also have Celmo's guitar amp modeler so I will post a review and comparison in the next few days. Stay tuned

brain1 · Post by **brain1** » Sun Mar 23, 2003 11:27 am

thanks kriz- i'm anxious to here about it.

krizrox · Post by **krizrox** » Wed Mar 26, 2003 10:28 am

Sorry for the delay but this whole transaction has been a bit of a headache. In fact, I have asked the seller for a refund. I doubt that my money will be freely refunded but we'll see.

The reason for a refund isn't due to any one thing, just an accumulation of small hiccups. The biggest problem is that loading presets causes SFP to crash. I could have overlooked all the other stuff but when a device causes SFP to crash, I consider that a catastrophic problem. Ehh.. must be something I'm doing wrong. Willing to eat my words if it's my fault (it's probably my fault - need to spend more time with it).

It appears that this device is still in the trailing end of a beta stage. I am getting a bit tired of paying good money to be a beta tester. Not even so much as a readme.txt file although I was told that a user manual will be forthcoming.

I was able to plug in my guitar and produce an output but in terms of how it compares to Celmo's device, I couldn't give you a real nice subjective comparison yet. The Amper is a bit noiser but I suppose that is supposed to simulate the qualities in a hi-gain amp. Which explains the need for a noise gate (which I thought was a bit twitchy - not smooth sounding). Ignoring the presets and just dealing with the knobs for a second, I was able to dial in some nice stuff along the way. Were the sounds I was hearing better than Celmo's device? Hmmm...I think I detected a really nice upper harmonic content not present in Celmo's device. Not sure. Need to spend more time with it I guess. They did a fantastic job on the graphics. Nice look and feel although I'm still not sure how I feel about all the preset menus. Maybe that will grow on me over time. At first blush, it seemed a bit clunky. I think I would have preferred a knob to tweak.

I'm sure the Amper will be a very nice device at some point in the near future but it still needs a bit more baking. If you're sitting on the fence waiting to make a decision, I would advise you to wait a little while longer.

Which leads me to my final rant.....

I've probably bought over a thousand dollars worth of plug-ins for SFP in the past year and a half (make it $1,100 now). Sadly, much of this stuff seemed (and still seems) half-baked. Very little of this stuff (especially from the 3rd party people) comes with even so much as a readme.txt file. I mean, is it too much to expect some basic instructions or is this just all part of the scavenger hunt mentality associated with all audio software (CW's stuff in particular)? In fact, hardly any of this stuff gets updated on a regular basis. Anyone besides me noticed that?

I don't know man. It must be me. I must be confused. Certainly we need more 3rd party programmers and I applaud this person for willing to try! He absolutely gets my adoration for trying. I think we're going to see some nice stuff from this person/company in the future. I just wish that when a device is offered for sale to the general public, it at least came with some documentation. I say boycott any new devices that don't at least come with a readme.txt file.

Nuff said.

If I have anything more intelligent to report on the actual sound quality or usage of this device, I will post additional info.

[ This Message was edited by: krizrox on 2003-03-26 15:11 ]

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Wed Mar 26, 2003 1:43 pm

I've probably bought over a thousand dollars worth of plug-ins for SFP in the past year and a half (make it $1,100 now). Sadly, much of this stuff seemed (and still seems) half-baked. Very little of this stuff (especially from the 3rd party people) comes with even so much as a readme.txt file. I mean, is it too much to expect some basic intructions or is this just all part of the scavenger hunt mentality associated with all audio software (CW's stuff in particular)? In fact, hardly any of this stuff gets updated on a regular basis. Anyone besides me noticed that?

I don't know man. It must be me. I must be confused. Certainly we need more 3rd party programmers and I applaud this person for willing to try! He absolutely gets my adoration for trying. I just wish that when a device is offered for sale to the general public, it at least came with some documentation. I say boycott any new devices that don't at least come with a readme.txt file.

Have you told this also to the developers of the devices you bought? I have never bought any 3rd party CW devices, except for the Pro One, and soon probably the Sonic Timeworks EQ, so I can't really comment on the situation. I do feel that judging from screenshots of many new devices, a lot of them look fairly cheap and unprofessional (see the big "interface design for softsynths" thread, and the thread about the Europa synth). Again this does not neccesarily say anything about the quality of the device, but it usually doesn't really give me the feeling that the device in question is worth my time and money. Maybe that's why I never bought any other devices.
Of course there is only a very small market for SFP devices, as opposed to VST for instance, so there is less revenue from a device so maybe less reason for the developer to really support a device with extensive documentation or updates. Also, Creamware have never seemed to be too much of assistance to 3rd part developers either.

krizrox · Post by **krizrox** » Wed Mar 26, 2003 3:26 pm

Have you told this also to the developers of the devices you bought?

Answer: Absolutely yes, although not in such a ranting fashion

. It's been a rather long road and I've forgotten about most of it. Frankly, I'm suffering from a plug-in buying hangover. I've got every plug-in tool I could possibly need and then some. In fact, many of the so-called companies that I bought devices from are now history.

The Amper seemed like a nice addition to my sonic toolbox. Being primarily a guitarist, I'm very interested in anything devoted to the guitar. I absolutely love Celmo's amp-sim devices. I wasn't sure I really needed another amp modeler as I also have a Line 6 Pod Pro.

Well, I'll keep you all updated as this unfolds. Would love to hear from anyone else who has bought the unit.

huffcw · Post by **huffcw** » Wed Mar 26, 2003 4:28 pm

Spending $100 without even a demo... you are a brave soul. I agree that if you are paying $100 there should be some documentation included with the device. I am staying away from this thing for now.

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Thu Mar 27, 2003 1:39 am

I have never bought any 3rd party CW devices, except for the Pro One, and soon probably the Sonic Timeworks EQ, so I can't really comment on the situation.

This seems a common-thread amongst CreamWare users and soon there will be no new 3rd-part products...

I do feel that judging from screenshots of many new devices, a lot of them look fairly cheap and unprofessional (see the big "interface design for softsynths" thread, and the thread about the Europa synth).

... at least none of my devices crash SFP (and sound great!)

and i always include some lit with my units (even demos), as does John Bowen, I know.

... (this) usually doesn't really give me the feeling that the device in question is worth my time and money. Maybe that's why I never bought any other devices.

a sad and rather narrow point of view for a musician to take, IMHO.

Of course there is only a very small market for SFP devices, as opposed to VST for instance...

yaaay! free VSTi devices for everyone!

VSTi is huge cuz it's "free"... come on!! throw NI on this pile, as well.

actually, the user-base for the CreamWare DSP platform isn't that small (not huge, either...)

Also, Creamware have never seemed to be too much of assistance to 3rd part developers either.

well... I'm not sure how they have been to you

but CreamWare have always been very helpful and supportive to me and my projects.

[ This Message was edited by: wavelength on 2003-03-27 01:56 ]

Post by **garyb** » Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:31 am

and i'm working on getting y'all more money.

thanks for developing devices for this platform!

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Thu Mar 27, 2003 6:08 am

On 2003-03-27 01:39, wavelength wrote:
This seems a common-thread amongst CreamWare users and soon there will be no new 3rd-part products...

Well, I just don't have the money to buy loads of plugins. It is not because I want everything for free if that's what you're thinking. I would gladly buy more of Johns synths, but frankly I have never been very impressed with most of the other 3rd party synths (there are exceptions of course). This is just my personal opinion.

... at least none of my devices crash SFP (and sound great!) and i always include some lit with my units (even demos), as does John Bowen, I know.

Well I never said this wasn't so did I? I was only adressing the initial impression I got from the look of certain devices. nothing more nothing less.

a sad and rather narrow point of view for a musician to take, IMHO.

Perhaps. As I said I don't have the money to buy lots of devices, so I am very critical when it comes to this. I do try demo's of course, but there hasn't been many devices that really impressed me, or that I felt I really needed.

yaaay! free VSTi devices for everyone! VSTi is huge cuz it's "free"... come on!! throw NI on this pile, as well.
actually, the user-base for the CreamWare DSP platform isn't that small (not huge, either...)

I never said anything about free devices.
I was only trying to tie Krirox's experiences to the fact that SFP developers will probably have less (financial) resources for making these plugins than a commercial VST developer, since their market is smaller than that of VST. Even taking into consideration the many crack users, there is still a huge market of people who use VST compatible host software.

well... I'm not sure how they have been to you but CreamWare have always been very helpful and supportive to me and my projects.

Well that's great, but I've also heard different stories (from John Bowen as well). Maybe this is now a thing of the past though. I'm not a developer so I'd better not speculate on this any further

[ This Message was edited by: wavelength on 2003-03-27 01:56 ]
[/quote]

next to nothing · Post by **next to nothing** » Thu Mar 27, 2003 7:15 am

the thing about creamware being supportive to developers is kinda note true, according to Arturia (developers of the Moog Modular VSTi). I saw a paste from an email from them, where they said they'd been thinking of making this Moog Modular for SFP, but due to recent lack of support from creamware to developers, they cancelled it. A shame, really.

Here's the paste:
"Thanks for your kind comments about the Moog Modular V. We have indeed thought at some stage of a development on the Creamware platform. But it is an important task as the processors, as you know, are requiring a specific development of the core-engine of the Software.

In addition, even if Creamware has in the past
helped third-party developpers, things are not that clear today about the commercialisation issue.

So right now, nothing planed for the Creamware users (unless Cremware wants to develop a wrapper from VST).

Frederic Brun"

[ This Message was edited by: piddi on 2003-03-27 07:18 ]

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Thu Mar 27, 2003 10:14 am

I really wouldn't overestimate that Arturia issue.
Why would CW want them on board ?
Move attention from DSP to native processing by promoting a DSP version with superior sound and later sell the native device ?
There IS a significant lack in Arturia's soundquality compared to an analog Moog, while everyone states the Minimax is non-distinguishable.

my 2 cents, Tom

krizrox · Post by **krizrox** » Thu Mar 27, 2003 11:17 am

Well, getting back to the original purpose of this thread........

This morning I received a rather gloomy email from UnitX regarding my assessment of their Amper product, the perceived bugs (real or imagined), CW support for 3rd party developers and the future of UnitX in particular.

UnitX admitted it was a mistake to separate the core device and the various effects presets, thereby making the product two distinct elements that need to be installed individually. Apparently, all beta testing had been conducted on an integrated version of the device - a version earlier than the one they are currently shipping.

I received the core device via an uncompressed email attachment (a 4MB file). The original device they sent me had been registered to another user. They realized this fact after the device had been sent and I was told another device, registered directly to me, would be sent the following day (actually took 2 days). I then received a device with an incorrect graphical surface. I asked two or three times (politely) for them to send me a corrected version. They didn't understand what I was talking about and I had to send them a JGP screenshot of the device panel (still haven't received a corrected version).

The presets consist of 6 or 7 files which can be downloaded from their website. These need to be installed separately. It was during this installation phase that the device kept crashing SFP. I believe I now have installed all the presets correctly but certain preset windows still seem to cause SFP to crash for no apparent reason. Each switch on the faceplate that you enable causes a preset window to pop-up. For example, you can select from various cabinet types, different distortion settings, effects settings, etc.

Anyway, back to the their email message....

I got the impression that UnitX has decided to stop any further development for the SFP platform due to lack of interest in their Amper product. Apparently only a couple of people (including myself) actually bought the device. It seems they felt my previous review of The Amper has killed any potential for further sales of their product. It was never, ever my intention of harming their business but I feel that it's important to let potential buyers know what they're getting themselves into. I wouldn't want anyone to have to go through what I've gone through. I probably wouldn't have made so much as a peep about all this if I had only paid $20 for the device. But $100 is too much to charge for this product in it's current condition. Shame on me for rushing in where others fear to tread. Shame on them for charging full price for a beta version (actually, I think they were planning on increasing the price to $120 at some point in the near future).

UnitX did graciously offer to refund my money but in all honesty, I'd rather get this issue resolved because I still believe this product has the potential to be a really nice tool.

I got the impression that UnitX is a retailer of some kind. They mentioned that they haven't gotten any help from CW in regards to product development (a recurring theme around here). They used a standard Scope product to develop this device. I don't know much about all that. Clearly an area of Creamware that is kept private for whatever reason (or else I've just been blind about it).

Well, buyer beware. As some of you correctly stated, a demo version would have made sense but I assume they didn't design or provide one because of the rather fractured nature of the device. Who knows. Maybe one will pop-up in the near future.

I truly hope they continue on with new products and I hope they eventually fix the Amper. Assuming they ever do, I'll post a better review about the sound quality. Until then - go talk to Celmo

huffcw · Post by **huffcw** » Thu Mar 27, 2003 2:11 pm

krizrox,

Thanks for the information on Amper. It is really too bad that this device isn't better. I was very excited about the possibilities that it could offer. Maybe they will continue to work on it and get it perfected for a release at a later time. Although, from the response you received, that doesn't sound likely.

By the way, I received an email from Celmo stating that updates are planned for the GAM - and the potential of a Noah version.

huffcw · Post by **huffcw** » Thu Mar 27, 2003 2:20 pm

I never said anything about free devices.
I was only trying to tie Krirox's experiences to the fact that SFP developers will probably have less (financial) resources for making these plugins than a commercial VST developer, since their market is smaller than that of VST. Even taking into consideration the many crack users, there is still a huge market of people who use VST compatible host software.

However, also remember that while there is a larger market for VST overall, there are also many more VST developers - meaning more competition among devices. Therefore, the financial resources for many VST developers may not be any greater than for SFP developers. Of course, there are a few dominant players that have a lot of resources, like Native Instruments, but this is probably not the case overall for the majority of developers.

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Thu Mar 27, 2003 2:26 pm

By the way, I received an email from Celmo stating that updates are planned for the GAM - and the potential of a Noah version.

cool! I forgot to mention that the Pro One is actually not the only device I ever bought for SFP, because I also bought the Celmo GAM not too long ago! (even though it looks pants!

)

_________________

[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2003-03-27 14:27 ]

krizrox · Post by **krizrox** » Thu Mar 27, 2003 4:14 pm

Celmo rocks. I probably have half a dozen or more of his products and they are all wonderful.

His amp modeler has saved my ass more than a few times. Clients (the guitar playing variety) will come into my studio and occasionally they... how do I put this... suck? Celmos' device can take a crappy sounding guitar track and make it bearable (or better).

And that's the reason I was interested in The Amper. Just another tool in my sonic toolbox.

Well, they at least sent me an updated version with the correct faceplate. I'm sure I've fallen out of favor with them so I probably won't see an upgrade anytime soon. Or the documentation. Or a free coffee mug

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Thu Mar 27, 2003 5:32 pm

indeed, the only reason why I don't have any of Celmo's commercial devices is that he sells via KAGI (creditcard required)

Device quality on Pulsar systems is expected to be more than mediocre and it's not a system to squeeze some quick cash out of customers.
This thread shows how fast such news spreads but it gives UnitX also the opportunity to learn and finally do a solid job.
Finish the product, take the challenge of competition with a demo and off you go if you have something to offer.
By getting this right you could proove that you're responsive to your customers.
If the whole issue was a fake then sorry for the trouble krizrox...

cheers, tom

krizrox · Post by **krizrox** » Sat Mar 29, 2003 7:39 am

The story continues...

UnitX is making a good faith effort to help me resolve this matter. I believe that at some point in the not too distant future, I will have a working version of this device. They also hinted at an upgraded version coming very soon so maybe that will help my situation. And they had told me that user docs were supposed to be released this weekend so maybe all this will help.

I was also informed that they are not throwing in the towel just yet .... meaning they are going to continue to develop products for SFP. I am certainly happy to hear that... and you should be too. We need more 3rd party developers and I remain confident that UnitX will become a major player here. I love the interface they designed for this thing. Very hip. Hopefully a sign of things to come from them.

Anyway... this is not over. As soon as I can get the install problems resolved and actually start making some music with the device, I'll give you a much better review.

btw: in case you're wondering, I've been a performing guitarist for over 25 years and I own my own recording studio. I think I could write a pretty good objective review of this device once I get it up and running.