Nope. Me, too.I don't think anyone is suggesting a QC to you?
I was responding to chadhargis
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Nope. Me, too.I don't think anyone is suggesting a QC to you?
I was responding to chadhargis
For me it seems like pretzel logic to spend $1800 to profile the rig I already have with half that much invested.
At some point, there will be a new device that blows my mind. I think what that would take at this point would be a small form factor interface that just contains the physical jacks. No screens or buttons. It would be controlled via a phone or tablet app. It would have wireless built in. It would have the option of running on a long life (12+ hours) rechargeable battery or external power.
The win for a device like this is that I'd take nothing to the gig other than my bass, the interface box, and my phone/tablet. The device could even have expandability for using things like Ultranet for IEM mixing. Wanna run a cab too? A separate class D power amp that connects using digital wireless allowing you to locate your cab anywhere on stage you would like.
Ah....I can always dream.![]()
Nope. Me, too.
Agree with your comments! The actual QC cost can greatly be offset, if one’s deep into TB-style pedal acquisition mode.Well, I guess it would depend on whether you believe your current rig will likely never change (the end of the tone road). If that is the case, then yes, $1800 to replicate what you already have would be poor logic, I agree. I would assume that you would capture your current rig so you have that PLUS explore further all the other possibilities afforded to you with a QC and the Cloud community.
My current QC preset isn't a replication of my older Stomp/Khan set up. I have definitely changed from then. I was able to because of captures available to me within the QC community and excellent onboard bass amps and captures that come stock within the unit. Currently I am running a capture of a real 50th Heritage SVT amp in to a capture of a real Ashly BP41 bass preamp in to a capture of a real Acme Motown DI. (the latter two are combined in to one capture). Sounds incredible. Tomorrow I can dial up a REDDI or Khan or Noble or whatever if I want to explore more. That is a large variable you are paying for with the QC. The flexibility to explore pieces of gear without purchasing them and having the processing power to do virtually anything you want as far as combinations of effects (in regards to DSP). That, and like Steve mentioned, having the I/O and processing power to run multiple instruments at the same time if needed. I personally also play electric guitar. The QC is a much better platform for an all-in-one guitar preset than the Stomp. Of course, if a person doesnt need that flexibility, perhaps its the wrong unit for them. The Stomp and QC are not apples to apples.
"Need" is the subjective key like Steve mentioned. Some people don't "need" $1800+ basses. Some people are fine with $750 basses that accomplish the same thing. Yet here we are with somehow justified expensive basses discussing the "need" of items that are vastly different. To bring the analogy full circle, some people don't need a $700 Stomp, they are fine with a $300 Tone Hammer. Yet, to borrow something Steve mentioned, all three (QC, Stomp, TH) have very "usable sounds." What sold me initially on the QC was that I could sell my Stomp, Khan DI, and a few overdrive pedals, capture all of them, then move to the QC for little to no out of pocket cost for the transition.
But....you are right. If the Stomp/Khan is everything you need tone-wise (and it IS a really good sounding combo which I can personally attest), and you don't foresee yourself exploring further with the likes of a QC, then the $1800 is definitely not justified (though in reality it is more like $800 once you sold the other two for the QC, and even less than $800 if you have other overdrives/preamps you can capture and sell).
Hey! Curious about that one. Haven't tried it myself. Look forward to your samples and thoughts.
. . . pun intended.Good Lort. The bass DI market sure has become saturated.
Its none of those things unless you have access to them to do a capture or spend more money on captures others have done. Its also a purpose built computer that will expire or become outdated in a lot less time than the originals its capturing. The Modelling stuff is great. I am in no way saying its not. It is not however a panacea by any stretch.My Kemper IS a Noble
and a Reddi, Jule, Kern, Demeter, Broughton,...
To be fair, neither are the devices it models, or any musical device for that matterIts none of those things unless you have access to them to do a capture or spend more money on captures others have done. Its also a purpose built computer that will expire or become outdated in a lot less time than the originals its capturing. The Modelling stuff is great. I am in no way saying its not. It is not however a panacea by any stretch.
I was wondering, hadn't seen you post in a whileI seem to have stopped gassing completely for new preamps. Yes, no-one is more astounded than myself. I seem to be more fixated on getting the best out of what I have.
The best IEM tone I've had currently is LA-1A into THDI. The tone hammer seems to come alive when you push the front end a little harder with the output of the LA-1A. Probably old news, but wanted to share.
Been lurking a bit, but nothing to contribute really. Interesting to watch the transition to digital emulation taking over though. This thread was so driven (pardon the pun) by tube preamps for so long, so watching people's opinions and tastes change as tech improves is eye opening!I was wondering, hadn't seen you post in a while
There's a lot to like about that puppy