@tramp Thanks for giving this insight, it makes things way clearer for me. I honestly didn't think about the fact that having a large userbase makes a conservative approach basically the only way to go. I'm definitively going to check your gits as soon as possible
@merlyn I'm not as deep into electronics as you seem to be (more of a math guy...), my basic interpretation was "high impedance - low current" which may well be incorrect or inaccurate. What I do know for sure is that I have a little knobby on my interface where I can level the input signal, which I would do if my input ever clipped or any other problems than "one specific preset in one specific software clips whithin its own signal chain" would occur. As I mentioned before I've used this setup for several years without any issues or anyone getting the recordings complaining. I would actually like to know how bitrate and desired peak correlate because I never heard of that, but that may be a little too OT, just as the question what types of sound one can create with an american tweed amp. I'm thinking about opening a thread about the bitrate-thing though, and hope for your reply if i do
I think with tramps explanation the questions I had were almost completely answered, everything left to say is opinion (in my opinion).
To recap the questions real quick:
Tubes: CPU friendly but maybe not the most accurate simulation, based on a 2008 algorithm, widespread and accepted by many and therefore difficult to change
Amp Impulses: *googled, unverified* seems to be the output of the little known or at least not very prominent "specmatch" feature of guitarix, that Auto-EQs the sound to match a given recording by impulse response. Goes after the cab or instead of it, depending on how its made, independent of the tonestack if thats correct
Overall usability: Seems to work great for a lot of people, but I'm not one of them
@merlyn and
@uns4ph3 Thank you for the lively discussion, I made interesting finds "en passant" and I'm looking forward to the next one
