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
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
Thank you for the lively discussion, I made interesting finds "en passant" and I'm looking forward to the next one