Nope, It can be taken off in the settings and you still have your amp modelling. But today it's for entire unit. If it will possible to do so but only for selected output it will be very helpful in many live applications!
^^^ This
that's the story though I can never find the quote - it does tho, align with most other modelling platforms which don't facilitate users isolating power amp. The question I never see answered, and which I've always been curious about as a techy type is: why, generally, is it so difficult to protect I.P. in the isolated p.a. scenario? - to the extent that a very popular request in amp modelling is out of the question in terms of implementation when we have every other config covered seemingly without IP worry? (ie "preamp only", stand alone drives, tape satch in the cab block ...). No need for forum members to answer - it's rhetorical as I've embarked into to this discussion before without any further insight.
The issue here isn't about protecting intellectual property. The issue is that once you have the the power amp turned on, you can't take it out later in the signal chain. There's just no physical way to remove nonlinearities from a signal.
Understood - For this use case, I guess one could achieve what's needed currently with 2 amp blocks, one with p.a. turned off, but both would have to have their own duplicate post fx block chains. The chain with p.a. off and no cab goes to the monitoring tube combo return, and the one with p.a. on and cab sim goes to foh. Having a "preamp off" (pre/p.a. separation) capability would not seem to help any. But even this type of solution is questionable if the modelled p.a. behaviour and/or color is going to be very different from the monitoring tube combo's p.a. behaviour and/or color.
I think of the "Preamp Off" / "Separate Pre / p.a." wish as a feature mostly useful for external preamp integration, which I do frequently (and I see a lot of others asking about here on the forum). When I loop in an external pre, whether the pre of a tube amp or a pedal pre, with the intent of sending it out via FRFR, I need (usually, unless the pedal pre has a power amp sim in it, or I'm taking a line out from a load box attached to a tube amp) a power amp simulation to go with the pre. Tho the "tube pre" model can do the job to some extent, particularly with some advanced p.a. parms swapped in for desired flavour/behavior, being able to turn pre off in any given amp model to yield power amp only would be great for this use case.
Cliff, if it is doable... you can do it!
Awesome! makes sense - with a single mono (but L/R separated) fx chain following, and p.a. ON left, OFF right. Actually, even in current fw, using 2 amp blocks as described above: one with p.a. ON goes left, the other with p.a. OFF goes right, both going into single post fx chain with mono fx but retaining left / right separation for output to foh (left) and tube amp return (right).
we currently have the "send" via the amp block's power amp off button; as I understand, the "return" (power amp only) is the case that's constrained by architecture.Cliff, if it is doable... you can do it!
But I think the majority of guitar player (included me) will be confused and lot of patches will not work correctly.
it is possible to create virtual "Send amp 1" block that tap the signal out of the preamp and "Return amp 1" tap into the preamp? So the user can use send when poweramp is not required (the rest of the chain will affect the sound, inevitable...)
It's different, because with the send we can still use the poweramp section, it splits the signal.
That would be an amazing option. Maybe in the next unit??
The first half of your second sentence does not compute!
