@orange_gorilla
Yes, I’m happy to briefly share my experience with the HX Stomp vs. Dwarf… and also why I could easily decide for the Dwarf in the end. The difference is actually quite big from my point of view, not in terms of effects etc, but more the aura of the two devices and the motivation to use them.
You clearly notice that with the Stomp you have a proprietary device in front of you, in which everything is coordinated, easy to use, excellent menu navigation, etc… With the Stomp, everything is polished. If I were to compare the Stomp with German soccer, I would say that the Stomp is the Club Bayern Munich of multi-effects units: this club always wins, everything runs smoothly and at the highest level. On the other hand, this is also clearly boring…
With the Dwarf, you have the aura of open source. The plugins come from different sources, and are accordingly not coordinated with each other (except for what the system specifies), which can be seen, for example, in the different gain settings. In a soccer comparison, I would come to the Eintracht Frankfurt: The club is also called a “moody diva”. Sometimes the club is outstanding, sometimes it fails because of itself, sometimes it quarrels, sometimes they love each other. Sometimes brilliant, sometimes grotty. To win a game is not guaranteed, but possible at any time and when victory comes, it is usually spectacular. The club is not boring at all, but you don’t get a satisfaction guarantee either.
I once read a review of the Dwarf in which the author complained that the whole thing was not polished. He then added a screenshot showing the beta store in a place where as many plugins as possible could be seen without UI to prove his point. This guy definitely didn’t understand the Dwarf, or rather, he didn’t understand open source.
With the Stomp, I’ve actually always been able to get good results and it’s been exceptionally easy for me. You have dedicated effect paths that are only slightly modifiable, you can’t make any mistakes here. You get perfect plugins from one line, which can be combined without further ado. You almost always get something good out of it. Plug&Play and good (but also somehow somewhat boring) results.
The Dwarf, on the other hand, offers excitement: do your routing the way you want it. Wild wiring? No problem. The result can be terrible, but you designed it proudly yourself. You are part of a community of sometimes brilliant people who develop great plugins out of passion, not always usable, but extremely imaginative and implemented with the power of conviction. Everyone has an opinion, just as different as the plugins. With the Dwarf you get a landscape (not a line) of plugins, fast growing, with different qualities. A device that accompanies you, annoys you, pleases you, frustrates you, makes you happy… So, in any case, it’s not boring. The gain staging… Maybe the point that annoys me the most about the Dwarf. The background noise, which is hard to get a handle on. Until I realized that the noise can also occur between plugins… And I always tried to turn down the gain plugin, mostly without success…
If you are a pure user who doesn’t want to think much about effects and you want everything to run smoothly, you should take the polished Stomp. Then you won’t be happy with the Dwarf.
However, if you want to be creative, are a fan of experimentation and want to be surprised sometimes, by all means go for the Dwarf! I sometimes have sudden ideas about how to use or wire the effects and just try it out. I get results that I sometimes didn’t expect that way, completely by surprise. The best of my sounds have come with the Dwarf, not the Stomp. But it also took longer and sometimes cost me nerves. I’m more of a creative person, but I have to say that I come from an IT background, I like to tinker and test. I have never had so much fun with a device as with the Dwarf. And I love the open source approach and the community. So, my choice is clear: I take the Dwarf!