-
Some of you may know I'm a long-time user of modeling technology. I've gone full circle and back again. Started with the original axefx, migrated to axefx ii, then to an AX8 and then an FM3 and for the last 1.5 years I've been using a helix stomp. After listening to some clips of the ToneX and based on the price, I decided to buy one for a try. The following are my thoughts...
I was looking for a backup for the Helix and something which sounds a little more fendery. The clips on youtube of the TC Combo Deluxe 65 sounded great. The reverb sounded more fendery than the helix spring reverb.
I got it last week. Very disappointed.
- The output level is too low to go into the effect return of an amp which is a deal breaker for me.
- Inability to configure one output with IR and another without. if you use a power amp and guitar speakers like I do, the current implementation of IRs (either off or on) doesn't allow you to feed IRs to the house or studio , while having them disabled going to your other amp. Every other modeler allows you to do this.
- Software is horrible. The editor does not edit on the unit. You are editing a virtual plugin on the computer. I found that some settings on the computer work fine but don't work when downloaded to your pedal. For example, having the gain at zero on the computer works fine, on the pedal, you get no output
- It's clumsy to use the pedal as input to your computer while you're dialing in the sounds. You have to physically go the the global menu (on the pedal), and disable the "live" mode on the USB. Then, after you download the sound to the pedal, you have to go back to your pedal and reset the parameter for live mode. You can't do any of this from the software so it's very clumsy. Alternatively, you can just leave it in "live" mode and plug your computer straight into another audio device's input but on my system, all 4 of my inputs are in use and it means I'd have to unplug something to edit a sound. Not very well thought out and in 2024, not having a editor to edit parameters and presets seems like a huge miss. Particularly since it's been out for a year!
- Tone was very shrill. I downloaded Nico Schliemann's jazz princeton amp preset. It sounded good on his youtube video. However, I discovered that it's super bright. I had treble and presence on zero and it was still brighter than a fender amp with the treble on 5. Additionally, it's very noisy. I suspect when they sampled the princeton, they turned it up loud and had the treble up to 7 or 10 in order to get the sweet breakup that, that amp is known for. However, due to the tone controls on the amp not having a very wide range, even turning all treble off, it was still very shrill sounding.
Before I packed it up to return, I A/B'd it with the $39 Joyo American pedal and the Joyo actually sounded better than the particular preset I was using, plus it's quieter and can drive the effect return at line level or go directly into the input of an amp. The joyo has got a very sweet voicing.
I think the tonex is capable of getting some great sounds but like any sample player, it's dependant on great profiles and 99.9% of the audience is rockers and hardcore metal guys. If you have some great clean amps and don't mind springing more money for the profiler box (you can't profile from the ToneX), i'm sure it's capable of getting some great sounds. I think the hardware tech is great. Sounds better than kemper for a fraction of the price. But too flawed at this point and the whole user experience is horrendous from the box to the app to the website and support. (Their installer disabled the main outputs on my presonus 68C)
After I returned it, i swapped my main vibroverb model in the helix with the princeton model and found that I liked the helix a lot better than before, lol. I may look into the kemper player or perhaps the quad cortex but the kemper bothers me in that it's 12 year old tech. Quad Cortex only this month, got an editor and I've heard they are struggling. So for now, i'm sticking with Helix and hoping they'll update their hardware...
-
01-08-2024 03:55 PM
-
Personally, I think a laptop using good modelling software, a good sound interface and a good PA could be the future.
-
Not so sure. Unless I have a dedicated sound-man keeping the system up to date and making sure windows updates are enabled for home use and disabled live, i don't want to worry about it on the gig. I also don't relish all the interface wires that are necessary to get the guitar signal into the computer and out to my amp and then to my monitoring system. Since I use a power amp and guitar cabs for my monitoring system, i'm not even sure a lot of the software supports my workflow. And even on a super powerful desktop with i13700k, 64GB memory, 3060ti graphics, the latency is still off-putting on my computer for monitoring...
Originally Posted by GuyBoden
-
Do you know this one?
MOD Dwarf – Thomann United States
It has a stereo out and the software that seems to be very intuitive (have not yet tried it myself). You can try the software (including the sound, it is not just an editor) on your own PC with your own soundcard.
GitHub - moddevices/mod-live-usb: MOD platform as bootable Live-USB image
-
not familiar with that one. Thanks for the link. Building upon Guy's thoughts...Rather than a laptop, I think the best solution for live use will be a dedicated computer that can run windows or mac format VST3 files or something similar with an appropriate editor. Maybe that's what the moddevices is? Originally Posted by Bop Head
-
I think that a dedicated powerful laptop with at least 32gig ram and a SS drive is fine for Jazz sounds. Originally Posted by jzucker
I setup my laptop using this info:
Live Laptop setup
-
thanks for the info! Originally Posted by GuyBoden
-
The Dwarf is a stand-alone multi-FX pedal; the live-image on Github is the software from inside the pedal, running from an usb-stick, that has the same GUI as the editor software for the Dwarf if I understood correctly. The software is open-source but there is also some kind of marketplace where you can add paid plugins to the Dwarf. I do not know if those work with the live-usb, rather doubt it. But the live-usb is a good chance to test out how the modular routing (connecting "pedals" with "patch-cables") work and to test the sound quality of the FX. Originally Posted by jzucker
This is a video about the Dwarf from their website:
-
listened to some clips. Of course it was nothing but hardcore metal. Also, the 6ms latency seems a bit high. The helix is less than 2ms.
-
Jack, if you look into Anderton's youtube page they do a few comparisons between modelers, and I always found the Quad Cortex to be the winner They're not jazz demos, but they run a Deluxe Reverb clean on the Quad and it sounds great. None of the Helix brightnes... I have to try the Princeton Model, a few fays ago I messed with the Grammatico (Dumble) cleans on Hx Native and thought it sounded great. And in the Quad you can profile an amp from the pedal... Not sure they're struggling, but they're the most selled multi-fx on Thomann, which I believe is the biggest online gear seller wordwilde. If they're struggling, it would be very weird. Originally Posted by jzucker
-
i go back and forth between the grammatico cleans and the princeton (previously was using vibroverb). Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
quad cortex hasn't had an editor until very recently and I see that as a sign of financial duress. If they were really doing solid, they would have hired an engineering team early on for the editor. Also, I think there's a lot of competition in the $500-$700 range now with the UA, Strymon, Boss and ToneX and even kemper pedals. I'm not sure that fractal or quadcortex has the resources to compete unless they each release a $500-$700 pedal form factor pedal.
-
I'm not sure that means financial duress, it just means they're more focused on releasing plugins, I guess. They've been quite slow on updates in general... Originally Posted by jzucker
That's a good point and we'll see how it goes. To me the problem with the small pedals is I ususally need to add more pedals and they're a pain to edit. The all in one in a small and light package like the Quad is much more seductive... I think most of the small pedals have a lot of hype for a while and lots of sales, but then I'm not sure they stick (with the exception of the Stomp).
-
Jack, have you considered putting something like a Kingsley Page in the FX loop of the Stomp?
I'm using it with a Bose GT Core 1000 but Boss has some simpler and cheaper devices that are 'hi definition' by current standards.
I had Simon make me Constable that's Bassman/JTM45 but to my surprise the Page is better to enhance the sound I like- the 4X10 Fender Bassman.
The Page is modeled on the Dumble but is really simple. Keep the gain low on the modeler and dial in the saturation with the Kingsley.
Even something as simple as the Boss IR-2 might do the trick- if it has the processing power;
BOSS - IR-2 | Amp & CabinetLast edited by Stevebol; 01-08-2024 at 09:42 PM.
-
Both of those are red flags I think. I spent an hour listening to cleans on the QC and I'm not convinced yet. Some of them were terrible and not as good as what I get out of the helix. For me, the helix is very good and convenient but the IRs are just not convincing. I've never felt that IRs convincingly capture the sound of a real cab. As I've said over and over, a real speaker motor interacts with the output section of an amp and that cannot happen on an IR. I've spent tons on 3rd party IRs and am not convinced they sound as good as Helix's native cabs... Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
For me, to get the best sound, I have to mix the modeled sound 50% with a mic on my guitar cab. If QC can eliminate that, it would be worth it to me to upgrade. But from what I can tell, it's pretty much the same tech. I feel like we've made head and shoulders gains in amp and effect modeling but very little progress in speaker modeling. And part of that is because the market is grunge/djent/hardcore. So it's probably fine for capturing those tones. Not so good for achtop tones.
-
I've thought about that but my house is very old. 70 year old wiring and i'm always getting weird noises. I suspect when my neighbor is running his vacuum cleaner or electric blower, it induces noise. And so any tube amp (preamp) is going to be susceptible to picking up RF noise through the tube itself... Originally Posted by Stevebol
I think if the speaker cab modeling is better on the QC, I'd probably bite on it. I haven't tried the boss but I'm not a big fan of their stuff. Plus, i doubt it has one of the the main functionalities I need which is to have one output with IR, the other output without.
-
If you're a one-sound man you don't really need a digital modeller-profiler-what have you, do you? I like technology but what would I do with 20000+ amp profiles? Of mainly super high gained distortion doom machines??
There are good Tonex profile vendors. Amalgam Audio is one. The Studio Rats is another that I like.
You should consider an IR box like the UAFX OX Stomp, the Two Notes Opus. I have talked up Milkman The AMP 50. Sounds great clean. Very good digital tremolo and reverb.
Next to lastly, get yourself an isolation transformer for that 70s wiring. I swear, the USA has the worst household wiring code I have ever seen anywhere. Only Japan's 100V AC non-grounded might be worse. China with their paper-thin prongs aren't any better but at least when I pull on a Chinese plug the whole wall mains socket doesn't come out with it with wall wiring exposed. I come from a UK standard of 3 solid brass pins that remain seated firmly in the wall plate. I cannot pull it out with a tug, not like in the USA. And the wall plate is switched so no sparks and sudden turn-on of your electronics when the plug is half inserted. The Europeans love their Schuko with the ground pin in the wall. Works but doesn't grip like a limey.
Last lastly, you could try a DI box or Line Isolator for the Tonex to FOH or the loop of your amp. This brings your Tonex signal up to line level.
In my overenthusiastic and possibly misguided opinion.
-
"If you're a one-sound man you don't really need a digital modeller-profiler-what have you, do you? I like technology but what would I do with 20000+ amp profiles? Of mainly super high gained distortion doom machines??"
I'm a one-sound man and still feel modelers have lots of advantages vs a regular amp. But of course, if you use a lot of sounds, you'll get a lot more out of one of those units.
I agree the number of profiling/captures can be very overwhelming. If I had such a device I would just try a reputed vendor (like Amalgam) or do my own captures. Otherwise, it can turn you crazy!
-
who said anything about 2000 profiles? I'd like a fender, a polytone, a marshall plexi, an acoustic preamp, an aguilar bass amp, a 4x12 with greenbacks, an open back cab with creamback, an open back with EV12L, an open back with JBL, an aguilar 1x12 bass cab, a bergantino 2x10 bass cab, an ampeg 15" bass cab. Hmmm...Seems like a modeler might be a good choice? Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
And regarding IR players, IRs are not "all that". Not a single one actually sounds like a real cab. It turns out the technology of modeling breaks down with the IR because there's no interaction between the output transformer and the speaker motor. Companies like line6, universal audio and quad cortex do a better job with their cabs than raw IRs. Plus to have an IR of a cab, it turns out you need 2 dozen captures to represent all the different mics, speaker offsets and mic distances. Give me virtual cabs by line6, QC and UA, any day.
And Tonex still is missing the primary thing I use every day which is one output with and one without IR. Adding an IR box just complicates things. I'd be better off spending a bit more and getting kemper or QC which have multiple output options as well as well written software and a decent user experience.
I hear you on the isolation transformer but I had one once and it completely worked. It completely isolated noise on the wiring in my old house. Sadly, the unit itself put out so much RF that it generated more noise through my pickups than the bad house wiring. It only works if you have it in an isolation booth far from your recording space. I don't have the luxury...
-
I've actually had a very different experience with IRs and found them, in general, to be quite accurate. Could it be the FRFR speakers you used? Or, of course, just different taste/experience. Originally Posted by jzucker
-
What Jack wrote above in other words: IRs are static*) so the are not so well suited for really realistically emulating an dynamically interacting system like an amp and a speaker. Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
*) There are systems that morph between different IRs to emulate dynamic systems, e.g. Focusrite's Liquid Mix that used a patent from a very expensive hardware from the 90ies called Sintefex.Last edited by Bop Head; 01-09-2024 at 09:12 AM.
-
I know you're an early proponent of IRs. I have never found an IR that captured anything close to the actual speaker in a room with a mic. Scott Henderson wrote something about that recently too. I have extensively A/B's a tone of IRs with the mic'd cabs and the IR's really don't do justice to the mic'd cabs whether I'm using an EV or Celestion speaker. The real speaker is so much more dynamic. Don't get me wrong. I can get a good sound with the IR but it just doesn't sound like a mic'd cab. (for my tastes). Obviously, we each have different tastes and that's what makes forums great! Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
-
Hi Jack,
have a listen to Guitarwank ep 264
(the latest one)
Scott raves about having found
some great IRs finally
-
Maybe I need to play trough a real cab again and re-evaluate my thoughts! Do you have the same opinion of profiles/captures made with the cab baked in? Originally Posted by jzucker
-
I talked to scott about IR's. I actually have the 4x12 york audio IRs he recommends. One thing he specifies is that you have to use a very specific IR player and that most of the players do not give you enough resolution to get the natural sound. I don't have the IR player he recommends and for me, with the IR player I have, the cabs sound flat... Originally Posted by pingu
-
Yeah, same issue. Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
Reply With Quote
pauln program
Today, 04:14 PM in Ear Training, Transcribing & Reading