Chocol8
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,626
Are you using a Mac or PC for this?
IK Multimedia TONEX
- Thread starter eggpl@nt
- Start date
Are you using a Mac or PC for this?
BenIfin
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,443
I know its early days .... and this very much seems to be a big step forward for Tonex .... given (a) IK have known for ages how good NAM is and (b) they have probably been working on the V2 Capturing Engine for some time .... surely (?) their goal would have been / is for Tonex V2 to at least equal if not better NAM [on paper at least] ?
- Messages
- 1,540
Mac or PC?
I've had similar with my PC but I thought it was a driver not liking a process. It eventually resumes.
EOengineer
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,310
IK seems like a pretty chunky org that might not be particularly agile. I’m making a lot of assumptions here but the improvements they made to their engine probably have been around for a while. I think they are less crumbling edge and a bit more middle of the road choose a safe path kind of thing.
MirrorProfiles
Rock Star
- Messages
- 4,613
Mac here
MirrorProfiles
Rock Star
- Messages
- 4,613
I think it really makes the ToneX more appealing than Dimehead and the current NAM players out there, the trade offs are much smaller now between each and the price of entry and availability means there’s only one winner.
The changes to training will lead to WAY more models being created and that’ll boost the platform massively.
I think it also gives Kemper and QC something to think about, and likely makes things way more difficult for STL tracer (possibly only doing artist packs anyway?) and Tonocracy (is it already dead?).
Chocol8
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,626
Define better though. Accuracy isn't everything and Tonex has been able to run on much cheaper hardware and this update still will run on their hardware. Even if NAM is more accurate, it can't touch that yet.
Edit to clarify, IK's goals may have been make it as close as possible in SQ yet still run on a One. Leapfrogging NAM in SQ would be nice, but not necessarily a good thing if it required upgraded hardware.
Last edited:
EOengineer
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,310
Like…I appreciate NAM and actively support/contribute to open source projects all the time professionally. Doesn’t change the reality that all of the hardware boxes running NAM are basically playschool toys or a pile of parts some asshole threw together in a closet.
IK is making a solid play here, and very quietly.
IK is making a solid play here, and very quietly.
Chocol8
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,626
I still think the market for NAM is home playing with a PC and studio environments (with a PC). That could change, but right now I feel like Tonex and NAM are addressing different markets with IK focusing on the people who need or want hardware.
EOengineer
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,310
Thats fair. I do feel like IK is further along in their software game than NAM is in the hardware game, but that’s not a surprise given IK has existing pipelines for hardware manufacturing and NAM is a relatively new open source (decentralized) software project.
It will be interesting to see how that open source dynamic stands up against IK’s more traditional business approach long term.
We all win, really.
Last edited:
synthpenguin
Roadie
- Messages
- 266
Yeah, honestly, the simplicity of NAM's plugin resonates with me way more. For most things outside of samplers, I sort of hate librarian software and all that, and I'd rather just have the ease and speed of file management right on my computer (and not being tied to an account to keep things running). I miss when basically all VSTs worked that way lol.
If I wasn't wanting hardware / didn't mind my guitar playing being tied to a computer, I'd just go that route: grab the NAM player plugin and some captures from Amalgam and be happy.
- Messages
- 9,166
NAM is a hobbyist development prototype. It is not an integrated platform suitable for everyone's needs. Most guitarists into digital modelling don't know and haven't even tried NAM.
texhex
Roadie
- Messages
- 959
Got me down to 6:35 time using Extended. That's almost a 10 minute decrease in capture time. Wow! Nice work IK! (now where is the AMD GPU support!)
The entire process will be a godsend for creators, new users, etc. but I'm really just to lazy to "re-shoot" all my amps.
These still sound way better than the Kemper. Sorry but it's true. I back to back compared to a Profile I made of the same amp and settings and it's night and day. I've added the Tonex and Kemper files below if anyone has both devices and wants to A/B, have at it.
Tonex (new)
www.dropbox.com
Kemper
www.dropbox.com
Some interesting things I noticed:
The Tonex Modeler App shows that I'm clipping but the AXE I/O, where I'm sending the input in from the AXE III and what I'm using to create the Capture, does not show I'm clipping. Also the Input and Gain in the Tonex app still need some tweaking to get things sounding closer to the amp.
Tonex Modeler App, clipping:
AXE I/O Control Panel, not clipping:
Once I made the Capture I needed to adjust the Gain in the Capture up to have it more closely match the real amp:
While the "AI" is doing it's thing it's running the CPU a bit and it's also hitting the GPU, just not showing any utilization in Process Monitor but you can tell by the GPU temps.
CPU:
GPU:
The whole new Capture process is waaaaayy nicer than the old process and the time reduction is substantial. Fun little experiment but there is no way I'm re-shooting all my damn amps again.
Damnit! I need to save up again for some Stadium goodness. The new Badlander broke my Stadium bank, but it was worth it.
Very nice, free upgrade. Thanks IK! And thanks for not charging for the upgrade i.e. TONEX Max Plus Enhanced V2, etc. Please don't do that....
The entire process will be a godsend for creators, new users, etc. but I'm really just to lazy to "re-shoot" all my amps.
These still sound way better than the Kemper. Sorry but it's true. I back to back compared to a Profile I made of the same amp and settings and it's night and day. I've added the Tonex and Kemper files below if anyone has both devices and wants to A/B, have at it.
Tonex (new)
Dropbox
Kemper
Dropbox
Some interesting things I noticed:
The Tonex Modeler App shows that I'm clipping but the AXE I/O, where I'm sending the input in from the AXE III and what I'm using to create the Capture, does not show I'm clipping. Also the Input and Gain in the Tonex app still need some tweaking to get things sounding closer to the amp.
Tonex Modeler App, clipping:
AXE I/O Control Panel, not clipping:
Once I made the Capture I needed to adjust the Gain in the Capture up to have it more closely match the real amp:
While the "AI" is doing it's thing it's running the CPU a bit and it's also hitting the GPU, just not showing any utilization in Process Monitor but you can tell by the GPU temps.
CPU:
GPU:
The whole new Capture process is waaaaayy nicer than the old process and the time reduction is substantial. Fun little experiment but there is no way I'm re-shooting all my damn amps again.
Damnit! I need to save up again for some Stadium goodness. The new Badlander broke my Stadium bank, but it was worth it.
Very nice, free upgrade. Thanks IK! And thanks for not charging for the upgrade i.e. TONEX Max Plus Enhanced V2, etc. Please don't do that....
- Messages
- 1,540
Click on 3d, right under GPU, select cuda and you will see the use of the graphics card.Got me down to 6:35 time using Extended. That's almost a 10 minute decrease in capture time. Wow! Nice work IK! (now where is the AMD GPU support!)
The entire process will be a godsend for creators, new users, etc. but I'm really just to lazy to "re-shoot" all my amps.
These still sound way better than the Kemper. Sorry but it's true. I back to back compared to a Profile I made of the same amp and settings and it's night and day. I've added the Tonex and Kemper files below if anyone has both devices and wants to A/B, have at it.
Tonex (new)
Dropbox
Kemper
Dropbox
Some interesting things I noticed:
The Tonex Modeler App shows that I'm clipping but the AXE I/O, where I'm sending the input in from the AXE III and what I'm using to create the Capture, does not show I'm clipping. Also the Input and Gain in the Tonex app still need some tweaking to get things sounding closer to the amp.
Tonex Modeler App, clipping:
AXE I/O Control Panel, not clipping:
Once I made the Capture I needed to adjust the Gain in the Capture up to have it more closely match the real amp:
While the "AI" is doing it's thing it's running the CPU a bit and it's also hitting the GPU, just not showing any utilization in Process Monitor but you can tell by the GPU temps.
CPU:
GPU:
The whole new Capture process is waaaaayy nicer than the old process and the time reduction is substantial. Fun little experiment but there is no way I'm re-shooting all my damn amps again.
Damnit! I need to save up again for some Stadium goodness. The new Badlander broke my Stadium bank, but it was worth it.
Very nice, free upgrade. Thanks IK! And thanks for not charging for the upgrade i.e. TONEX Max Plus Enhanced V2, etc. Please don't do that....
texhex
Roadie
- Messages
- 959
Thank you! Damn, I've never even noticed those drop downs.
Were the new brown sound packs captured with V2 or......
Jim Gaustad mentioned in interviews tweaks made to the capturing process in order to make the captures sound and feel the way he wanted. He also talked about batch processing. I guess they just made them available along some optimizing. Pretty cool update.
paisleywookiee
Rock Star
- Messages
- 7,995
I mean, it’s very open source. And by that I mean it’s rough around the edges, grassroots, challenging in some ways to use, etc.
When someone significant comes around, a Red Hat of music gear, and commercializes it well, it’ll blow your sack back.
But that said, I too am digging this new ToneX version. Competition is good.
synthpenguin
Roadie
- Messages
- 266
I saw Amalgam has matching samples of the v1 and v2 Benson amp + cab captures, so I went to compare as I've been a big fan of their Benson captures.
I was surprised that the v2 had a different cab (Matchless 2X12 G12H G12M vs Marshall 1960A 1968 G12H) and very different tone settings (Treble 8 and Bass 2 on v2 vs Treble 5 and Bass 3.5) for the same capture name ("BEN CHI Crunch BAL CAB"), and I didn't love how the new one sounded because of that (way too bright and thin, which imo is weird for a "balanced" eq capture of such a dark amp). Not a huge deal as you can tame it with the treble and presence controls, but I wonder if this will be a thing with their newer captures? In the v1 pack, only the "Bright" and "Thin" captures of this amp have the Treble anywhere near this high (e.g. the BRI captures have the Treble at 7 and Bass at 3).
Anyway, it was hard to compare with these differences, but both sounded great with the EQ adjustments, and otherwise the v2 was waaaay gainier (with both captures of the amp set at volume 7), which I guess is more accurate! I'm really really curious to hear more, and it'll be interesting to see if some of these capture companies offering updates take this route of adjusting sounds vs attempting new captures of the same sounds (or somewhere in between).
I was surprised that the v2 had a different cab (Matchless 2X12 G12H G12M vs Marshall 1960A 1968 G12H) and very different tone settings (Treble 8 and Bass 2 on v2 vs Treble 5 and Bass 3.5) for the same capture name ("BEN CHI Crunch BAL CAB"), and I didn't love how the new one sounded because of that (way too bright and thin, which imo is weird for a "balanced" eq capture of such a dark amp). Not a huge deal as you can tame it with the treble and presence controls, but I wonder if this will be a thing with their newer captures? In the v1 pack, only the "Bright" and "Thin" captures of this amp have the Treble anywhere near this high (e.g. the BRI captures have the Treble at 7 and Bass at 3).
Anyway, it was hard to compare with these differences, but both sounded great with the EQ adjustments, and otherwise the v2 was waaaay gainier (with both captures of the amp set at volume 7), which I guess is more accurate! I'm really really curious to hear more, and it'll be interesting to see if some of these capture companies offering updates take this route of adjusting sounds vs attempting new captures of the same sounds (or somewhere in between).
