IK Multimedia TONEX

Speaking of Tonex controllers... Besides the DAD Midi Baby series, are there any MIDI controllers that can control two Tonex Ones simultaneously? I thought about getting a USB hub and the Xsonic TX controller but I havent been able to find any confirmation that a USB hub will properly work. All I'd want to do is change presets on 2 pedals at once, that's it lol.
 
Speaking of Tonex controllers... Besides the DAD Midi Baby series, are there any MIDI controllers that can control two Tonex Ones simultaneously? I thought about getting a USB hub and the Xsonic TX controller but I havent been able to find any confirmation that a USB hub will properly work. All I'd want to do is change presets on 2 pedals at once, that's it lol.

You defenitely need two Tonex controller boxes for that. In case you can slap them together yourself it might be cool to have them both in one enclosure.
 
Speaking of Tonex controllers... Besides the DAD Midi Baby series, are there any MIDI controllers that can control two Tonex Ones simultaneously? I thought about getting a USB hub and the Xsonic TX controller but I havent been able to find any confirmation that a USB hub will properly work. All I'd want to do is change presets on 2 pedals at once, that's it lol.
No, there is no Tonex controller device available that supports USB hubs.

But you could build one yourself with two ESP32-S3 controllers instead.
You'd need:
  • two of these boards
  • this site to program the boards
  • a MIDI In socket with an optocoupler to feed both controllers
  • a 9V to 5V step down converter and/or an USB-C socket for power
  • a non-shielding enclosure (WIFI)
Out of the box this would switch both Tonex Ones the same with MIDI-PC messages. But you can then program your DIY MIDI adapter with a phone or PC if needed (CC messages, individual MIDI channel per Tonex etc).
 
I just got a humbucker pickguard for my Tele and will be installing a Chopper T / PAF Master combo at some point this week.
Thanks for making me realize I posted that in the wrong thread lmao. But I hope that rules :D I just got the PAF Master and unfortunately it's not my cup of tea though. Prefer the 36th anniversary PAF.

Quadrophonic Tonexi for the win!!!
Fuck it, making a pedalboard of nothing but Tonex. Like Matt Pike with Orange amps.
 
Has anyone made a full rig capture and a DI + IR of the same mic'd cab of the full rig and compared them? In general I'm having a hard time finding a DI capture + cab that feel as good as the direct captures. A few collections have the DI and full rig and no matter how close I get them to sound using my own IR's or the Cab sim inside Tonex. The DI one always feel "dryer" if that makes sense, they don't feel as good/fun to play.
 
Has anyone made a full rig capture and a DI + IR of the same mic'd cab of the full rig and compared them? In general I'm having a hard time finding a DI capture + cab that feel as good as the direct captures. A few collections have the DI and full rig and no matter how close I get them to sound using my own IR's or the Cab sim inside Tonex. The DI one always feel "dryer" if that makes sense, they don't feel as good/fun to play.
That's the inherent problem with impulse responses. They are static eq curves. Full captures include a real speaker and depending on the vendor capture technology may add some mojo
 
That's the inherent problem with impulse responses. They are static eq curves. Full captures include a real speaker and depending on the vendor capture technology may add some mojo

If that was really true the length would make zero difference. Inside Logic you have an IR loader plugin that you can easily change the length and the difference is pretty obvious - unless it's changing something else and not aware of.

But, I'm not really sure if that's what's causing this difference either.
 
If that was really true the length would make zero difference. Inside Logic you have an IR loader plugin that you can easily change the length and the difference is pretty obvious - unless it's changing something else and not aware of.

But, I'm not really sure if that's what's causing this difference either.
the length (time) does do a little something but it is still a static curve. Not exactly how a real cabinet would behave.

A speaker/cab that plays an 80hz note from a stand still won't react or sound exactly the same as a speaker playing an 80hz note that just played a 90 hz note 20 ms prior. There are going to be overtones and resonances in the cabinet and the cone. There is also the microphone interaction that takes part in capturing the sound.
I think these factors have a big role in the amp + cab captures and they certainly can't be summarized by a simple eq curve and I think the capturing tech is picking up more info than regular impulses.
I can't even begin to fathom how software attempts to delineate and separate the amp from the cab portion and none of them are perfect.
To me, amp + cab captures will always win, but from a recording standpoint, impulses get the job done.

This is similar to a beef I have with most drum vsts sounding flat. Drums and cymbals don't sound static. If they are still ringing from previous hits, there will be overtones and cancellations from previous hits. Still fine for recording but to me real drum loops are more authentic than individual midi hits.
If 'lookahead' were possible then midi playback could take things into account about the passage being played but the library size would be insane as would the cpu power to play them.
 
Last edited:
Regarding a „dry“ feeling with some DI captures and some IRs: i really like the IRs from Science Amplification (all free). They somehow give some air/breath or even sound as if they have slightly more headroom. They became my goto IRs for prelistening DI captures
 
Has anyone made a full rig capture and a DI + IR of the same mic'd cab of the full rig and compared them? In general I'm having a hard time finding a DI capture + cab that feel as good as the direct captures. A few collections have the DI and full rig and no matter how close I get them to sound using my own IR's or the Cab sim inside Tonex. The DI one always feel "dryer" if that makes sense, they don't feel as good/fun to play.

Fwiw, I might be an outlier here, but a bunch of my favourite captures (including my handful of main live captures) are full rig captures with the cab "magically removed" (no idea how IK is calling their process of internally substracting the cab portion) and replaced by IRs.
 
A proper full amp DI Capture is made with a cab plugged into the head, but only the amp's output is captured, rather than the mic'd cab.

That way the amp is loaded by the cab and the impedance curve is present, and available for use with any IR (preferably an IR of of a similar cab design).

If using a resistive or reactive load when capturing the head rather than a real cab, then there will be some differences (though whether they'll actually matter is subjective).
 
Has anyone made a full rig capture and a DI + IR of the same mic'd cab of the full rig and compared them? In general I'm having a hard time finding a DI capture + cab that feel as good as the direct captures. A few collections have the DI and full rig and no matter how close I get them to sound using my own IR's or the Cab sim inside Tonex. The DI one always feel "dryer" if that makes sense, they don't feel as good/fun to play.
You can try my Mesa Mark V captures under the username "laxulus123" on Tone.net. The amp only captures are made from the Mark V line out (derived from the speaker out), and I also made several by micing the cab.

IMO the direct + custom IR of the miced setup vs full tone model at the same mic position doesn't really sound or feel any different so I don't think having the whole capture is some kind of magic.

I'm not too happy with the sound of the miced captures, I might redo them at some point if I can be bothered.
 
Back
Top