Tone X Capture Thread

PXL_20230310_020140035.jpg


Vs smth like this, with the one button soon to be replaced by the 3 button midibaby
 
FAS has all the building blocks to do some kind of Profile/Capture implementation. They even have the Axechange to share online. It’s all there but as soon as a new update to the amp modeling (Ares, Cygnus, Cygnus2, etc.) would come out it would blow up the previous Matches due to the way Tone Match works. It’s still pretty damn cool though.

 
texhex said:
FAS has all the building blocks to do some kind of Profile/Capture implementation. They even have the Axechange to share online. It’s all there but as soon as a new update to the amp modeling (Ares, Cygnus, Cygnus2, etc.) would come out it would blow up the previous Matches due to the way Tone Match works. It’s still pretty damn cool though.

Click to expand...


Tonematches yes - since it's just an EQ match. But an ML/capture block wouldn't be altered by those changes
 
northern_fox said:
I hate my brain because I can't decide which way to do it. Using it in the fractal loop is kind of annoying because then you have only output 1 for both FOH and cab, or you have to feedback to 2 out and do a bunch of panning and stuff. The HX is actually more flexible, routing wise and smaller and I'm not that big on FX, so the fm3 feels like I'm forcing it.
Click to expand...
I feel that. I plan on using the stomp effects loop. I was going to get an effects but I think having the models will be worthwhile if needed
 
northern_fox said:
Heck, I just added the 2 JCM800 captures I did for NAM also. I had the master on 6 for testing so the tone could probably be a little better but it wasn't completely the point :)

www.tone.net

Marshall JCM800 2203 + SD1

Gain: 10 Presence: 5 Bass: 6 Mid: 8 Treble: 6 Master: 6
www.tone.net www.tone.net
www.tone.net

Marshall JCM800 2203

Gain: 10 Presence: 5 Bass: 6 Mid: 8 Treble: 6 Master: 6
www.tone.net www.tone.net
Click to expand...

Hell yeah, putting these on the download list.
 
Mongillo19 said:
I feel that. I plan on using the stomp effects loop. I was going to get an effects but I think having the models will be worthwhile if needed
Click to expand...
Now I'm leaning back the other way 😅 to using it with fm3. But one way or another, I like the idea. Tonex has a high noise floor like a real amp which is weird coming from models too
 
northern_fox said:
Now I'm leaning back the other way 😅 to using it with fm3. But one way or another, I like the idea. Tonex has a high noise floor like a real amp which is weird coming from models too
Click to expand...
I currently have it in the loop of my III which is fine for studio use but anything I want to do on the move will be with the stomp
 
I like it a touch better in 4cm with the FM9. I like it with Stomp too and it does fit on a more size : size basis but the FM for me plays a bit nicer with it? FX wise at least. Both are great options.
 
Deadpan said:
Often, the issues with capturing is due to interference from other electrical devices. Of course this hard to avoid. If you stay in the digital realm it's amazing how accurate some of the devices are.
Click to expand...
Staying in the digital realm and capturing plugins is where it really shows its problems that are easy to measure
 
JiveTurkey said:
I like it a touch better in 4cm with the FM9. I like it with Stomp too and it does fit on a more size : size basis but the FM for me plays a bit nicer with it? FX wise at least. Both are great options.
Click to expand...

I also only now discovered the multiplexer and that might simplify my routing issue so I can still use out 2 for real power amp and fx loop instead of splitting out1 awkwardly
 
Mongillo19 said:
Btw tried the 800 capture without the SD1, threw in my own SD, and I think it sounds fantastic!
Click to expand...

nice! I also like it better captured raw I think. I'm struggling with tonex in the fx loop though, for some reason it doesn't sound the same as the plugin version and I'm not sure why. I gotta mess with it more tomorrow. Between that and the noise floor, it's a bit frustrating and possibly not worth doing


Edit: scratch that, it does sound the same. But the gain staging is really annoying. I've got FM3 on unity output, out2 dial maxed, adjustments all at 0 dB, but I've had to set the tonex input trim to -15 dB and reduce the gain on the patches to get the same level as playing back in the daw. That seems to have helped get the noise floor correct too.

Although I might not be done yet because having output 2 on unity gain is probably not going to be loud enough for the power amp
 
Last edited:
northern_fox said:
nice! I also like it better captured raw I think. I'm struggling with tonex in the fx loop though, for some reason it doesn't sound the same as the plugin version and I'm not sure why. I gotta mess with it more tomorrow. Between that and the noise floor, it's a bit frustrating and possibly not worth doing


Edit: scratch that, it does sound the same. But the gain staging is really annoying. I've got FM3 on unity output, out2 dial maxed, adjustments all at 0 dB, but I've had to set the tonex input trim to -15 dB and reduce the gain on the patches to get the same level as playing back in the daw. That seems to have helped get the noise floor correct too.

Although I might not be done yet because having output 2 on unity gain is probably not going to be loud enough for the power amp
Click to expand...
Ok you caught it. Was just going to reply it's the gain staging, I went through this the first week of release with it in the loop of my Helix floor.

The app routed through Helix USB to PC+ was perfect, hooked up pedal and started digging in to levels and Deadpan recommended what you and I both found.
 
texhex said:
This weekend I’m going to work out how to record a DI of the sounds the Tonex uses when it processes the first part of the capture (the part where it plays the sine wave and prerecorded riffs). Then I’m going to use that DI into the Kemper during the Refine process and see if it does any better than the way I normally Refine a profile.

:rollsafe
Click to expand...

So the results of this are very interesting. On the amps of mine that the Kemper Profiles well, using the Tonex DI during the Refining process produces the absolute best Profiles I've ever created. They are closer to the amp than any Profile I've ever made. In fact, when A/B/C comparing Kemper/Amp/Tonex the only way I can tell the difference between the three is because the Tonex captures have a really high background noise vs. the Kemper and the Amp.

On the amps that the Kemper doesn't Profile well, Refining with the Tonex DI still produces a better Profile vs. ad lib Refining, I just ended up with a Profile that didn't exactly match the amp as usual but the differences were smaller than when not Refining with the Tonex DI. The Profile didn't sound bad, it just doesn't match the amp as well as the amps that Profile really well.

Tonex Captures still beat Kemper Profiles. On my amps that don't Profile well, the Tonex Captures are spot on when comparing to the amp. There is still a really high noise floor on the Tonex Captures. I haven't spent any time looking into that to see if it's something I can correct but wow, Tonex is the clear winner here.

Kemper clearly has to do something to compete with this new tech if they want to stay competitive. Literally just running a DI of the four minute Tonex DI when Refining makes a big difference.

If anyone wants the raw Tonex DI let me know. It's a 39MB WAV file, I don't think I can attach it to this post.
 
texhex said:
So the results of this are very interesting. On the amps of mine that the Kemper Profiles well, using the Tonex DI during the Refining process produces the absolute best Profiles I've ever created. They are closer to the amp than any Profile I've ever made. In fact, when A/B/C comparing Kemper/Amp/Tonex the only way I can tell the difference between the three is because the Tonex captures have a really high background noise vs. the Kemper and the Amp.

On the amps that the Kemper doesn't Profile well, Refining with the Tonex DI still produces a better Profile vs. ad lib Refining, I just ended up with a Profile that didn't exactly match the amp as usual but the differences were smaller than when not Refining with the Tonex DI. The Profile didn't sound bad, it just doesn't match the amp as well as the amps that Profile really well.

Tonex Captures still beat Kemper Profiles. On my amps that don't Profile well, the Tonex Captures are spot on when comparing to the amp. There is still a really high noise floor on the Tonex Captures. I haven't spent any time looking into that to see if it's something I can correct but wow, Tonex is the clear winner here.

Kemper clearly has to do something to compete with this new tech if they want to stay competitive. Literally just running a DI of the four minute Tonex DI when Refining makes a big difference.

If anyone wants the raw Tonex DI let me know. It's a 39MB WAV file, I don't think I can attach it to this post.
Click to expand...
For playing the ToneX pedal in the loop of another modeler whether Fractal, Line6 or I assume QC you need to adjust input trim down a bit to remove noise.

I'm not awake enough to think through if this would effect the capture routing in the same manner. Check the input trim level on the pedal if it's at 0dB drop it to -10dB to start if it's at -6 to -10 dB try going to -15dB.
 
Whizzinby said:
I removed the cab via the pedal and it thins out the caps considerably. Software must have a hard time discerning the cab section. They are friggin ace with cab baked in though, just depends how you want to run them.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I would never trust the algo to get this close enough to right to be really useful... Like you, I run 4CM a lot. With the prevalence of load boxes nowadays, I try to focus just on no cab caps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top