ToneX vs Quad Cortex - the stuff (almost) no one talks about
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 тра 2024
- Thanks for checking out my deep dive into the aspects of ToneX that interested me the most. Let me know what you think about it in the comments and what your favourite amp / modeler / profiler currently is.
Subscribe, leave a like and a comment and feel free to follow me on Instagram:
/ maxfreist
My captures on Cortex Cloud: neuraldsp.com/cloud/u/MaxF
My models on Tone.net: www.tone.net/tonex/users/maxf...
00:00 - Intro
00:33 - What are we doing today?
01:07 - Who am I?
01:36 - Why did I get ToneX?
02:22 - The Comparison
02:44 - Signal Chain
02:47 - Rock - real amp
03:05 - Rock - ToneX
03:23 - Rock - Quad Cortex
03:42 - Rock - real amp
04:04 - Metal - real amp
04:16 - Metal - ToneX
04:28 - Metal - Quad Cortex
04:39 - Metal - real amp
04:54 - Capture / Model translation
05:13 - IR Packs anyone?
05:18 - Cab / IR used for this video
05:50 - Latency - why you should give a f***
07:11 - Is the latency fixed?
07:38 - Measurements…
08:20 - …and what to do with them
09:12 - Capturing Fuzz
09:27 - Fuzz Sample
09:51 - Fuzz capture
10:08 - Nope! Why you will never capture the true fuzz sound
11:30 - Preset switching delay
12:04 - Conclusion
14:10 - ToneX 2:0 Quad Cortex (for capturing)
15:41 - Feel vs. Sound
15:55 - Outro
Some of the following links are affiliate links and will help me continue producing videos on UA-cam - without costing you a penny :)
Signal chain:
Guitar 1: Fender Standard MIM Telecaster
Guitar 2: Harley Benton SC 550 II - thmn.to/thoprod/521064?partne...
Guitar 3: Solar A1.7 ETC - thmn.to/thoprod/502918?partne...
Boost: Mesa Grid Slammer
Preamp 1:Synergy Bogner Ecstasy - thmn.to/thoprod/488028?partne...
Preamp 2: Synergy Diezel Herbert
Amp: Randall RM100
Loadbox: Driftwood Reactive Load - driftwoodamps.com/produkt/rea...
Delay: Strymon Timeline - thmn.to/thoprod/261034?partne...
Reverb: Meris Mercury 7 - thmn.to/thoprod/414206?partne...
Quad Cortex: thmn.to/thoprod/486992?partne...
ToneX Pedal: thmn.to/thoprod/560560?partne...
Cab Impulse Responses: York Audio 412 EVH - www.yorkaudio.co/
Audio Interface: Waves DSPRO 4000 - thmn.to/thoprod/460187?partne...
DAW: Studio One 6 Pro - thmn.to/thoprod/552366?partne...
Monitoring: Neumann KH120A - thmn.to/thoprod/255902?partne...
Awesome analysis! Looking forward to more videos from your channel!
Thank you HB, me too 🙂🤘🏻
I just want to say thanks for the amount of hard work you did here. Superb quality that rivals the biggest channels... keep up the great work.
Hey ya, thank you for the kind words, instant smile on my face! 😁👍🏻
I will save this reply because if you keep doing stuff that good, you will be too big to do it soon!
@@BlugubriousMusic I understand what you mean, so in the simplest way searching for the right words: thank you 🙏🙃
I have both and agree with your assessment of the accuracy of tonex vs. qc. On the flip side I still enjoy using my qc a bit more as it is so easy to edit etc.
Yes I fully agree with you - QC still has the best UI currently. That also has its quirks but it's still a great leap forward from the usual small screen and encoders/buttons.
Great video Thanks! Did you try in the GLOBAL menu to turn BANK NAV off? It is supposed that the delay between presets improves significantly!
Muchas gracias Alejandro! No I haven't yet!
Thank you for the great comparison of these two!
You're welcome, thanks for commenting! :)
Have you tried the captures/models?
@@MaxFreist No, I haven't. I just use amps and plug-ins for now.
A lot of interesting and useful information. Thanks.
Thanks Rodrigo, glad it was helpful! 😊
Great seeing you back in the YT game! I need to get myself back to Germany, it's been too long.
Hey Vlad! Cheers! If you come to Germany let me know, would be great to meet you again :)
You can absolutely switch between amps and/or captures within a scene on the QC. The QC will let you load 4-5 amps/captures in a single preset and you can bypass any blocks via scenes
Hey Chuck, yes absolutely correct, I mentioned that a few sentences earlier but that probably could have been communicated a bit clearer :)
I was referring to the way you can change parameters per scene. So you can go from clean to drive within 1 amp block but then of course you can't change amp models this way. Thanks for clarifying.
@@MaxFreist I'm not sure if we're saying the same thing - yes you can change params via scene, but you can also add a 5150 and a Fender Twin model to one preset, and then switch between them via scenes - effectively letting you change between two totally different amp models in a single preset with no gap. You simply bypass the amp you don't want in the signal chain in any given scene. And as I said earlier - you could do this with 4-5 different models/captures however you'd like to mix and match.
@@ChuckHirstius yes I know :)
QC is most versatile in this regard, better than the rest 👍🏻 sorry for the confusion ;)
Yes but you bump up the latency significantly for every capture you ad
Good video.Useful content. Thanks.
wow... nice job with this analisys!
Good video. I have a QC and I really enjoy using it. The tones work for me as a studio guitarist. I don’t notice latency with it. I don’t do a lot of capturing. The ToneX looks good but I don’t have the spare cash to chop and change modelers. I will stick with what I have and learn to use it more and spend my time playing. I may check out the ToneX developments in a couple of years. Thanks again.
Thank you and keep enjoying your QC! :)
Interesting and detailed reflexions on latency, and good editing for A-B-C comparisons. Thanks for that. You obviously have a good technical background and and a lot of experiences you are sharing and it's precious. May be you could enlarge the sounds of your testing which is here mainly done with metal sounds orientated, which is a bit narrow to me.
Merci beaucoup! :)
I'm mostly playing rock and metal myself which then of course is where I feel most comfortable, but your feedback is appreciated and noted 🙂👍🏻
Very nice video!!! Great job man!!
Thank you very much :)
There is a nifty little trick you can do to 'compensate' the switch delay in the Tonex, and that is that you can press and hold the knob for the preset you want to use next, and only release it when you need to actually switch. Feels a tad more seamless to me at least.
interesting "workaround" I'll give that a try :)
To be clear I don't find the switching delay in ToneX a huge issue. I wanted to test it as I don't like it when it is more pronounced and as I am used to not having any for the last 7 years of playing live 😁
Thanks for the NO CAB latency figures! Also for the ToneX, it's set to change on releasing the switches (not pushing them) by default, so that you can execute bank changes more easily/accurately (I'm guessing!). If you disable BANK NAV in the GLOBAL SETUP menu, it will change on pushing the switches! 👍
Oh that's good to know, thank you! And you're welcome :)
THIS!
I just thought of a solution for capturing fuzzes. I haven't had a chance to try it out yet, but it should solve the buffer problem: a pickup impedance simulator pedal. Happy Valley Analog has a few different ones for sale on Reverb for cheap. It's an inductor, a volume pot, and a tone pot in a pedal that simulates either humbucker or single coil loading and it's all passive. I built one myself so I could use my Digitech Drop before my fuzzes and it works great at restoring their response; especially on Tone Bender circuits. I bet throwing one of those in between the IK send and the pedal input would yield much better capture results.
I know they exist but never tried one myself. Would be interesting how the effect compares to the loading and resonant frequency change on a real pickup!
Have you had a chance to try this out yet? How has it worked? Curious for both better fuzz capture results as well as a second potential benefit for using with Fishman Fluence pickups.
Muito bom seu vídeo. Excelente comparação.🎉🎉🎉
Muito obrigado! 🙏🙂
When I switched from Boss GT1000 to the QC, I started to notice latency again. But not straight away. The first couple of weeks, everything is new and you’re blinded by all the new fancy features. But after that, I started to feel “disconnected”. So I turned on a tube amp and the GT1000 for comparison. The difference in perception was huge. I’m silently waiting for boss to come out with the GT1000 successor.
Yep, I can completely relate. Which is why I'll stick to real amps where possible. QC does some nice things but the variable and at times immense latency is absolutely of putting. "most powerful modeler" - and then I can't run a few captures in series without having last century like latency 😖
I live 30 min away from Sweetwater Music. I have been trying to decide for a week if I'm going to go buy a Tonex to use with my Boss GX100, or save for a QC. You just made up my mind. Wait for the GX1000!!!
That’s cool you have a bunch of synergies, that’s what I’m into going towards when I have the money seems like a great direction to get a True Tone in a portable rack first I’ll have to part and sell some tube amps , I have a Headrush original pedal board not the new modeling one and will own this Tonex in a few days . I look at this as for fun and good back up rigs for live use.
Wow great video man! Thanks for your efforts. Would love to see a video or just a soundwave comparison on your pc between the ToneX and the HX Stomp. I'm using the HX Stomp currently and am trying to decide if I should add the ToneX to my board. I have Amplitube5 and ToneX for pc, but would love to incorporate all those tones into my board. Anyone have any experience with that? Tone loss?
thanks man, glad you appreciate it!
unfortunately I don't have HX line hardware anymore so I can't compare directly. But regarding integration - if you want ToneX sound on your board - go for it, I don't think you will regret it!
How happy are you with the HX amp sounds or what are the areas you think they fall short?
I am mostly just a guitarists, the past few years I kind of have been messing around in Reaper. I had limited "fake" amp experience, but Tonex caught my ear for sure. I am not in a huge hurry to buy a new device like Tonex. I got the app for $50 and I think it was worth it. I think in the near future we will be looking at refining captures and the adjustability of them. Like if they added capturing to the HX Stomp that would be sweet. I am just up to my neck in options, like most people probably. An all in one box with a good price with some upgrades compared to Tonex will be what I am looking at. I am thinking a box for about the same price as Tonex that literally does it all lol I am still keeping my Mark V 25 thjough.
Hey there, thanks for sharing your thoughts :)
Fully agree, the option paralysis nowadays is real! So much ways of getting a good sound, so much says of getting shitty sound :D
The digital tools are awesome for live and small rigs and also convenient for recording but they for me will never 100% replace my amps in all situations.
Mark V 25 is a killer small box of great tones!
A really good Clip 👍👍👍🥰 will be subscribed directly 😉✌
Thank you Andreas! 🤘🏻
Nice vid. Thx for analysing and clarifying the latency issue. About modelling fuzz: every body and their grandma (especially her) knows that certain vintage design fuzzes need to see the low impendance ofthe pickup (fuzz face 5,2kohmish?) there are nice videos here on yt of 60buck boxes who do just that: take a buffered signal but show the fuzz a low impendance. Maybe slap that in the moddelling loop? The venerable hx can switch input impendance to low when using fuzz models. Strange those genius engineers designing those groundbraking capturing devices didńt think of that. Hmm. Maybe when the qc update enabling installing those nice neuraldspcplugins comes finally they will put that feature in…. Or maybe just take a cheapo broadband speaker connected to an hifi amplifier, hold that to the pickup into the fuzz and capture that way.
Cool that you appreciated the latency part ;)
Regarding fuzz - taking the buffered / low impedance signal of an audio interface output and running thru a reamp box converting it to something closer to a guitar output impedance should be and is one part of matching the sound closest, no matter what I run into (pedal, amp). But from my understanding the problem isn't only the impedance of guitar out and fuzz in but the interaction and loading effect of the unusual low input impedance of a fuzz face (5-8 kOhm as you said) on the guitar pickup(s) resulting in a resonant frequency shift. But writing this I think I understand what you're getting at - if using a impedance correction device after reamp out to fuzz in the fuzz might maybe react closer to how it would to the guitar.
BUT then you're missing the loading effect of the low impedance in on the guitar when playing into the ToneX pedal or QC or your interface - so you'd need to switch the impedance correction on when tracking/playing too. Provided both fuzz and guitar really act in a similar fashion with the impedance correction vs direct interaction........... Maybe something to test in another video? 😅
@@MaxFreist certainly a niche subject, but havent seen a vid going into this deeply. Maybe also try playing the capture tone via a speaker/transducer directly into the pickup of the guitar connected to the fuzz. Next thing you know wéll be capturing pickups as well. Just dont forget to play while tinkering! All the best!
At the end you're talking about different feels while playing. But you didn't talk about how they differ (amp, ToneX, QC)? For me thats one of the most important topics. So could you tell us something about it?
Hey, you're right, I didn't go into further detail - but that's because I can't put it into words properly. All I know is that when not playing and switching it is harder to tell which is the real amp from just listening to how it sounds. As soon as I have the guitar in hand and switching then I can tell in a blind test. If I find a way to describe it better in the future, I will ;)
Nothing can touch the Low end and punch of real.I hope the engineers make it happen from a vst before I die😢
I’m trying your ToneX models now! What York Audio impulse did you use for the intro? That sounds killer!
I did a blend myself if a few mics on the EVH 412. I can check which ones and let you know if you want. The standard mixes where a bit too bright for me IIRC.
@@MaxFreist I downloaded your ToneX models, sounds great! Im using OH Heavy Hitters, I'll try it w their EVH cabs.
@@mikesmith1290 awesome! Let me know what cab / speaker works best for you!
@@MaxFreist I'm playing my Ibanez Axion label MS 7 string dropped to G std, OH 412+V30 BOLD-00.wav. Your tone model still sounds pretty focused for such a low tuning. I'm having a blast!!
@@mikesmith1290 nice! My bread and butter 7 string is tuned to Drop Ab and I have another going down to Eb, so 8 string territory. Fun but not as easy to make it work sound wise.
Agreed, the ToneX also sounded more accurate to me. Have you tried NAM - Neural Amp Modeler? It is a "totally free," open-source software that is available as a VST Plugin, or Standalone. In all the tests/videos I've seen so far, it is capable of producing the most accurate Profiles/Captures compared to other hardware units and software products.
Thanks for watching + commenting :)
I know about NAM but haven't found the time to dig in myself and test it. I've made the same experience as you, all I've seen so far looks very promising and it seems to be able to deliver even better accuracy than ToneX.
Just what I was going to ask. NAM looks like it has a future.
Just curious what you are using for loadbox for the Randall? Getting your amp DI?
I'm either using real cab as a load or the Driftwood Reactive Load: driftwoodamps.com/produkt/reactive-loadbox-8ohm/
Still want to try a Suhr and a St. Rock react:ir.......
@Max Freist I have the St Rock ReactIR. It's very good. Also have the Boss Waza. It's good too. Always interested in what other guys are using. Cheers
I think both the ToneX and QC sound very good. To my ears though (and even with the compression youtube adds), to my ear it sounds like the QC has some cutoff happening in the lows and low mids in comparison to the ToneX. Though I suppose that could be down to a different cutoff in the IR on both units?
The IR was added in the DAW for exact comparison, so different IR resolutions will not factor in ;)
@@MaxFreist In that case this just makes me all the more excited I'll be receiving my ToneX Pedal on Friday! Great comparison, it's really nice to hear these units stacked up to each other so clearly.
@@toast180 thank you! :)
Have fun with the ToneX pedal, let me know how it works out for you!
Which York IRs were you using, specifically? I have almost all the YA IRs already and I'm interested in trying out your captures with the same IRs.
Hi Jeremey, I checked and used a mix of 4 single mics:
160-1 @21,3%
58-3 @34%
906-2 @23,4%
47-1 @21,3%
@@MaxFreist Which YA cab pack is that from? I must've missed the name in the video.
@@Poparad yep, you can find it in the signal chain / ir part ;)
YA EVH 412
Pretty much explains why the GT1000 Core is still on my board... 💥
How does the boss gt1000 compare to these 2 in the video?
As far as processing power and quaility of sounds in the effects...
It really depends on what you want to compare. ToneX has no effects, it's a amp surrogate (yeah, Reverb and comp, but not very good ones imho and not effect units like the other 2). Processing power - quad cortex is best as it's most flexible and can run multiple stuff parallel. GT1000 is limited to 2 amps and fixed number for each FX.
Sounds of the fx - both QC and GT1000 are good.
Djent timestamps:
4:05 - AMP
4:17 - TONE-X
4:28 - QUAD CORTEX
I just got mine a few days ago. I have a Helix floor and a Mooer GE300.
They both sound great, but there is a different level of clarity and fidelity the Tonex has that they can't match.
I've mostly concentrated on Marshall and Marshall type amps so far.
The 900 and the Taco which I assume is a Friedman.
This is the first time I've truly had the amp in room sound from any modeler.
The Helix is great and if you didn't have the Tonex to compare it to, you might think it can't get much better.
I'm bypassing the cabs and playing through a powercab on the Essex model and its incredible.
I haven't downloaded any from tonenet yet, but will soon.
I will never buy an amp again.
Awesome that it's working out so great for you! If your into Marshall sounds, check Runt + Maxon from a guy called Tim, just stumbled upon that.
I sold my QC 3 weeks ego.I am using a Boss GX 100. I waiting for the Tonex to get better, effects etc No latency with the Boss GX 100.
Hey Eduardo! I'm thinking of doing the same, just haven't finally decided yet. Actually got a Boss GT 1000 Core last week for effects 🤘🏻
Great job, I really limed your video. Maybe you can work on making less cuts in your videos. Still very good for now, subscribed!
Thank you and thanks for your feedback!
That's something I want to work on and I'm sure I can improve upon in the future 🙃
I own all three of the popular profilers. The Tone X being the newest one.My issue has been the load that it's putting on my computer, being that I do use some heavy plugins. So I thought buying an apple Studio ( the most spec out one) would solve the issue. I bought two of them, being that I work between two places. It helped, but it was still the same issue. I had friends who are wizards with logic and apple computers in general to help, but it's still the same issue. I use a lot of outboard gear instead of plugins to lighten the load. So I mostly use my Kemper and Q.C. if I could, I would definitely use the Tone X.
That sounds like you are using the ToneX plugin vs Kemper and QC as hardware? Or do you run each device as your audio interface?
@Max Freist No. I just use the Q.C. or an amp. I connect everything to Antelope.
@@jrlee243 well so you compare ToneX in plugin form to QC / Kemper hardware? Of course the plugin has the computer CPU load "issue" - but if you get the ToneX pedal and record / reamp thru that - no more CPU issues. Or freeze the ToneX guitar tracks and only use 1 live one each time. But the you can't use bigger buffer sizes when monitoring thru ToneX as you loose low latency monitoring.... As you already do - hardware is king for that ;)
@Max Freist I have been down a rabbit hole with profiles, kinda like with IRs. Some profiles are on my Kemper, some are on my Cotex, and tone x. I do reamp with mostly my amplifiers, I guess I never thought about that with the Tone X. I will try that. Thank you. I kind of feel stupid for not thinking of that. Lol. Appreciate it.
There’s something not right with what you’re experiencing. I’m currently running the MBP 16 inch with M1Pro (lower specked model) in Logic running through Rosetta (because of a few old plugins), using Tonex, Neural DSP, and NAM plugins, all with drum AUs, lots of Arturia synths and Kontakt instruments. My latency is very manageable, and I use low latency mode to record. The whole thing has been rock solid. It’s my best setup yet. I can’t understand why yours would be so bad. Perhaps your audio interface? I’m using the Motu m4 which does have good latency.
cool video, thx! 😊
Thank you 🙂
🔥🔥🔥🔥
What about a pickup simulator pedal before the capturing device?
You mean regarding fuzzes? I have never tried one so far. Had the thought too.
What about headphones output sound quality? I asked IK the specs and here is the response. Do I need an headphone amp? Should I connect to Tonex headphones jack or the line level output?
IK email response:
Measurement condition: Output volume set at 0dB; operation mode:interface, 32ohm load
Output impedance 68 ohm
Dynamic range -100dB
Power 20mW
Frequency response 5Hz-20kHz
THD+N -54dB
Crosstalk L-R -60dB
Hi Max ! I own a TC Electronic Plethora and a Strymon Timeline. You think If those pedals would be a good combination with the Tone X ?
I guess that would be a great combination! Plethora for all FX, ToneX for nice amp sounds, Timeline as delay King - let me know if you get ToneX and how it works for you! :)
@@MaxFreist Thank you, I’ll let you know…
Sounded like you said 50 years...😮
Kemper still rules! 🙂
But what do you think of the FM9???
Fractal modeling is - in my opinion+experience - the best there is in a hardware unit right now. The FM9 is great regarding possibilities and sound (great sound, dual amping, a lot of nice fx, grid and modifier flexibility) but I have a few caveats about it:
1. there is a lot to learn, Fractal units are complex. really complex. You don't have to use all of that complexity, but the temptation is there and you can easily spent more time turning knobs than playing. You have a lot of advanced parameters available - you can get lost in tweaking and you can get bad sounds due to the sheer possibilities of changing the sound. You don't have to. But sticking to the basic amp parameters and leaving it there can be difficult, trust me, I've been there for 5+ years.
2. it costs 2299€ in EU - that's 450€ more than a QC and 740€ more than a Helix
3. I would not want a device costing this much be in the front row in smaller locations where drinks might be put on the stage edge. > I'd prefer rack + midi controller and I would put my QC in a rack and have a midi board in front of me on stage (or midi control remote via PC when playing on a click track).
So for me the FM9 form factor is suboptimal - I'd buy it for Axe Fx III like processing but saving money compared to the rack unit.
4. UI is not en par with QC. Quite frankly, Quad Cortex has the best user interface with big screen, touch and encoder combination.
5. FM9 / Fractal is powerful regarding modifiers and remote control, far superior to most other devices in my experience. If you need that - only you can decide. It's not necessary for getting good sound or basic rigs.
All fine but the hardware prerequisites for the pc/long processing time for toneX is a no go for me. As an amp designer I capture little hardware changes I make to judge the differences later. For me the Kemper is still doing the job after 10 years. It’s fast and does the job.
I almost bought tonex, but I don't need it live.. then I discovered NAM.. and now, yesterday I bought the AXE I/O one.
If you only need it for studio use in your DAW - NAM or ToneX without the pedal (or both 😁) is the way to go 👍🏻
@@MaxFreist its just an amazing deal.. 125 euro and I get tonex SE and amplitube 5 SE with it.
@@bassblom yes! I just stumbled around and tested Amplitube 5 a bit a week ago and did get a really usable sound out of it quite fast! I think the last version I used years ago may have been 2? 😅
I love the Quad Cortex, but the latency is what keeps me away. The Boss GT1000 has far lower latency than almost all other devices (even faster than the Helix, Kemper, Headrush, and Axe Effects), and you can feel the lag difference when you play. I prefer the tone of the QC, but I cannot get past the latency. Either QC needs an updated version that is far faster, or Boss needs a new GT1000 successor with capture capabilities and better UI.
Thanks for sharing your experience! In the recent 2.1 update (a few days ago) NDSP wrote that overall system latency has been improved - I haven't had the time to test and measure it yet. And yeah, GT1000 successor is something I have thought of too - it's already some years old 😁
That's what plugin latency compensation is for though. Although if you're using the Tonex pedal then yeah the latency of the pedal might become an issue. In a recording situation however plugin latency compensation will take care of any latency on the grid that's caused by a plugin. You might be able to lower the latency figures at higher sample rates I don't know. For live use I don't know and don't care. Mine are studio use-cases only. And in the studio and for tracking you have several methods available to battle latency while tracking.
You are correct regarding plugin latency compensation, but as you said with regards to the pedal in test here.... no latency compensation ;)
@@MaxFreist yeah you're kind of at the mercy of the pedal then. I think you could maybe use real pedals though in front of the Tonex thing and solve it that way maybe. Are these fuzz pedals analogue? I don't know much about pedal distortion. I just use an amp in the studio. But listening to this I mean the Tonex thing sounds fine to me. I wouldn't have a problem trying it in production and seeing if it works for the track. Seems like we have lots of great options these days. :)
@@Screaming-Trees yes great point - we are spoiled with great options these days ;)
Yeah the fuzz pedals are analogue. For me the ToneX pedal and software is a tool for a) saving amp sounds and b) quick turn around times and songwriting, where I can just throw the plugin on a DI track instead of reamping multiple tracks thru my amp rig. Still love my amps, still like the Quad Cortex for some of the stuff where it delivers. Fun times 😁
@@MaxFreist Oh for sure. I get it. Guitar isn't my primary instrument I produce electronic music but I do like playing them and I do end up making stuff with guitars. It's mostly a blow off some steam thing for me though, do something different with the brain, get a different perspective etc etc. I have been around a lot of guitar production in a real studio setting though. Mostly around London and Newcastle and more recently in Austin TX. Sometimes just as a tag along with friends and sometimes as a consultant. For most pros anything goes really. I've seen lots of Guitar Rig sessions for example. And that's how it should be I think. Open minded about anything. If it works in the context of the track you are trying to produce it doesn't matter what it is. I get your point about loving your amps though. It's not either or. I prefer amps myself as well but I don't really own that many pedals (just one). And I don't even use that one. But this Tonex thing sounds pretty good to me. I would have no problem using it in the studio.
I'm also a bit ampless at the moment having just got rid of Supersonic 22 due to noise floor issues. I'd like to buy a Hiwatt but it seems that's a whole saga. Might take a while to figure out which one is the true Hiwatt company. So until I can sort out my new amp I might have to try this Tonex thing thanks to you. Cheers.
The only beef i have with tonex is actually 2 things - 1.) preset switching latency (going from clean to distorted for live). 2.) not enough outputs for live use. why no xlr outs? can't wrap my head around that one
Yeah I agree with you although I find xlr outs not a problem. Every venue (should have) has DI boxes flying around so going ToneX to DI shouldn't be a problem. Of course it'd be nice to have all onboard and I'd like having multiple outs (one with, one without IR) but then for example including xlr out would make the box bigger and the cost higher.
The switching latency isn't due to the pedal itself (the CPU or DSP), it's related to the switches. It can be turned on and off. It's all about whether it switches on the press of the switch or on the release of the switch. The default behaviour (on release) works better for switching banks. But if you plugged in a 2 button switch into the back, you could use that for changing banks. Then you could set the 3 switches to switching on the press, and the switching would be instant. Similar thing if switching via MIDI.. it's instant.
I love turning analog knobs...
Me too. Which is why I have an absolutely unnecessary and way too big analogue console in my studio...... 😂😂😂
Im in a cross bridge now between tonex and QC...i love my pedal board rig and if i sell it i can get QC and if i keep it ican buy tonex....geeeez i cant decide it 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Too many great options ;)
Both are good. What do you have on your Pedalboard right now, are you happy with the fx? What music, what are you favourite sounds?
@@MaxFreist nothing special, in fx loop strymon big sky and timeline, eventide micropitch, in front (change overtime) rn a lightspeed, boss od3 and a tuner. Thats all. And the boss ir 200 as a amp and cab. Last diso+ for flexibility.
@@fedboy21 that's a pretty great selection man! I have a Timeline and Mercury7 as external FX. If your happy with the board and the control and "user interface" I'd say stick with it and get a ToneX. If you need compactness, changing multiple fx and sounds with one press (unless you have that implemented on your board already) quad Cortex might be great for you.
I guess the X really matters in the new technology these days. Helix, ToneX, QuadCortex...
aXe fX
@@rejuvenator8966 that too.
Amp X
Throw back to 90s naming
Quad Cortex sounds like Kemper to me now compared to Tonex lol. Mushy gain and deviates noticeably from the original sound. Not tight and punchy like Tonex and the amp. Tonex is still slightly thinner than the amp, I've heard clips where NAM outdoes it in this respect
Interesting analogy, I had the same feeling about Kemper. Always got like 90% there but the last 10 percent where quite noticable, for especially in the bass IIRC. I have heard great things about NAM but haven't yet found the time to dig in myself.
@@MaxFreist I have no experience with NAM either, and I've also seen opposite results, where people get quite bad results. I guess it is still so new and unpredictable or hard to use. It'll get there some day to be a plugin for average users as well I think. Meanwhile I'm loving my Tonex. And I still gig with QC because it's a full package in small footprint, so easy to use and still sounds very good
+1 York Audio
Lack of low mid and high mid on QC very hearable.
Unfortunately, when the transition between two devices is also a transition between a low chord and a much higher pitched chord, the human ear cannot accurately judge them as a comparison.
Thanks Max. With all of this said, do you now see yourself getting rid of your Q.C. and using your ToneX exclusively? 🤔
Thank you! Well - I actually have been thinking about selling my QC since December, before I even started using ToneX but wanted to wait for CorOS 2.0 to see if some of the issues / missing features get delivered. I'm still on the fence right now but in general - I will be using my analogue amp rig (especially as it's constantly growing 😅) in studio for creating guitar sounds for me and other bands and I will be using ToneX for "saving" sounds and possibly faster reamping and tracking with sounds I already created. Live shows is a different story - not sure yet what I'd prefer as I currently don't play live, but both a QC grab and go and a ToneX + FX Pedalboard could be awesome.
Fun fact - I bought a GT1000 Core a week ago for FX as I'm not happy with the QC capabilities (I have almost everything in my studio guitar rig MIDI controlable from my desk / sweet spot) and have been using the QC only for some post FX and signal routing right now. And for that, 1800€ is definitly too much.
I'll let you know when I decided, probably with a video 😉
@@MaxFreist BTW have you tried the Synergy Peavey 6505 Module yet? Pete Thorn did a pretty decent review of it.
@@jdubbs9655 I'm waiting for it to be available at thomann 😁 supposed to be there end of April! Have you?
@@MaxFreist I am not in the Synergy ecosystem (YET!) I have a few purchases ahead of that journey. 😉
I didnt consider the combined latency of wireless as well... 😢
Yep, it adds up fast. Take a great combination like HX FX and ToneX. Add a wireless. Maybe monitor thru a digital mixer. 10ms easily. Or a effect pedal with modulation, delay or reverb without an analogue dry thru. It adds up ;)
Imagine the Boss GT 1000 with upgrades. A new model that is easier to use than the QC , ultra sensitive touch screen, 10 button , 10 presets , 10 scenes, hyper mode : 5 button effects, 5 scene and much more. So goodbye modelers for me and many other. I really hope 🙏🏼.
Yes! I got a GT 1000 Core again last week and was waiting for NAMM to see if Boss comes out with something new.... We'll see what the future brings 😊
@@MaxFreist Hello Max . Congratulation with your GT 1000 Core. Maybe you will need a MIDI Captain Foot Controller. Thank you for you comment.
Yeah but Boss guitar amps sux
To my ears the real amp always has a bit of depth and airiness that are not translating into the captures
It's really a subjectivity of yours since you can see the physical thing. Try blind test!
The ToneX wins by a mile on price alone.
I recently took a look at these tone processors… I can’t believe they get away with 700 MHz arm cpus from 2010…. And claim it’s high performance. No amount of raw Asm is going to save that. And the funny thing they’re probably using java 😂
I'm pretty sure with what's happening right now with ToneX and NAM, after years of Kemper only (for profiling/capturing, disregard modeling right now) and then QC we will see a faster evolution in the near future than compared to the last 10 years. Hopefully that includes someone doing a "screw you all, THIS is high performance" device 🙂
Not sure how much scaling the raw processing power really helps and where the bottlenecks might lie besides CPU speed as I don't know enough about that, but I guess we will see in the near future!
We need NAM 🎉🎉🎉
Yes! I had a brief look at it, very promising! Of course integrating it on stable road worthy hardware is another level but the accuracy and software workflow is very interesting and potentially best in class.
quad cortex all the way
why? ;)
@@MaxFreist It has a bigger, fuller sound. And for me i'm not dong any capturing because the sounds already in it sound amazing.
@@w1zard0f0h cool, thanks for sharing!
YT makes you (me) buy things...after a while they suck. Will be the same with ToneX...
They dethroned Kemper, but NAM dethroned them all. And it is free.
Nam was made by actual engineers and programmers. Not marketer bullshitters, and idiots cobbling 700 MHz cpus together and claiming that 4 gigs of ddr3 memory is actually “high level specs”
@@snesmocha Do you think IK and QC have no engineers and programmers of their own? ;)
The "marketer bullshitters" I know are not able of delivering a hardware or software product. But I understand your sentiment - QC was overhyped due to aggressive marketing and now NDSP struggles to keep the userbase happy as they aren't 100% capable of delivering on all the promises made (yet....maybe. lol).
NAM seems to be even more accurate and I therefor wan't to have a look at it BUT keep in mind it only is software so far. Building a roadready hardware that can withstand touring and has good circuitry to support the software side is a whole different challenge.
But it is awesome to see something completely free and open source come along and stir up the whole market - I'm looking forward to the waves and reactions it will create ;)
@@MaxFreist Hardware is expensive (I do not mean the final product only, but the manufacturing process, storage, distribution, delivery, warranty).
I was amazed how fast I managed to get a mix ready guitar tone, loading NAM with the 'community' profiles.
AI is getting more and more affordable and in 10~15 years will replace about ⅓ of todays jobs.
@@PASHKULI yep 👍🏻
that djent sond is so bad. you cant here any diference i sond whit that djent sound. every modeler and tonx sounds the same
what is a good djent sound in your opinion?
Wow the quad cortex sounded the worst
Jep, thought so too.
I mean, it's still not at all horrible sounding. But it's not that accurate capturing the original sound either.
@Max Freist no but you can definitely hear a difference
A toy and the real thing
Tonex is sucks! I have a kemper and the QC “the best units” QC is the future guys!
no
Both of these units have extremely weak processors. I look for the day when $30 crap processors are no longer installed in high end modelling pedals and gear........
And what exact "weak" processor does the ToneX have?
@@matthewearl9824 The ToneX uses a MIMXRT 1061 DVL6B: its basically a single Arm Cortex M7 running at 600mhz, and costs $8, or $5 if you buy quantity.
So yes, by any standards it uses a very cheap low performance processor.
The QC uses two dual coreSharc ADsP58x Arm 5 at 500mhz (so not "quad" - or the 2GHZ as claimed by Neural Cortex -by any normal definition) but still cheap ($39) and way off current processor performance standards.
@@digitalchris6681, Have you run out of DSP power with your Quad Cortex?
@@b10t3rr0r I have, happens all the time with big presets. And it can disable global eq for presets that are too packed.
@@b10t3rr0r Oh yes. I'm selling the QC and moving onto NAM so I can upscale the PC or Mac hardware whenever I feel like it.