Axe III vs. Tonex V2 capture

boyce89976

boyce89976

Experienced
I've had a couple Tonex One's for a while now, but have hated the Editor and the UI in general. In fact, I've never used them live, nor have I touched them for months.

They just released their V2 capture tech, and so I thought I should check it out. I got one V2 capture pack of a Matchless SC30, which is an amp I'm most familiar with. I went straight to a Ch. 2 (EF86) low gain capture. After a few minutes of tweaking, I recorded a comparison of the Tonex V2 capture vs. my Axe III (both the Tonex Capture and the Axe III amp preset are from Worship Tutorials/Signal Theory Audio). In the words, both the amp and cab are the same in the Tonex capture and my Axe III preset.

There are 3 sections in the clip below:
Section 1 - dry, amps-only
Section 2 - Bridge on "He Who Is to Come"
Section 3 - Final choruses on "He Who Is to Come"

Can you guess which is which?
 
To my ears right away it there is an EQ or mic difference between the two, gain structures sound similar. Which one feels better?
 
Sixstring said:
To my ears right away it there is an EQ or mic difference between the two, gain structures sound similar. Which one feels better?
Click to expand...
I have no idea what mic was used for the Tonex Capture. I EQ'd them as close as I could (no changes to my Axe preset... but I Eq'd Tonex in the Tonex editor to get as close to the Axe preset as I could).

Feel wise, I think I like #1 slightly better.
 
Sixstring said:
gain structures sound similar
Click to expand...
To me they couldn’t be more different

Granted I’m listening through AirPods, so may be missing a lot, but:

Listen to the beginning of the third section where chords are played. With the first device I hear individual notes/strings, the second device is kinda “directionally correct” but it’s more of a continuity from lows to highs - either there’s more saturation or aliasing kicks in, I don’t know

Second device is much more compressed, and the low end just isn’t there

And the reverb in the first device is much more transparent, to me it sounds like a guitar in a cavernous space, with the second device it’s again all mashed up together in some noise like medium

So maybe it’s my personal preference coupled with bad monitoring speaking, but that’s what I typically get from every profiler/capturer, or cheap modeler. Although it’s probably possible to achieve in fractal too, but why would anybody do it?
 
every 1st sample : Don'tX v2
every 2nd sample : AXE III

This is my conclusion. I think the IK Don'tX is trying to emphasize a more percussive sound. Is this their strategy to make it sound like a real amp to the user? 🤔
 
boyce89976 said:
I've had a couple Tonex One's for a while now, but have hated the Editor and the UI in general. In fact, I've never used them live, nor have I touched them for months.

They just released their V2 capture tech, and so I thought I should check it out. I got one V2 capture pack of a Matchless SC30, which is an amp I'm most familiar with. I went straight to a Ch. 2 (EF86) low gain capture. After a few minutes of tweaking, I recorded a comparison of the Tonex V2 capture vs. my Axe III (both the Tonex Capture and the Axe III amp preset are from Worship Tutorials/Signal Theory Audio). In the words, both the amp and cab are the same in the Tonex capture and my Axe III preset.

There are 3 sections in the clip below:
Section 1 - dry, amps-only
Section 2 - Bridge on "He Who Is to Come"
Section 3 - Final choruses on "He Who Is to Come"

Can you guess which is which?
Click to expand...

Why don't you get your patch set up on the Fractal and then just make a Tonex capture of it?
 
I applaud people's desires to experiment with gear but there's a certain point where pulling outboard gear into the mix when there is zero need is just a waste of time. It makes sense for me when it's something in the analog realm (aka "let's get a power amp and guitar cabinet" or "let's try some analog pedals in front") but when it's "let's put this other crap to use digital turd into the mix" when we already have every pretty much* amp you could ever want baked in the Fractal; no thanks.
 
I had a Tonex One for a while (for my son) and never liked anything on it, always sounded harsh. Neither tone here sounds good, but 2 seems harsher, so I'd guess that was the Tonex, not that 1 sounded better really.
 
zerolight said:
I had a Tonex One for a while (for my son) and never liked anything on it, always sounded harsh. Neither tone here sounds good, but 2 seems harsher, so I'd guess that was the Tonex, not that 1 sounded better really.
Click to expand...
I spent WAYYYYYYYYY too much time watching captures fail time and again during the brief stint I had it to where it became "Welp; I could just, you know; play through the Badlander OR grab one of the bazillion Boogies in the FM3/9/III" and use it when I want my digital fix. Absolute no brainer in my book.
 
FractalAudio said:
Sorting through thousands of captures/profiles/etc. is about as fun as a prostate exam with an unlubricated glove.
Click to expand...


200.gif
 
I like Tonex in Ax3's loop for some sounds Fractal does not have (of course those exist - check the wish lists). Quality/Accuracy as good as Axfx component modelling? - nope, but, like plugins, can sound pretty good to my ear if used right. Yes, finding profiles is a pain in the patoot - I stick with a couple of trusted sources.

Also, Tonex1 is great as a tiny couch practice unit with headphones.
 
Last edited:
By the time these Worship tones get through a Lexicon verb and a Westminster Abbey verb and a Mammoth Cave verb and a 50% wet stereo delay (only to then be performed in a church that sounds perfectly nice on its own), the original capture is nearly moot. This is not where I would invest a bunch of time.
 
WKSmith said:
Capturing an amp with their hardware and capture device yields a tone similar to the brown bits left over on that same blue glove.

Delightful.
Click to expand...
People often don't get the levels right when capturing, so doodoo results. For the captures I've tried (mostly pedals), results were good - snapshots of specific settings of course (which is a major disadvantage of profiling in general vs component modelled imo), but pretty descent.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom