ToneDexter Thread

[buzzardwhiskey]

Originally Posted by guitaniac

Thanks for the report. David.

Did you need to do anything at all (invert the phase, use the sweepable notch, roll off the bass) to deal with feedback or a boominess problem?

Have you found a use for the "character" function yet (like cutting through the band mix), or does some added "character" still seem counterproductive for your personal taste in tone and your live performance needs?

The VFW gig is kind is almost like an open mic. It's extremely hurried. One band leaves and you hurry on stage and do your thing asap.

During the first set I plugged-in and got more than acceptable sound immediately, and frankly didn't even think about adjusting the character. I didn't adjust anything at all, not even the volume as it was in the ball park.

The sound isn't even close to being boomy. If it had any negative characteristics it would be thinness compared to a regular system. But again, a mic'd guitar does sound thin.

On the second set, the host (whose a bit of a tinkerer) came up and helped me setup and he adjusted the mids on the Fender acoustic amp (pulled it down). This was a pleasant change as it gave my vocals a bit of room.

I've got a three hour gig in a big bar next month and I'll definitely do some experimenting with all the controls. By then I'll have it running into a DigiTech RP360 for some polish (parametric eq, reverb).

[dannyg1]

Originally Posted by AeroUSA

I really enjoyed the set up last night. My monitor was one of the mini nejringer things but the sound was good. I didn't have as much boominess as I do at home, my monitor speakers are possibly too close the the wall or something.

The boost works well but for some songs I actually went into bypass mode and used the raw pickup for solos, this is handy!

I actually liked the bypassed sound a lot more than I ever have. I still find the K&K to lack punch in the bass. I think I'll enjoy the TD even more with an undersaddle pickup. We will have to see. Planning using it again over the weekend and next week with the undersaddle pickup.

You might want to look into the DTar Wavelength as your under saddle. The 18v pre should make a huge difference in headroom when you strum. The Fishman matrix is a fairly good sounding UST (but does vary, I've got at least 5 of them that came in some of my guitars and out of those, only two ring nicely. The poorest sounding ones either boom or tin out).

I'd love to try a tonedexter someday. I'm reading this thread with some interest. Wonder where Cuki79 is though.

[Cuki79]

Originally Posted by dannyg1

You might want to look into the DTar Wavelength as your under saddle. The 18v pre should make a huge difference in headroom when you strum. The Fishman matrix is a fairly good sounding UST (but does vary, I've got at least 5 of them that came in some of my guitars and out of those, only two ring nicely. The poorest sounding ones either boom or tin out).

I'd love to try a tonedexter someday. I'm reading this thread with some interest. Wonder where Cuki79 is though.

I am here following, don't want to interfere... With my system it is easy to compare: pickup, mic and pickup with IR.

I wish someone post samples from a regular quacky ust transducer, with heavy strumming. I think it would Be even more convincing.

From the patent, one can read they use a reference IR to select information from the learning phase. I bet the reference IR was made with a piezo ust pickup.

Anyway I Remember about the story mischief told me about the beatbuddy. I don't want my personal opinion to influence anyone. Especially since I can't even test the pedal here in Europe.

[guitaniac]

Originally Posted by dannyg1

You might want to look into the DTar Wavelength as your under saddle. The 18v pre should make a huge difference in headroom when you strum. The Fishman matrix is a fairly good sounding UST (but does vary, I've got at least 5 of them that came in some of my guitars and out of those, only two ring nicely. The poorest sounding ones either boom or tin out).

I'd love to try a tonedexter someday. I'm reading this thread with some interest. Wonder where Cuki79 is though.

I like the Wavelength too, but some folks feel it compromises the acoustic tone of the guitar more than the Matrix does. With ToneDexter, the most important factor (for a good sounding result) will be the miked sound of the guitar (which is dependent on the acoustic sound of the guitar). The better your guitar sounds acoustically, the better result you're going to get. That may be one of the reasons why James May prefers using an SBT (as opposed to a UST) for his own guitar. Most USTs will compromise the acoustic tone a bit.

Don't forget that a passive UST will also work well with ToneDexter. James May has observed that ToneDexter compensates for any loss of bass caused by running a passive UST to ToneDexter's 1 Mohm input impedance. With a passive pickup there's no worry about the possibility of overdriving a low headroom onboard preamp. There may well be passive USTs available which minimize the impact on the guitar's acoustic tone. Its even been claimed that the passive Barbera Soloist in-saddle pickup doesn't compromise acoustic tone at all (because of the high quality saddle material).

[guitaniac]

Originally Posted by buzzardwhiskey

The VFW gig is kind is almost like an open mic. It's extremely hurried. One band leaves and you hurry on stage and do your thing asap.

During the first set I plugged-in and got more than acceptable sound immediately, and frankly didn't even think about adjusting the character. I didn't adjust anything at all, not even the volume as it was in the ball park.

The sound isn't even close to being boomy. If it had any negative characteristics it would be thinness compared to a regular system. But again, a mic'd guitar does sound thin.

On the second set, the host (whose a bit of a tinkerer) came up and helped me setup and he adjusted the mids on the Fender acoustic amp (pulled it down). This was a pleasant change as it gave my vocals a bit of room.

I've got a three hour gig in a big bar next month and I'll definitely do some experimenting with all the controls. By then I'll have it running into a DigiTech RP360 for some polish (parametric eq, reverb).

I'd agree that the Dexterized signal sounds thinner (or less phat) than the Pure Mini. It doesn't sound too thin to my ear, however. Its not as thin sounding to me as the Lyric is, or the high end of the Anthem SL. I can see how those later two pickups benefit a bit from the Session DI's processing.

James May has mentioned that ToneDexter works with the Lyric. That will be an interesting comparison when we finally hear the dry/wet comparison for that combination.

[buzzardwhiskey]

Been playing with the character knob thru my Unico. I'd been experimenting for a half hour before finally reading the manual and it confirms my suspicions.

There are basically three settings even though it's a smooth turn knob.

All the way down (or counterclockwise) is a "thicker" less spacial setting.

All the way up is a more spacial setting than sounds exactly like a mic.

12:00 is some kind of mix.

Last night I'd run it on its thick setting thinking that it was off (oops).

Mind you, maybe it's not ultra-subtle, but none of these settings is earth-shattering in it's colorizing either.

When I get a little more time I'm going to make a few more trainings and save them. I want to try using my AKG 535 and I want to try recording 2+ feet out or so.

[Cuki79]

Originally Posted by dannyg1

I'm reading this thread with some interest. Wonder where Cuki79 is though.

WARNING: The following does not involve Tonedexter.

For Dannyg1, here is one of my raw IR using a similar configuration with

SR tech JAM 150+ instead of Unico + Zoom H2 at 2 feet. I play in a separate room to prevent mic bleed. I played fingerstyle: No pick.

First the EPSI IR is off (with EQ flat), second it is on with EQ low at 10h.


Note that this IR is pretty raw, you can still here some ringing in the high end and the low have to be tamed on the amp. It's explained in the Tonedexter patent that they have an algorithm to do that... In my case, I have to do it myself. I didn't do it yet since I need some free time with my amp and no kids around.

Please Tonedexter owners (and future owners) post more samples... Now I am not able to figure if I can get a better sound than what I already have with my own process...

[dannyg1]

Cuki,
which pick-up is that and what size guitar, string gauge/material? I ask because that sample sounds very different than what I was hearing with DY's guitar.

[Cuki79]

- Again: No tonedexter in this post -

Hi Dannyg1,

Doug Young was using his own guitar and:
* TA Amulet
* UA audio interface
* Very expensive studio mics in stereo.
The recordings were made straight to the audio interface. No amp. No mic.

Here it's more a live situation.
I use a Martin D-18 (2012)
* Martin strings Phosphor Bronze SP Medium (non coated)
* LR Baggs Lyric
* CAE Boost (homemade)
* EPSI IR
* SR Tech JAM 150 +
* Zoom H2 recording in mp3.
* Audacity cut on the begining of file (so mp3 compression again)

The IR is done with more affordable things (mine)
* DPA 4099G in mono (it is a clip-on mic not really studio quality)
* Focusrite scarlet 2i2 (v1)
* The process is almost the same that for DougYoung before fine tuning. (low cut, a bit of blending with a crossover and ringing correction)

A lot of the quality is lost in today's signal chain (When I've sent a wav file to MartinGitdave it sounded better on his JBL.)

The recording is done in my garage... Not the best acoustic either.

To conclude the best is your mic, audio interface, studio room, guitar skills... The best it actually sounds

Note: Comparing both I think Buzzardwhisky samples sound better than mine...
It means I have to work again on the process However it could be my crappy playing since even the K&K raw sample sounds better... Then I would have to work even harder

[guitaniac]

Originally Posted by buzzardwhiskey

Been playing with the character knob thru my Unico. I'd been experimenting for a half hour before finally reading the manual and it confirms my suspicions.

There are basically three settings even though it's a smooth turn knob.

All the way down (or counterclockwise) is a "thicker" less spacial setting.

All the way up is a more spacial setting than sounds exactly like a mic.

12:00 is some kind of mix.

Last night I'd run it on its thick setting thinking that it was off (oops).

Mind you, maybe it's not ultra-subtle, but none of these settings is earth-shattering in it's colorizing either.

When I get a little more time I'm going to make a few more trainings and save them. I want to try using my AKG 535 and I want to try recording 2+ feet out or so.

Thanks for the follow-up regarding the "character" function, David. Its not surprising that the knob direction was confusing. Because of the way that volume knobs function, most people would expect that a clockwise direction would yield more of the "character" effect. Not so, apparently. I'm reminded that Mama Bear's EFX knob also worked a bit counter-intuitively. Turning the knob counter-clockwise increased the amount of Mama Bear's modeling effect. I recall that it confused many new users, and that I had my own "what the heck?" moment with it.

Good luck with your WaveMap training adventures. To my way of thinking, its a wonderful feature that ToneDexter users are able to make up to eleven WaveMaps and select the one(s) which are most pleasing

[James May]

Hi all,
I've been following this thread but too busy to respond until now. We just got the next batch of ToneDexters ready for shipment out Monday. This will cover all who've purchased so far.

I want to add some clarification to a few points that have been raised here.

1. Regarding the difference between using ToneDexter with a UST vs. a K&K SBT. The end result, tonally, will be very close to the same. But there will be some difference, mostly related to the attack sound. The USTs have a much stronger initial attack due to their sensing the string attack rather immediately. The SBTs on the other hand are slower to register that attack due to the inertial resistance of getting the top plate into motion. They sound more like our ears hear it acoustically, and more more like the mic hears. But for live playing through a sound system, the extra attack from a UST is a useful thing in many settings. And, we are very well used to hearing it. So the question of which is best with TD, UST or SBT has no definitive answer. It depends on what you like, and how much feedback immunity you need.

2. Regarding the character control. CW is fully the mic sound (plus our feedback adjustment). CCW is a punchier sound with less ambience and space. 12 o'clock straight up is half and half. But both have exactly the same frequency response. Tonally identical, but CW sounds more spacious like the mic, CCW sounds more like a pickup but EQ'd perfectly.

3. The internal process that we use to create the WaveMap does not reference any particular kind of pickup, or indeed any particular instrument. It does not have a bias nor does it play favorites.

[midwinter]

Got my shipment notice today in the middle of a set at a folk festival. Can't wait!

[Cuki79]

Originally Posted by James May

Hi all,
I've been following this thread but too busy to respond until now. We just got the next batch of ToneDexters ready for shipment out Monday. This will cover all who've purchased so far.

I want to add some clarification to a few points that have been raised here.

1. Regarding the difference between using ToneDexter with a UST vs. a K&K SBT. The end result, tonally, will be very close to the same. But there will be some difference, mostly related to the attack sound. The USTs have a much stronger initial attack due to their sensing the string attack rather immediately. The SBTs on the other hand are slower to register that attack due to the inertial resistance of getting the top plate into motion. They sound more like our ears hear it acoustically, and more more like the mic hears. But for live playing through a sound system, the extra attack from a UST is a useful thing in many settings. And, we are very well used to hearing it. So the question of which is best with TD, UST or SBT has no definitive answer. It depends on what you like, and how much feedback immunity you need.

2. Regarding the character control. CW is fully the mic sound (plus our feedback adjustment). CCW is a punchier sound with less ambience and space. 12 o'clock straight up is half and half. But both have exactly the same frequency response. Tonally identical, but CW sounds more spacious like the mic, CCW sounds more like a pickup but EQ'd perfectly.

3. The internal process that we use to create the WaveMap does not reference any particular kind of pickup, or indeed any particular instrument. It does not have a bias nor does it play favorites.

Thanks for the info James! It is really good that the selection of the samples is not pickup related.

Cuki

[AeroUSA]

Gig #2 done. My advice, if you have a nice acoustic with a K&K or undersaddle pickup and you like the sound of a mic'ed acoustic. Get a ToneDexter now.

[guitaniac]

Originally Posted by AeroUSA

Gig #2 done. My advice, if you have a nice acoustic with a K&K or undersaddle pickup and you like the sound of a mic'ed acoustic. Get a ToneDexter now.

Thanks for the follow-up, Aero. Have you used ToneDexter in live performance now with both of your guitars, or just the OM?

From your earlier posts, I could tell that you were seriously worried that you might have a feedback or boominess issue with using ToneDexter in a performance environment where you've had problems before with the Rainsong/Pure Mini rig.


BTW, I'm still very impressed with your ToneDexter demo. It sounds like you were strumming pretty aggressively. I've always had the biggest problem with strumming (as opposed to picking), when recording direct from pickup. I went back and did some more recording yesterday, but ToneDexter still wins hands down.