Tonedexter vs Behringer ADI21

[Marshall]

Originally Posted by Monsum

As suggested above, the room and the speaker (and added reverb) had too much effect on the comparison to make it fair, so here is a direct recording of both, first Tonedexter and then Behringer ADI21.

ToneDexter !

Gets rid of the brittleness.

[BT55]

Originally Posted by AeroUSA

Actually everything sounds the same through my iPhone Speakers anyway lol

The sad thing is that people use their phone, pc or tablet for listening to music [emoji30]. Don’t we all remember when everyone had a stereo system and music sounded good!

That’s why tests like this topic regardless of how well done produce questionable results. If the listener isn’t hearing the sound on a good system how can they make a decision based on what is reproduced. The most accomplished player using a plastic guitar will have the tone of a plastic guitar regardless of the wavemap.

[Peter Z]

Originally Posted by Marshall

ToneDexter !

Gets rid of the brittleness.

And now I'd be surprised if still someone likes the ADI better!

[Peter Z]

Originally Posted by BT55

The sad thing is that people use their phone, pc or tablet for listening to music [emoji30]. Don’t we all remember when everyone had a stereo system and music sounded good!

Long time ago, isn't it?

[Marshall]

Originally Posted by James May

. . . , As to the last point, no, that statement is not correct. CH0 is all WaveMap, no blend. CH0 strips the excess phase and time information out of the full mic sound CH2. CH1 splits the difference. There are no tonal balance differences between CH0, CH1, Ch2, only the sense of dryness or closeness. CH0 is often a good choice for live. In order to blend you need to go CCW from the straight up CH0 position.

I've often wondered why anyone would mix in some pickup sound with processed sound with any of these sound-correcting-devices. It's sort of like the analogy of putting lipstick on a pig. If you're not happy with the color of the lipstick, . . . , how is it going to be any prettier if you mix in more pig?

[James May]

Originally Posted by Marshall

I've often wondered why anyone would mix in some pickup sound with processed sound with any of these sound-correcting-devices. It's sort of like the analogy of putting lipstick on a pig. If you're not happy with the color of the lipstick, . . . , how is it going to be any prettier if you mix in more pig?

The blend feature was added primarily for upright bassists who have more difficulty properly miking the "meat and bones" of their instrument, due to the physics involved, and due to the weakness of some bass's reproduction of the low fundamentals.

Some guitarists with quacky pickups use a bit of blend to bite through a band, at the expense of natural tone, of course.

[andydepressant]

Originally Posted by Marshall

ToneDexter !

Gets rid of the brittleness.

Thank the lord. I read this thread in bed last night and couldn't listen to the link. As a Tonedexter owner who had happened to have a Behringer pre lying around in storage for lending to my violinist I was gutted to read the comments. Hearing it now I'm relieved.

Nothing is perfect but the TDs sound has a complexity to it that I've found I haven't been able to deliver even using the advanced Bodyrez setting on an a TC Play Acoustic. There's so much happening in the mids on an acoustic I'll trade two sweep able mids with Q control for AI any day.

[DownUpDave]

Oh I might as well throw my 2 cents in here. The first demo through the speaker it was Behringer all the way for me. The second demo with direct recording it was Tonedexter all the way. What a huge difference between live power amplifer sound and direct in recording. But my only criteria is live sound so Behringer wins it for me. The fact that I own one makes me even happier. Yes I listened with good headphones.

[gfirob]

Interesting thread. I thought the Tonedexter (#2) sounded more natural on the first demo, but I agree that hard strumming is not the ideal for Tondexter use. I am a finger-picker with metal picks and the Tonedexter was a major game changer for me.

But the question of whether the real sound is in the quiet of your headsets or in a live room with drunks, is a dilemma that is just depressing to me because every room and situation sounds different.

I have always felt if you go in with the best you've got (the sound you liked in your headsets), then tweak and eq with what little time you may have on site you have done your duty. Trying to chase the butterfly of audio perfection in the real world environment of little bistros, bars, outdoor events and worse just adds to my already significant headache.

My starting place has always been the live acoustic sound of the best guitar I could own. The Tonedexter has provided far and away the best amplified version of that expensive guitar. Sometimes I tweak it, but for the most part, I just let the Tonedexter do its mighty work...