School Me on the Tonedexter

[Brent Hahn]

I'm doing a lot of FOH mixing all of a sudden, and running into a fair number of Tonedexters. The idea behind them is great. They do, indeed, seem to make a piezo sound just barely like a piezo.

But the sound from every one of them that I've heard has been thin and unpleasant. In a solo singer-guitarist scenario, I can't EQ them into something that'll blend with the voice and support it and fill up the speakers. In a band situation, it's always the scritchyschratchy odd man out that just won't sit with the rest of players.

From the literature, it appears that it's a "profiler" sort of like a Kemper amp modeler, which I'm not crazy about but at least find somewhat workable. Since the Tonedexter user creates the profiles, are all the users I encounter just really bad at it? Or is the Tonedexter great, and the problem is me?

[uriah1]

Bud had one. Just different. He does not use for live anymore.
Perhaps too difficult. Some users love them, so you never know.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

From the literature, it appears that it's a "profiler" sort of like a Kemper amp modeler, which I'm not crazy about but at least find somewhat workable. Since the Tonedexter user creates the profiles, are all the users I encounter just really bad at it? Or is the Tonedexter great, and the problem is me?

Yes, it's similar in concept to the Kemper or an Aura. James May, one of the creators of it, often posts here, and there are tons of threads here with people discussing it, posting their results and so on. I'd suggest if you really want to learn about it, reach out to James. It sounds like you've hit some people who didn't train theirs well. There's no reason it should sound thin or unpleasant. In my experience, it's pretty hard to mess up the training, but then some people manage to get bad sounds no matter what they do.

I did a demo video of that may help you understand what it does. My video isn't as dramatic as it could be, since I started with a fairly decent sounding pickup. With a poor sounding UST, the improvement can be more dramatic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kH9Qs3FZLYc

[buzzardwhiskey]

The OP hit the nail on the head. Even if the artist has taken great care, the "my guitar only louder" mantra often does not scale past some volume.

[dcopper]

I used a Shure SM57 in different locations and came out with really good wave maps for my K&K Taylors. No fancy mics or unending attempts at mic positioning.
Not sure why they become thin or hollow for you when mixing. At least for me though, I like the TD more on solo work than when doing trio work. We play mostly small to medium venues so we are not blowing out the crowd with FOH systems. I can go into the BOSE S1s either direct or with a ZED 10FX mixer then into the BOSE S1s (two of them). No real problem. I have not tried larger venues though, but the current touring LA Guitar Quartet is using them, so...

[lkingston]

The following is just my opinion and how I hear it:

I find that my favorite guitar sound is a blend of decent sounding pickup and a mic.

The sound of a mic alone is too boxy over a PA. This is true of both real and modeled mics. A real mic sounds great on a recording, but I prefer a blend live.

You can get there a number of ways. Perhaps the simplest is to stick a mic in front of a guitar and blend it in with the pickup.

Another is to use a mic modeller like an Aura, a Tonedexter, Boss, or TC Electronics and blend it in as you would a real mic.

The third (and what I use) is a dual source pickup/mic blend.

I like all three approaches and think they all sound great. I just use the last one for convenience.

[phcorrigan]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

There's no reason it should sound thin or unpleasant.

Agreed. If it's thin and unpleasant then there is something wrong with the wave map. The problem is that there is no one way to get a good wave map, just as there is no one way to mic a guitar for recording. It's a trial-and-error process. My best wave map (so far) was made with a $50 condenser mic. It sounds rich and full and requires little or no EQ.

[Petty1818]

Originally Posted by lkingston

The following is just my opinion and how I hear it:

I find that my favorite guitar sound is a blend of decent sounding pickup and a mic.

The sound of a mic alone is too boxy over a PA. This is true of both real and modeled mics. A real mic sounds great on a recording, but I prefer a blend live.

You can get there a number of ways. Perhaps the simplest is to stick a mic in front of a guitar and blend it in with the pickup.

Another is to use a mic modeller like an Aura, a Tonedexter, Boss, or TC Electronics and blend it in as you would a real mic.

The third (and what I use) is a dual source pickup/mic blend.

I like all three approaches and think they all sound great. I just use the last one for convenience.

My thoughts as well. The Tonedexter IMO does cut a bit of low end but I feel as though this helps make it less prone to feedback. A 100% blend of the wavemap is just far too much live. I guess if you are playing solo it could work but it's not ideal. I like even a 50/50 wavemap/pickup blend. It gives me the air and natural tone of the mic but still maintains the low end and more direct tone of the pickup.

[buzzardwhiskey]

Originally Posted by phcorrigan

Agreed. If it's thin and unpleasant then there is something wrong with the wave map. The problem is that there is no one way to get a good wave map, just as there is no one way to mic a guitar for recording. It's a trial-and-error process. My best wave map (so far) was made with a $50 condenser mic. It sounds rich and full and requires little or no EQ.

I wish this were true. It's easy to get good wave maps. You can get dozens that, straight into an interface, would be difficult to distinguish from a mic. And you can play those in a restaurant and it'll sound great. But play them on a festival stage and they sound completely irritating and unprofessional.

[GuitarLuva]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

Or is the Tonedexter great, and the problem is me?

The Tonedexter is great but I really doubt that the problem is you.

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

Since the Tonedexter user creates the profiles, are all the users I encounter just really bad at it?

This is more than likely the issue. If a person is particular like me, I can get a good wavemap 1st shot or I could end up repeating the process 10 times in a row until I'm satisfied. Everytime I used Tonedexter with a UST, it completely eliminated the piezo quack.

The Tonedexter training algorithm does eliminate a lot of the low end but I would hardly call the tone thin sounding, pretty much the opposite actually. Who knows, maybe the people you're speaking of actually liked the wavemaps they created, hard to say or maybe they didn't really know what they were doing.

I think the Tonedexter is well worth the investment for those seeking a natural sound while amplified. I don't always use mine but I'm always happy with the result when I do.

[Gordon Currie]

The biggest audience I've been in while listening to a ToneDexter guitar is about 400 - the California Guitar Trio early this year.

The CGT is not about 100% pristine and accurate guitar sounds, and they use their share of effects, but they had the best sound I've ever heard from them while using their distinctive red boxes. If I wasn't already hip to ToneDexter that show would have pushed my buttons.

I have noticed that sometimes I produce a hollow sounding wavemap from training. I have learned to trash it and do it again - these wavemaps end up sounding harsh, phasey and irritating in the upper midrange. I'm not sure yet why this happens.

[phcorrigan]

Originally Posted by buzzardwhiskey

I wish this were true. It's easy to get good wave maps. You can get dozens that, straight into an interface, would be difficult to distinguish from a mic. And you can play those in a restaurant and it'll sound great. But play them on a festival stage and they sound completely irritating and unprofessional.

I'm sorry. I'm telling you my experience, and I've used it on both indoor and outdoor stages. You may have had experience with someone else's wave maps, but please don't call me a liar.

[buzzardwhiskey]

Liar? Good grief. I am disagreeing with you. You claimed that THE reason for thin sound when using a Tonedexter is a poor wave map. It is not, and this is quite demonstrable.

[gfirob]

I'm afraid there is some degree of overthinking in these Tonedexter discussions. I have had mine for more than a year and it has never disappointed, but I have never given it the kind of molecular analysis that some people seem to do. I have all kinds of other problems playing out, with the PA, with the sound guy, with the venue, but the Tonedexter itself has never been a problem.

It just sounds so much better to me than an untreated signal from the K&K's, that I consider it a blessing. It is not perfect, it is not exactly like a microphone and it is not always ideal, but it is so much better than anything I have used in the past that I have a hard time faulting it. You do have to spend the time to come up with a good wavemap, training it more than once, but these are simple to do, as getting a good microphone is simple to do with a little thought.

I have a good friend, a guitarist whose opinion I deeply respect, and he was fascinated with the Tonedexter, borrowing it and making wavemap after wave map, fussing with this and that, tried it on stage, tried mixing it with a mike, tried it with different pickups. He thought it was an amazing product but he could never find the perfect combination of everything he was looking for. And he is generally one of those perpetually dissatisfied kind of guys.

I mean, the Tonedexter is not the Shroud of Turin. It will not raise the dead or bring world peace.

But it sure is better than anything else I have ever used.

I'm keeping mine...

[BluesKing777]

I am enjoying my Tonedexter at home and while mine has never left the house, I like hearing about the various opinions.

I can tell you this - I have some terrific wavemaps for various guitars of mine and when the dude next door mows and mows and mows that grass and his kiddies scream louder than Ian Gilmore the whole time, which makes the big dog bark..then all the dogs in the street bark and everyone screams louder and the dude may even mow louder? - I can still make some recordings that sound good with Tonedexter and my music room door open, and I have! Sure can’t use my Neumann KM184 when all that noise is going on - that mic can pick up the grass growing. Thanks Tonedexter.

I have my Matons, so I would take them as it is so easy to plug in. But if for some reason I wanted to take my vintage Gibson LG3 with undersaddle someone else put in, well, lookout, here comes Tonedexter!

BluesKing777.