huli50 wrote:One thing I was wondering about is if a tone model captures an amp and cab, will any of the amp parameters be adjustable once the tone model is created?
My sense is, "no" -- or, at least, "not to the extent that you can control parameters on the digital models of gear in AmpliTube".
TONEX looks to me like (and perhaps pardon the oversimplification) an "in-the-box Kemper killer".
That is, it looks to me like TONEX is about capturing a particular "snapshot" ("Tone Model", in TONEX parlance) of processing for a guitar signal -- and that snapshot could include, or not, all kinds of specific gear from a single effect to complex chains of pedals, amps, cabs, mic, rack units, what-have-you -- and then being able to apply that "Tone Model" to whatever other signal you send to it. In other words, while AmpliTube provides digital simluations of how real pieces of individual gear work, and then you can combine those individual simulations in various ways and (because they are simulations) adjust their (simulated) parameters, TONEX captures and reproduces the specific characteristics of a complete chain of real gear (however simple or complex) and let's you re-apply those specific characteristics.
Thus, I don't think you can make changes to a TONEX Tone Model as you can with AmpliTube gear models.
Also, I think this makes the comparison with a Kemper is fairly appropriate -- except that, of course, TONEX is going to do this all in software on a computer/device you already own, and thus lists for considerably less than a complete Kemper hardware-based system.
And that is why I characterize TONEX as an "in-the-box Kemper killer"
at least in studio situations. I recognize that for many touring musicians, having a dedicated and robust hardware device like a Kemper is going to remain attractive for playing live. But I bet many studios (especially smaller studios) are going to love TONEX (assuming it gets and keeps a repuation for quality). I mean, think about it: a musician could capture "Tone Models" of their preferred real gear in various combinations -- just some pedals, or just an amp head, or just an amp/cab combination, etc. -- and then you could go and record or mix with those Tone Models in any studio that had TONEX installed just by sending them your Tone Models or carrying them along on a thumb drive or something. No need to lug that Kemper hardware around (or even buy it). This ought to be hugely attractive to to studios and musicians.
Plus, since TONEX Tone Models will apparently be shareable through ToneNET or otherwise shareable as AmpliTube presets currently are, this implies a huge ecosystem of people freely sharing and/or selling their TONEX Tone Models (as already the case with AmpliTube presets).
Moreover, I think it's largely a matter of time -- and perhaps less time than we think -- until there would be hardly any remaining motivation for people playing live to want to fall back on the comfort of a big chunk of profiling hardware. It may not be that you would necessarily feel comfortable today with replacing your Kemper head with TONEX on your phone, but .... Well, computing power just keeps advancing, doesn't it?
huli50 wrote:Also, can you bring in a tone model for an amp and still add Amplitube stomps, rack effects, and other stuff in a mix-and-match virtual rig? I've noticed, based on the various IK tone models for pedals, it seems the model only reflects a snapshot of the stomp parameters.
It looks to me like the answer is "yes". It looks like TONEX snapshots/profiles are intended to live within AmpliTube, and the videos demo'ing the creation of TONEX (e.g., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4922dB9BmNw) as well as the list of IKM-produced Tone Models (https://download.ikmultimedia.com/html/tonex/TONEX_Premium_Tone_Models.pdf) show that given Tone Models can be designated as one of "Amp and Cab", "Complex Rig", "Stomp", "Amp", or "Stomp and Amp" at the time of creation. Presumably, if you have a given Tone Model, you can drop that into AmpliTube and it will (I am guessing) take it's place in the AmpliTube chain depending on how it was designated at creation. So, I presume, you can drop a TONEX Tone Model of a given pedal into the stomp section of the normal AmpliTube chain but you could put normal AmpliTube amp/cab models after it, or an "Amp and Cab" TONEX Tone Model would take up the amp head and cab room portions of the AmpliTube chain but you could put normal AmpliTube stomp models in front of or normal AmpliTube rack models behind the "Amp and Cab" TONEX Tone Model, etc.
This brings us -- or me, at least
-- to musing on who TONEX is really for. There's obviously overlap with what AmpliTube does, and the apparent interoperability is very cool, though TONEX is clearly quite a different beast than AmpliTube. TONEX looks killer if you have, or have access to, specific gear that you want to model. It seems perfect for musicians or studio owners/operators who have exactly that. The ability to model specific chains not only makes those chains isntantly and easily portable, they are also instantly and easily "recallable" (and all without special hardware).
Access to others Tone Models is also great if you do not like tweaking either real or simulated gear. AmpliTube 5 is getting impressively accurate in its modeling, but with great accuracy comes great complexity.
ToneNET is a great aid to players who are happiest just flipping through presets, and access to a world of others' TONEX Tone Models does essentially the same thing. Find one you like, and go.That said, I am not sure how much the simple existance of TONEX necessarily means to me personally. Other than a few physical pedals, I hardly have any gear to model -- and though it would be fun to model my pedals, I'm not sure it's worth it.
Skimming through the official list of pre-made Tone Models (https://download.ikmultimedia.com/html/ ... Models.pdf), my main thoughts were along the lines of "Oh, they captured a model of that piece of gear? I hope they model it for AmpliTube!" And this is because, after all, I don't really know how any given Tone Model will sound. This makes me (though studio owners/operators might well feel differently) a little leary of investing heavily in the "regular" or "Max" versions of ToneNet, which seem to essentially represent access to more IKM-produced Tone Models out of the box. As noted, some of these Tone Models (mostly in Max) use gear that is noticeably absent from current AmpliTube, but far from all. For my part, I would mostly be hoping that the wider TONEX ecosystem eventually provides access (free or purchased) to Tone Models that model more gear that is not already in AmpliTube -- since AmpliTube's modeling is already quite good enough for my purposes, and I'm more excited by the possibilities for "new gear", regardless of whether it comes in the form of functional digital models (AmpliTube) or "snapshots" of particular chains (TONEX).So, I think TONEX is a great product for IKM to be releaseing -- it's basically the first software-only product of this kind -- and great news for people with physical gear they want to model without the bother of expensive and bulky hardware. I am less sure that it's something that makes a huge difference to me ... though this may depend principally on how the wider "3rd-party" TONEX ecosystem evolves, as well as the continuing leaps and bounds taking place in digital modelling (i.e. AmpliTube itself).
There was a time when I would have doubted that digital modeling would ever be capable of replacing actual hardware, but while that time may still not have formally arrived, one kind of feels like it's effectively inevitable within the near future. I feel like profiling/snapshoting specific chains was something that emerged as a solution for people who needed not just quality digital convenience and reproduceability that was not yet available through digital modeling itself. I think TONEX will be highly successful with that market for the immediate future, though I also wonder whether in the longer run whether the main competition to TONEX (or similar technologies) will not just be digital modeling (e.g. AmpliTube) itself.
