IK Multimedia Tone X One?

[mbenigni]

Funny reading the above when I just came off the NDSP Discord where someone just said they were sending back a Tone X they got a couple of days ago because it was the most unintuitive piece of equipment they ever used. And stated that even the Ampero has a better UX.

I don't know what any of that means as I haven't used either but I suspect hyperbole.

Claims of "most x ever" are almost always hyperbole (go change a clock on a VCR) but ToneX is crazy counter-intuitive and just sort of clumsy.

Meanwhile, even (most?) people who hate a hundred other things about the QC will admit that its UI/UX are best in class. And the software - though embarrassingly late in arriving - mirrors the on-device UI exactly.

 

[Mongillo19]

I don't know what any of that means as I haven't used either but I suspect hyperbole somewhere.

Idk it might not be lol

 

[Jynx]

Idk it might not be lol

Not from the person on the Discord anyway.

 

[laxu]

Claims of "most x ever" are almost always hyperbole (go change a clock on a VCR) but ToneX is crazy counter-intuitive and just sort of clumsy.

Meanwhile, even (most?) people who hate a hundred other things about the QC will admit that its UI/UX are best in class. And the software - though embarrassingly late in arriving - mirrors the on-device UI exactly.

Yeah I can understand raking NDSP over the coals for e.g content management as it's just "bearable" at best, but Tonex is much worse IMO.

 

[mbenigni]

Yeah I can understand raking NDSP over the coals for e.g content management as it's just "bearable" at best, but Tonex is much worse IMO.

Are we talking organization/ discoverability of content on neuraldsp.com/cloud, or on the device itself?

 

[laxu]

Are we talking organization/ discoverability of content on neuraldsp.com/cloud, or on the device itself?

I'd say both. At least the cloud website is barely any better than the Tone.net website.

On the QC itself the content management still seems a bit iffy even though it is no longer as bad as it was at release.

 

[mbenigni]

I'd say both. At least the cloud website is barely any better than the Tone.net website.

On the QC itself the content management still seems a bit iffy even though it is no longer as bad as it was at release.

I rarely visit the cloud, but I suppose that's fair. And I'm still waiting on 3.0 to see whether they can get capture searching and placement consistently as good as it is in the views where it currently works best.

Profiles/ captures present a unique challenge in terms of presenting a vast number of options. The more content, the bigger the challenge. This is even true of FAS amp models - I'm more likely to lose my bearings simply because there are so many options. A strength becomes a weakness, of sorts.

 

[laxu]

Profiles/ captures present a unique challenge in terms of presenting a vast number of options. The more content, the bigger the challenge. This is even true of FAS amp models - I'm more likely to lose my bearings simply because there are so many options. A strength becomes a weakness, of sorts.

Absolutely. That's why for captures metadata is of great importance and honestly nobody does it well. Kemper's Rig Manager is probably still the clearest in this regard.

It would be nice if Tonex had for example a system that let you build bundles of captures, e.g same amp with different settings that can be switched as some subset rather than each being a separate model and thus leading to a ton of clutter.

 

[mbenigni]

It would be nice if Tonex had for example a system that let you build bundles of captures, e.g same amp with different settings that can be switched as some subset rather than each being a separate model and thus leading to a ton of clutter.

This is a great idea. Basically an n channel amp model, where n is the number of captures taken. Next best thing to making tone stack, gain, etc. function realistically by way of a bzillion captures. :)

 

[Desertdweller]

I'd say both. At least the cloud website is barely any better than the Tone.net website.

On the QC itself the content management still seems a bit iffy even though it is no longer as bad as it was at release.

I refuse to believe tonenet even exists. I could not stay connected to it for more than a couple minutes at a time.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Is it still a bargain if input gain crapshoot and 1 successful capture attempt out of 15-20 are factored in?

Spoiler

Nope

 

[Jkist7]

Funny reading the above when I just came off the NDSP Discord where someone just said they were sending back a Tone X they got a couple of days ago because it was the most unintuitive piece of equipment they ever used. And stated that even the Ampero has a better UX.

I don't know what any of that means as I haven't used either but I suspect hyperbole somewhere.

Huh? If they were talking about the Ampero Stomp / Stage, they have some of the best UX of the bunch IMO.

 

[pipelineaudio]

first of all, the software has to exist. Even tonex shipped with the software they claimed it would have. Does QC even have theirs after all these years yet? Certainly didn't last time I checked. That's why we all sent ours back.

 

[mbenigni]

Even tonex shipped with the software they claimed it would have.

Ish. Some of that stuff was pretty much placeholder as far as I'm concerned. Especially from an iOS perspective.

Does QC even have theirs after all these years yet? Certainly didn't last time I checked.

Yes.

Bottom line - when you look at actual functionality as an aggregate of hardware and software implementation - no one could reasonably argue ToneX was in a better place than QC, even at their respective launch dates.

 

[pipelineaudio]

- no one could reasonably argue ToneX was in a better place than QC, even at their respective launch dates.

I could. there was NO software aside from some even worse than tonex library app on iPad or something. And that was at least a year after it was first sold. I think much more than that. Tonex’s librarian sucks but I can open it on pc and I could do a lot of what I need with it as a plug-in on a DAW.

Say did qc ever let you put the plugins you own on their unit yet?

 

[mbenigni]

I could. there was NO software aside from some even worse than tonex library app on iPad or something. And that was at least a year after it was first sold.

Well, have at it then. I said "functionality", not "software". I never once found myself pining for an app that made my PC screen look exactly like the QC that was sitting right next to it with better controls. Now that the app is available (and installed, even) I still never use it.

I think much more than that. Tonex’s librarian sucks but I can open it on pc and I could do a lot of what I need with it as a plug-in on a DAW.

That's a fair point. If you need a plugin, QC ain't it. This brings us back around to the "value" angle. Between the hardware, the librarian software, and the plugin, it's true IK is offering a lot for the money. I just never managed to enjoy using any of it.

Say did qc ever let you put the plugins you own on their unit yet?

I put this one in the same file along with "OMG no editor!" I don't own any NDSP plugins, and never had the slightest interest in plugin compatibility. (Except to the extent that it seemed to throw a wrench in QC development otherwise.)

Anyway... You don't like the QC and I don't like ToneX. I can live with that.

 

[pipelineaudio]

I don't love either, but I put QC about fifteen notches below tonex on every category where they overlap.

In reality, I'm just totally spoiled by Helix and can't believe how bad IK dropped the ball here, considering their like 10 year head start.

QC dropped the ball hard at launch, I wouldn't even consider them in the same playground

 

[norminal]

In reality, I'm just totally spoiled by Helix and can't believe how bad IK dropped the ball here, considering their like 10 year head start.

These gear companies need to wake the fuck up. Imagine, just imagine if say, Line 6 would have designed the software.

The TONEX One is a cash grab, plain and simple. In a few decades, there’ll be hundreds of thousands (throwing that number out there but I know it’ll be a lot) of these out in the world that will no longer be supported. It’s useless without the software, which is bad enough for people to return the product altogether.

 

[EOengineer]

I’m sorry that I missed our annual visit from an IK rep. Kudos for trying.

Maybe next time let’s do them a solid and at least give them a helmet and some pads as they’re walking into one of these threads.

I imagine IK laughing as they’re hiring these poor reps and sending them off to the forums like poor kids climbing on the boats for Normandy.

RIP.

 

[pipelineaudio]

I’m sorry that I missed our annual visit from an IK rep. Kudos for trying.

Maybe next time let’s do them a solid and at least give them a helmet and some pads as they’re walking into one of these threads.

I imagine IK laughing as they’re hiring these poor reps and sending them off to the forums like poor kids climbing on the boats for Normandy.

RIP.

We had a guy named Obi from IK who would make the rounds in the REAPER forums like a decade ago. He was so cool and helpful that it never really looked like a bloodbath, but man he would get hammered on facebook