NAM capturing is a pain. I still get weird errors even with using the gui. And i'm a really "tech savy" person with a degree in IT. So imagine the average user, it's unusable for them. It would need a simple capture process as seen on the video with the tracer.
Except that there is no standard in capturing gear. Like how hot the profiling is done, db wise. Most don’t mention this with the profile. But yes if it’s right it sounds great.
Finally, that's exactly what I was hoping for years ago, if this had come out 2 years ago it would have been an instant buy! Unfortunately since I have a perpetual license and the NAM environment/community is well supported and user friendly I don't see the point in paying extra for basically the same thing... Which is a shame because Tonehub was absolutely my main thing when it came out and I bought a ton of packs for it 😶 Oh and I found it a bit funny that on their own video where they went through everything your presets were online before everyone else's, even their own 😅
Yeah, they missed the boat. They decided they could make more money selling packs instead of selling the technology, apparently (same with Overloud TH-U). Its too bad because they could have cemented their place in the lexicon if they were first. That honor belongs to IK Tonex and NAM now. Tonehub is useful (especially now with the Tracing module) but it wont get the community behind it like there is for NAM or Tonex.
16:25 have you tried using a footswitch for switching between tones in Reaper ? It's awesome. Also : for the best comparison possible, looping riffs is the best, so that you're sure the exact same performance is played throughout all rigs being compared.
There are different thoughts of school - in my personal experience, when it's a cycled riff, then I kind of "prepare myself to hear a difference" - whether or not there is any. It's like that the anticipation of knowing when the loop ends changes the perception, fooling the listener into hearing differences where there maybe aren't. But have not worked yet with footswitches, I guess that would need MIDI? 🙂
@@PippPriss "There are different thoughts of school - in my personal experience, when it's a cycled riff, then I kind of "prepare myself to hear a difference" - whether or not there is any. It's like that the anticipation of knowing when the loop ends changes the perception, fooling the listener into hearing differences where there maybe aren't" Great point,and I thought in your example the tone change automation was at the end of each riff cycle, but maybe i need to re-watch your video :) Also : looping a riff doesn't mean you have to switch tone at the end of the riff cycle :) You can switch whenever you want, so you don't have the effect you described. The point of looping a riff is not the loop per se, it's the fact you don't have to play at the same time as listening/tweaking tones, and introduce new variables such as playing the riff slightly differently with each cycle. "But have not worked yet with footswitches, I guess that would need MIDI?" Yes, but that is not a big deal tbh. I use some old (20 yo easi) Yamaha MFC 10 footswitch and it works perfect.
@@djabthrashOh yeah, totally get the looper portion with a pre-recorded riff. The reason why.i went with automation instead is that when I record videos, the CPU is somewhat occupied, and by using the group solo lead/follow feature (which would allow for changing solo'd tracks during the loop), there is a small gap of silence, which skews the ability to make fair comparisons. But under other circumstances, you are 100% on the money. Looping a pre-recorded riff and then just switching stuff would be my normal way to go as well. As s they say, all roads lead to Rome 😂
I don't think so, to be honest. I was somewhat involved in testing, and the amount of tests required for it to work make me believe that this toolkit was developed from the ground up. It might be used for future tools though, since it's really accurate. Also, the subscription model is often criticized, but in case of STL Tones have proved to have merit, at least for AmpHub. The platform constantly evolved and is now really great - I happily spend 10 $ a month for that kind of progress.
You get many professional profiles by well known players etc. With Tonex you still have to buy them. So the cost goes up. If you just profile your own gear. Yes maybe.
did you compare the files sizes of the captures of NAM vs tracer? It generally give a good overview of the number of parameters of the neural network used. For example ToneX files are 1/4 of the size of .nam files.
Great to see more vendors jump on this. There's something wrong with the Conclusion section - it only plays back on the left side (nothing on the right stereo channel).
Thanks! That with the left side is due to the way I edit, forgot to copy the left to right track on the last segment it seems (always got voice on left, guitars on right hard panned, so I can adjust volumes afterwards easily), and since I am deaf one-sided I can't make out these kind of errors! Damn it! 😀 But thanks for pointing out, but since the video is now live, it is what it is.
Absolutely fair assessment. I have not measured CPU usage, since that is not my concern. But for what it does, ToneHub Tracer works really well. I'd say it's somewhere between ToneX and NAM, quality-wise.
Legend! Always bringing the best comparisons. NAM is still king of capturing.
NAM capturing is a pain. I still get weird errors even with using the gui. And i'm a really "tech savy" person with a degree in IT. So imagine the average user, it's unusable for them.
It would need a simple capture process as seen on the video with the tracer.
Except that there is no standard in capturing gear. Like how hot the profiling is done, db wise. Most don’t mention this with the profile. But yes if it’s right it sounds great.
Finally, that's exactly what I was hoping for years ago, if this had come out 2 years ago it would have been an instant buy! Unfortunately since I have a perpetual license and the NAM environment/community is well supported and user friendly I don't see the point in paying extra for basically the same thing... Which is a shame because Tonehub was absolutely my main thing when it came out and I bought a ton of packs for it 😶
Oh and I found it a bit funny that on their own video where they went through everything your presets were online before everyone else's, even their own 😅
Yeah, they missed the boat. They decided they could make more money selling packs instead of selling the technology, apparently (same with Overloud TH-U). Its too bad because they could have cemented their place in the lexicon if they were first. That honor belongs to IK Tonex and NAM now. Tonehub is useful (especially now with the Tracing module) but it wont get the community behind it like there is for NAM or Tonex.
@@jasonzdora yup. The closed environment and full-rig only (until now) mindset were major limitations to their potential.
Thanks for this video. You explained it really well. I went and tried it and it all worked perfectly!
Awesome, great to hear that it worked! Thanks for the compliments!
Awesome comparison man. It's basically between TH tracer and NAM, I think NAM's still king here. For free it's a no-brainer.
cheers Phil
16:25 have you tried using a footswitch for switching between tones in Reaper ? It's awesome.
Also : for the best comparison possible, looping riffs is the best, so that you're sure the exact same performance is played throughout all rigs being compared.
There are different thoughts of school - in my personal experience, when it's a cycled riff, then I kind of "prepare myself to hear a difference" - whether or not there is any. It's like that the anticipation of knowing when the loop ends changes the perception, fooling the listener into hearing differences where there maybe aren't. But have not worked yet with footswitches, I guess that would need MIDI? 🙂
@@PippPriss "There are different thoughts of school - in my personal experience, when it's a cycled riff, then I kind of "prepare myself to hear a difference" - whether or not there is any. It's like that the anticipation of knowing when the loop ends changes the perception, fooling the listener into hearing differences where there maybe aren't"
Great point,and I thought in your example the tone change automation was at the end of each riff cycle, but maybe i need to re-watch your video :)
Also : looping a riff doesn't mean you have to switch tone at the end of the riff cycle :) You can switch whenever you want, so you don't have the effect you described.
The point of looping a riff is not the loop per se, it's the fact you don't have to play at the same time as listening/tweaking tones, and introduce new variables such as playing the riff slightly differently with each cycle.
"But have not worked yet with footswitches, I guess that would need MIDI?"
Yes, but that is not a big deal tbh. I use some old (20 yo easi) Yamaha MFC 10 footswitch and it works perfect.
@@djabthrashOh yeah, totally get the looper portion with a pre-recorded riff. The reason why.i went with automation instead is that when I record videos, the CPU is somewhat occupied, and by using the group solo lead/follow feature (which would allow for changing solo'd tracks during the loop), there is a small gap of silence, which skews the ability to make fair comparisons. But under other circumstances, you are 100% on the money. Looping a pre-recorded riff and then just switching stuff would be my normal way to go as well. As s they say, all roads lead to Rome 😂
Tonehub's biggest downside is the subscription. On the long run say 2 years of subscription and you could have a tonex one from that price :D
Also probably the tracer is the dev. tool that they used to make the tones in tonehub for years
I don't think so, to be honest. I was somewhat involved in testing, and the amount of tests required for it to work make me believe that this toolkit was developed from the ground up. It might be used for future tools though, since it's really accurate.
Also, the subscription model is often criticized, but in case of STL Tones have proved to have merit, at least for AmpHub. The platform constantly evolved and is now really great - I happily spend 10 $ a month for that kind of progress.
You get many professional profiles by well known players etc. With Tonex you still have to buy them. So the cost goes up. If you just profile your own gear. Yes maybe.
did you compare the files sizes of the captures of NAM vs tracer? It generally give a good overview of the number of parameters of the neural network used. For example ToneX files are 1/4 of the size of .nam files.
Great to see more vendors jump on this. There's something wrong with the Conclusion section - it only plays back on the left side (nothing on the right stereo channel).
Thanks! That with the left side is due to the way I edit, forgot to copy the left to right track on the last segment it seems (always got voice on left, guitars on right hard panned, so I can adjust volumes afterwards easily), and since I am deaf one-sided I can't make out these kind of errors! Damn it! 😀 But thanks for pointing out, but since the video is now live, it is what it is.
Great video
Yeah. But Tonex (and others) already have Soooo much content! So many great captures... Pretty late to the party!
Very true, I would have expected something like this around 2019, to be honest.
True. But nam has lost me. There are to many profiles imo and the quality varies to much. It’s a pain to use. Tonex 2 probably
Stl is much less cpu intensive than nam. I like that.
Absolutely fair assessment. I have not measured CPU usage, since that is not my concern. But for what it does, ToneHub Tracer works really well. I'd say it's somewhere between ToneX and NAM, quality-wise.