Double Bass ToneDexter - What Keeps Me Up at Night!

[statsc]

Like many of us, I've been following the discussion on AudioSprockets' ToneDexter with great interest. It really seems like this little box is potentially a game changer in our eternal quest for an amplified bass sound that sounds more like our bass (MBOL). But the fact that it does "change the game" is what keeps me up at night.

It seems as though up until now the search for a better amplified upright bass sound has followed a fairly straight path: microphones, pick-ups, amps, preamps, HPF's, etc., all introduced into the signal path between the bass and the outside world to amplify and enhance the sound of the bass as we play it in real time. Despite these artificial interfaces, it's still just you and the bass, working together to try to create something beautiful. I think this type of "organic" relationship is what attracts us to this awkward, inconvenient, fragile, and expensive instrument (otherwise we'd all just stick to slab bass!). Part of me feels like the ToneDexter is a left turn away from this. Here, you're using your bass to access an artificial electronic patch that you've created using your bass in another place at another time that "models" a combination of a mic you no longer need to use and a pick-up. In effect, your bass becomes a controller used to access a synthesizer/sampler patch of yourself! This seems like a long ways away from the "organic relationship" mentioned above.

And so I wrestle with this. I'd love to just swallow it all and try this thing out (as @Mark Gollihur says, "Life is too short for bad tone!"). But it does keep me up at night. What do others think?

 

[Jon Mush]

I get that. It’s a strange thing to think about.

The flip side, for me is really liking the way my bass responds up close and personal, or how great it can sound through a great mic on a recording. Then in a live environment we have to use a transducer of some sort that only delivers an approximation of this experience.

I’ve been auditioning preamps lately, as I’m increasingly dissatisfied with my stuff right now. Even tried the Alix. While it’s indeed a next level piece of gear, it’s a pristine representation and reproduction of a transducer that doesn’t really capture the instrument we all love.

I’ve been watching the thread with great interest too, and if it allows me to get that same feeling and response from the bass that I love, or gets me much closer, then I’m into it.

 

[Jay Corwin]

Once you put a piezo transducer on your bass, YOU HAVE INTRODUCED AN ARTIFICIAL INTERFACE! It's a pickup, that sounds nothing like a double bass without a heavy amount of processing through a preamp......

.....so why does it matter if we are eq'ing by way of modeling, or by frequency knobs on a preamp? Either way you're shoving a crappy piezo signal in, and trying to get a passable signal out to a speaker somehow. There's no purity in a piezo versus any other pickup. None of them sound good compared to an acoustic double bass.

So I say go for it. If you have to amplify with pickups, you've already conceded MBOL. Only a mic can do that, or maybe the ToneDexter now.

 

[madbanjoman]

The playing conditions that I spend most of my time in are cramped and feedback prone. I can’t complete acoustically with my band members so I need some form of amplification. I try to use as small amount as possible. I tried a body piezo MSP and a couple of mics. Without fail these attempts ended in fighting feedback at gigs, something I find quite unpleasant. The Tonedexter takes my feedback resistant piezo wing pickup that was often used as a backup and makes it sound closer to the sound of my DB miced. It is not exactly the same but it is closer than anything that I can use reliably. I f I had the type of gigs that allowed me to reliably mic my DB, I would. When we record in the studio, my DB gets miced, but out the world there are always compromises. The tonedexter is the compromise that I am happy with right now. It is cheaper than a Grace Felix which was what I was considering before the Tonedexter.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

I'm interested to try the ToneDexter, but am a bit in the minority in that I'm perfectly happy with the piezo pickup and amp combination I'm currently using. If the TD can improve it noticeably, I'll pick one up. If not, so be it. What keeps me up at night (aside from a too busy schedule that tugs at consciousness at bedtime) as regards music are things like:
- Finding enough practice time to keep some reasonable level of chops up
- Playing the right kind of gigs with the right kind of people, and not the opposite
- keeping my head in the right space to allow the possibility of meaningful music happening once I get to the bandstand

Past a certain point, chasing the "perfect tone" is a game of seriously diminishing returns.

 

[statsc]

I'm interested to try the ToneDexter, but am a bit in the minority in that I'm perfectly happy with the piezo pickup and amp combination I'm currently using. If the TD can improve it noticeably, I'll pick one up. If not, so be it. What keeps me up at night (aside from a too busy schedule that tugs at consciousness at bedtime) as regards music are things like:
- Finding enough practice time to keep some reasonable level of chops up
- Playing the right kind of gigs with the right kind of people, and not the opposite
- keeping my head in the right space to allow the possibility of meaningful music happening once I get to the bandstand

Past a certain point, chasing the "perfect tone" is a game of seriously diminishing returns.

Yeah; those things also keep me up at night!

 

[statsc]

I'm interested to try the ToneDexter, but am a bit in the minority in that I'm perfectly happy with the piezo pickup and amp combination I'm currently using. If the TD can improve it noticeably, I'll pick one up. If not, so be it. What keeps me up at night (aside from a too busy schedule that tugs at consciousness at bedtime) as regards music are things like:
- Finding enough practice time to keep some reasonable level of chops up
- Playing the right kind of gigs with the right kind of people, and not the opposite
- keeping my head in the right space to allow the possibility of meaningful music happening once I get to the bandstand

Past a certain point, chasing the "perfect tone" is a game of seriously diminishing returns.

Also agree that "tone chasing" is expensive and never leaves me completely satisfied for long. Whenever I think I've found it, something else comes along and it starts over. Probably makes more sense to spend my energy on playing better!

 

[shwashwa]

I'm with Chris, I'm really happy with my Amplified sound at the moment and so far none of the recordings I've heard of the tone Dexter with bass have impressed me. Maybe I just need to hear some better recordings or maybe it's just not going to do it for me.

 

[Povl Carstensen]

I understand you, statsc. It is almost like reading about (the fascinating) ToneDexter pushes me in the direction of buying a wood Realist, which is perhaps what I should have tried 10 years ago. Instead I have stubbornly pursued using an acoustic mike. It sort of works for me, perhaps mainly because I play in circumstances where I can mostly rely on the acoustic sound of the bass itself. Anyway I am a late mover in most aspects.

 

[Chris Symer]

Although I don't own one yet (one is ordered) you can safely go back to sleep. The ToneDexter is not a "sample" that you are triggering, but more of an eq "map" that is using the mic input in training as the "goal", and the pickup is being processed to more closely resemble that goal. That is why a "map" made for one pickup does not give the same results when used with another pickup. It is like making a map of how to get from your sofa to your kitchen. You go 17 feet straight ahead, turn left 90 degrees and go 6 feet, then right 90 degrees and 8 more feet. If you change your starting position you may end up closer to the kitchen than when you began, but you will not be in the same spot as having started on the sofa. Or perhaps you may have ended up in the street. It does not function at all like a sampler, outputting a pre recorded "goal", but like an eq that is preset (in the case by "training") to get rid of some of a piezo pickups annoying qualities. I am impressed its the demos enough to have put my money down.....

 

[Povl Carstensen]

But, is it only eq, or is there some envelope- or other thing happening?

 

[statsc]

Although I don't own one yet (one is ordered) you can safely go back to sleep. The ToneDexter is not a "sample" that you are triggering, but more of an eq "map" that is using the mic input in training as the "goal", and the pickup is being processed to more closely resemble that goal. That is why a "map" made for one pickup does not give the same results when used with another pickup. It is like making a map of how to get from your sofa to your kitchen. You go 17 feet straight ahead, turn left 90 degrees and go 6 feet, then right 90 degrees and 8 more feet. If you change your starting position you may end up closer to the kitchen than when you began, but you will not be in the same spot as having started on the sofa. Or perhaps you may have ended up in the street. It does not function at all like a sampler, outputting a pre recorded "goal", but like an eq that is preset (in the case by "training") to get rid of some of a piezo pickups annoying qualities. I am impressed its the demos enough to have put my money down.....

Nice explanation! I'm feeling a little sleepier...

 

[Chris Symer]

But, is it only eq, or is there some envelope- or other thing happening?

Not sure if there is an envelope thing happening or not, I just know that the demo and review results sounds really good to me. And with 30 days to check it out and work with it, it seems like an easy call to me. It sounds like the character settings at least are messing around in reverb territory. But like I said, it sounds good to me. I'm looking forward to checking it out.

 

[sean_on_bass]

I still love my copper Realist, and am curious if the Tonedexter would be worth it. I guess to me it is a techy way to EQ the bass, and i still am not sure that it will give me something i can't already get through my EQ. Definitely interested, but there are few things above it on my list of gear purchases.

 

[madbanjoman]

I have been reading about impulse responses and I think eq profile is too narrow of a description. It is more of a digital representation of the difference between the mic and the pickup.

 

[sean_on_bass]

I'm not trying to diminish its capability, but at the end of the day it is boosting and cutting frequencies, correct? It can't add anything that's not there already, but can accentuate it. I think the advantage is that it EQ's at a surgical level that might be hard to achieve with what you have with your preamp or amplifier(or i'm assuming so, obviously i don't actually know how the damn thing works).

 

[richhansen]

I've been playing and gigging with my Tonedexter now for a few weeks. There is some science happening with the digital maps that is probably proprietary, and I certainly don't know everything that's going in in that box. Jim May may or may not not be able to explain fully what it's doing, but this thing is definitely more than just eq. It does eq your pickup to simulate the condenser mic you are "training" it to, but it also adds "air" to your tone, similar to what a condenser mic sounds like. I just know that I like it.
Like Sevenyears said, using a piezo pickup is introducing an artificial element in the mix between the bass and the speaker that changes your tone. The Tonedexter is reshaping and adding some of the natural elements back into the mix, like the airy warm acoustic tone that a mic captures, but a piezo does not, plus, it's removing a lot of that artificial piezo quack that the pickup adds to it.
The bottom line is the tone coming out of your speaker. If you're using a piezo as your pickup, and you already like your amplified tone, the tonedexter most likely will make you like it a lot more. I would recommend giving it a try to anyone still on the fence here.

 

[statsc]

I've been playing and gigging with my Tonedexter now for a few weeks. There is some science happening with the digital maps that is probably proprietary, and I certainly don't know everything that's going in in that box. Jim May may or may not not be able to explain fully what it's doing, but this thing is definitely more than just eq. It does eq your pickup to simulate the condenser mic you are "training" it to, but it also adds "air" to your tone, similar to what a condenser mic sounds like. I just know that I like it.
Like Sevenyears said, using a piezo pickup is introducing an artificial element in the mix between the bass and the speaker that changes your tone. The Tonedexter is reshaping and adding some of the natural elements back into the mix, like the airy warm acoustic tone that a mic captures, but a piezo does not, plus, it's removing a lot of that artificial piezo quack that the pickup adds to it.
The bottom line is the tone coming out of your speaker. If you're using a piezo as your pickup, and you already like your amplified tone, the tonedexter most likely will make you like it a lot more. I would recommend giving it a try to anyone still on the fence here.

I've been playing and gigging with my Tonedexter now for a few weeks. There is some science happening with the digital maps that is probably proprietary, and I certainly don't know everything that's going in in that box. Jim May may or may not not be able to explain fully what it's doing, but this thing is definitely more than just eq. It does eq your pickup to simulate the condenser mic you are "training" it to, but it also adds "air" to your tone, similar to what a condenser mic sounds like. I just know that I like it.
Like Sevenyears said, using a piezo pickup is introducing an artificial element in the mix between the bass and the speaker that changes your tone. The Tonedexter is reshaping and adding some of the natural elements back into the mix, like the airy warm acoustic tone that a mic captures, but a piezo does not, plus, it's removing a lot of that artificial piezo quack that the pickup adds to it.
The bottom line is the tone coming out of your speaker. If you're using a piezo as your pickup, and you already like your amplified tone, the tonedexter most likely will make you like it a lot more. I would recommend giving it a try to anyone still on the fence here.

Thanks, Rich; I'm about 90% there!

 

[James May]

An interesting thread, I thought I might take the liberty of chiming in with a bit more explanation of how our technology works.

The WaveMaps (trained presets) that you create are indeed impulse response filters (IR). An IR is technically an EQ, but not the simple type that you get with a multi-band parametric or graphic EQ. These simple EQs, which can be themselves rather complicated to adjust, can only operate on the frequency response or tonal balance. An IR, on the other hand, operates on the frequency response (tonal balance) AND the time response. The time response can be thought of as phase relationships, reverb, and echoes.

To give an analogy, image you've set your boom box down in a large cathedral with gorgeous, lush reverb and echoes. If we were to capture the impulse response (WaveMap) from the boombox speaker signal to what your ear hears in this lush cathedral space, that WaveMap would represent the complexity, spaciousness, and tonal balance of the cathedral. If we than apply that IR to the speaker signal (through a process called convolution which is just a fancy way of saying complex filtering), it will indeed sound like the cathedral. We would no longer need to be in the cathedral to get the boom box to sound like it was.

Now let's convert the analogy to what happens with your instrument: replace the boom box with what your pickup hears of your strings vibrating, and replace the cathedral with the gorgeous, lush sound of your acoustic bass, complete with chamber resonances, subtle little echoes, and some reverb, as heard by your ears or a mic. The WaveMap (IR) that you make when you train ToneDexter captures all the difference between those two points of reference. And then in exactly the same fashion, we apply that IR to the sound of your pickup and it will indeed sound very much like what the mic heard, without needing the mic.

That is the essence of what ToneDexter does. The convolution filtering during playback is the easy part. The training process to create the WaveMap is the part that took a LOT of development effort by our team.

 

[Nathan Levine]

That is the essence of what ToneDexter does. The convolution filtering during playback is the easy part. The training process to create the WaveMap is the part that took a LOT of development effort by our team.

Are there any thoughts about making an acoustic bass specific ToneDexter? Perhaps with an HPF? Sounds like the heavy lifting of the WaveMap development is done. Do you think there would be a big enough market for this to justify a bass model with a few different bells and whistles?