Brian Walton

The RHoF is a sham and I can understand why some would want to reject being a part of it. However, the reasons I've seen stated from her don't make logical sense. Reject it because it doesn't give recognition to the unsung heroes? Isn't that exactly what they are doing by adding her? She is a legend that for decades very few even knew about and frankly outside of music circles and youtube videos drawing attention to her as this "bet you didn't know" kind of content - she wouldn't be known to any kind of mass audience unlike the artists who's albums she put down tracks for. And as for the wrecking crew name. Well I think technically speaking there is some validity that group of amazing musician's did wreck the ability for others to get hired and fundamentally changed the artist / recording landscape in LA in particular.

Yeah I did that out of necessity but really didn't like it. Laptops have fewer and fewer ports and between using an interface and a decent mouse, external drive, etc the space is a lot a premium and if you compound that with ilok and others it really is unacceptable for software one has legitimately paid for. Even my desktop has gotten out of control with the ports with everything I use between audio, video, and photography.

Who knows but if I was on WUP I would to get resizable UI across all plugins as well as have the tech support if something breaks. If you are outside WUP even if they did let you upgrade you would be outside of support and have to pay for WUP for them to help you get operational again. The UI resizable update is about the most meaningful thing I recall them doing in the last 5 years. Glad I ditched them when Super Clear was able to replace Clarity VX which was the only thing keeping me tied. As someone who works across multiple computers the single seat when now on WUP is absurd. This isn't 1985 when only the Uber Rich could afford more than. One computer.

Looks like they have moved to a once a year new version cycle to push people to WUP unnecessarily even faster. The company is 33 years old and the versions would last a few years....until recently.

Well this is odd. Now that I have both installed the Boz Pro Channels no longer show up in CbB - and also not in Sonar (I had the paid Hoser XT, as well as the Bark of a Dog)

Here is my hot take. Years ago they bought Cakewalk and released it as free. At that time the outcry was we don't believe you and expect they will charge us. Over and over we were told the core platform and features would be free, but if they added back things like the Adaptive limiter EQ, synths, etc then those would potentially be paid products. Honestly this feels like they are trying to keep their word after pulling the rug out for a few months with a sub only option. Once again, we will see.

I agree the interval can be problematic. Any computer that is used to create one of a kind art needs the option to work offline for security of that data. I do appreciate we can now use the new version without paying for it (as someone who purchased lifetime updates back in the day always hoped this would be honored even though legally they were not responsible do to they way they purchased the IP. That said, I hope they keep CbB as there is a massive difference in the UI for those of us running custom themes. If you use one of the defaults getting used to the same theme but flat isn't a world of difference. My custom theme is already pretty flat but both the colors and the fact I've decluttered it by removing text and things of that nature in a few places is easier to work with. There are also some pro channel stuff that is installed in my CbB that isn't in Sonar on the same machine.

I don't have it but everything I've seen suggests it is a license key and 3 authorizations (online- offline auth not supported) but does have an auth and deauth process to move around computers. https://www.scuffhamamps.com/support/faq/licensing https://www.scuffhamamps.com/support/product-activation/s-gear-activation

Almost forgot about the Tapes, I love a couple of those but they are super resource hungry and I always wait until the end of a project to add them. That said, a lot of the older (but still great) T-racks plugins are pretty light. The 670 comp or the black come to mind and I'm betting the same algos are used in mix box for those.

My main complaint is it is a bit resource heavy. It was at one time one of the more expensive bundles and has quite a bit of stuff in there. As a windows user, I expect it to work for many years. If I was a Mac user I'd expect not only this but everything else to be a temporary tool outside of a subscription service like adobe where you know they have a vested interest to play the apple update game.

It isn't clear on the website but there is now a free version with unlimited tracks, it doesn't have all the addins and features of the paid version, but it is fairly close. Use the same installer as posted in the OP. Seems to just have a nag screen and you have to login to your account like you have to with CbB and will have the periodic check in requirement just like the same.

They also seem to be offering the $20 IKM Mix Box suite at check out (like PB was offering for a time previously) Just an FYI for anyone that had Tape Echo already and had no interest in that deal, but might have had interest in the "suite" for a fairly reasonable price. Just be aware reports are that the platform will no longer get new features or development.

That is a great track and a fun recording (I've personally recorded Derek Trucks Band covering that tune live myself more than once back in the day) but I think we have a different understand of what "amp in the room" actually means. That recording while it is a live recording and certainly has quite a bit of the room sound picked up on it - certainly doesn't sound like what the amp actually sounded like to the human ear in the room - this is a function of using microphones and different speakers to capture and play back sound - it will never actually sound the same, though you have picked a really solid reference of a live band in a room sound. I agree AT5 sounds like a layer of AT5 and I don't use TONEX within AT5.

This is why I reference Tonex as a warts and all. It sounds like the real thing when you mic a cab (which is how tone was traditionally recorded to tape) this is not as easy to do as most people think and therefore the results can vary wildly. As for what the real thing compares to. The real thing is not the "amp in the room" sound. No one in history has ever recorded that so it sounds like the same thing played back through speakers physically isn't possible. So the real thing is what does an amp sound like miced up for recording, and as far as feel - it goes through the same process. If I was sitting in a control room in a studio with my amp in a different room does it respond like that amp would as translated through a microphone and speakers? I've done the tests and TONEX is as close to that recreation as I've experienced. This isn't to say it is perfect, you can read my little blurb on the TONEX cab and how it can't overcome the harmonic content and richness of an actual super high end tube amp "in the room sound" but once it is going through a mic and speakers, it is rather close to that, or at least close enough for the average player. I've used S-Gear as noted, it can get a polished sound potentially faster than tonex. But as you observed, an actual amp recording is not a pristine thing without a whole lot of work. I'm guessing you haven't done much capture work with Tonex if you are not sure it is like the real thing or not. After a capture you can literally A/B between the "live rig" setup of your amp and your mic through headpones and compare it with the tonex capture in real time. That said, if you don't like the results of your personal amp+mic results - you are going to get close to the exact same thing with a Tonex capture.

They both seek to emulate the sound and feel of guitar amplifiers (and effects) and therefore I'd put them in the exact same category. You can literally capture an S-gear rig with tonex and see just how close the two can be. I'd argue that Tonex sounds and feels more like the real thing (but that also comes at a warts and all approach). So you are looking for a polished final product sound, S-gear in many instances takes less time to get there. But add the Tonex pedal in the equation with the super low latency and that realistic feel becomes more apparent than in a software based rig in my experience (and yes, I have a very high spec computer)