LinuxMusicians

Anyone tried it ?

From the ToneLib web site:

"ToneLib-GFX is a collection of guitar amps, speaker cabinets and effects implemented in software for use with your computer, Windows PC or MAC. The software comes as a Standalone Application and as plug-ins for use with the most popular DAW (digital audio workstation) recording software. The Tonelib-GFX also supports 3rd party impulse responses (IRs), offering even greater tonal flexibility."

Free, available for Ubuntu:

https://tonelib.net/gfx-overview/

For Xubuntu 18.04 LTS installing the deb yields:

Unpacking tonelib-gfx (3.5-6) ...
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of tonelib-gfx:
tonelib-gfx depends on libcurl4-openssl-dev; however:
Package libcurl4-openssl-dev is not installed.

This is why I'm asking. I find it just a bit 'strange' that it should rely on curl and SSL. It's an audio plugin after all. So before going further down this road I'd like to know if anyone is using it and what it's like.

Why don't you ask them? It could be anything, preset updates?

At this point I'm not even sure about asking them. More like looking if it's worthwhile at all. Hence the asking if anyone uses it.

Look at the image, they have a online preset store, were you could download presets. Same as with guitarix, they seem to use curl for that.

The only remark is, that libcurl4-openssl-dev should only be a build dependency, at runtime it should be enough to have libcurl4 installed.

tramp wrote:The only remark is, that libcurl4-openssl-dev should only be a build dependency, at runtime it should be enough to have libcurl4 installed.

Yes, that's the other thing. A dependency on a -dev package. Way to go !

Well, it's a small mistake on the debian/control file. It didn't harm your computer to install the dev package, otherwise, you could unpack and edit the control file to remove this dependency, repack it and install.

If it is worse it? I don't know.

jonetsu wrote:Anyone tried it ?

I did recently. This stuff rocks, but is still beta, so it can refuse to start or close unexpectedly. I didn't have such a problem with a standalone app, but Linux VST plugin released just yesterday didn't work on my machine. Maybe you'll be more lucky. It features some basic yet must-have pedals, 19 amps, a small set of bass and guitar cabs, a cab sim, and some other little things. The sound is really killer, it's much above what I did expect. Don't worry, it doesn't do anything bad. I've run GFX and JAM in strace for debugging and haven't found anything destructive in its behavior.

By the way, that JAM thing is much more amazing than GFX. It features a score/tab editor, a MIDI synth, a mixer, a VST host, and the whole GFX controlled from inside JAM, including switching presets on a specified point. I was blown away. The future of home practicing is here.

AlexTheBassist wrote:I did recently. This stuff rocks, but is still beta, so it can refuse to start or close unexpectedly.

Thanks for the feedback ! Much appreciated. I'll keep an eye on GFX as well as JAM. Will certainly try it again in a couple of months or so.

jonetsu wrote: I'll keep an eye on GFX as well as JAM.

Here's a short demo of a “Djentlman” preset I made for GFX:
Guitar and bass in a mix, no processing except the GFX itself: https://yadi.sk/d/EgOv4r-QdVp9Ag
Isolated guitar: https://yadi.sk/d/XF86N8ekUsDd7Q

AlexTheBassist wrote:Here's a short demo of a “Djentlman” preset I made for GFX:

It sounds excellent. Quite motivating to get it.

As an aside, it's the first time I see such a long list:

jonetsu wrote:As an aside, it's the first time I see such a long list:

yandex.jpg

These are just local domains for search engine that provides me cloud storage, except for the latter that is really an ads domain. It's sort of Russian Google.

Thanks guys. It does sound pretty darn good.
No rest for the wicked.

I’ve tried it on a throwaway windows pc. I does sound real good indeed. And I was just about to install it on my linux box. But I have a hard time figuring out which software license that has been used for the code. And since it most likely isn’t open source (don’t know if it is), I at least would very much like to know, where the code comes from and who is responsible for writing it. Is it a company or private hobbyists or whatever. Some users thought it was affiliated with ZOOM products. Usually whoever writing things like this would like some credit for their work, or in case it’s a company they would prob have some street address and history. But none of this information is available anywhere. I signed up at their forum and asked these questions and about the relationship with zoom and who they are.. I encouraged to give out a bit of info and make an about tab on their website. And guess what... my thread quickly got deleted. Seriously? They could have just answered in the open. I did try to write my questions in a friendly non harmful way. And by answering them in front of other people’s eyes it would benefit prob both them and the users and create a bit of trust.

I got this answer back but in email, since the thread in there is gone. At least they answered, but without giving any real answers. I still don’t know who they are and don’t feel safe enough to install their software. I don’t get this whole anonymous thing on a project this big.. seems odd. And even more so not being willing to participate in the thread and just deleting it. Well maybe it’s just me being too paranoid.

Their email answer:
Hello,
Thank you for interest in our software. ToneLib.net is an audio software development company based in the United States and is not affiliated with Zoom Corporation or its subsidiaries. All our software is free of charge due to generous support from our funders. Please feel free to contact us if you need any further information.
Best regards,
Andrew

Unicornblender wrote:But I have a hard time figuring out which software license that has been used for the code.

Oh, really? I understood that it's a proprietary app just by looking at the main page. Every Open Source project states that it's open source.

Unicornblender wrote:Well maybe it’s just me being too paranoid.

Exactly. I did analyze system calls it makes, and there's nothing to be worried about. However, it's still beta, so it may or may not work depending on your software environment.

AlexTheBassist wrote: Exactly. I did analyze system calls it makes, and there's nothing to be worried about. However, it's still beta, so it may or may not work depending on your software environment.

Cool.. Your linux skills are clearly is a LOT higher than mine. I have no idea how to do that kind of stuff. All I know is to not just blindly install anything I come across and use a bit of common sense before executing files.
I still don't quite get why the company working on it and also who is funding the project want to be completely anon. I think we can all agree that it does sound good, has a huge potential and will be very very much appreciated in the linux community if they changed their strategy a bit and opened up a bit on info.