The more IRs are used, the more realistic the amp/cab in the room sound is

The more IRs are used at the same time, the more realistic the cab in the room sound is

  • Yes

  • No

  • Maybe

Results are only viewable after voting.
TheRedDevil

TheRedDevil

Inspired
I'm always surprised that this isn't a topic in the forums:

When I examine simple modelers like the HB DNAfx Git or the Line6 Pod Go, I notice that only 1 cab/IR can be used at the same time. With the AX FX I learned that the more IRs I mix, the more likely I am to achieve a amp/cab in the room sound.

Let's assume our ears would have perfect perception, whereas a microphone does not. It only records certain parts/positions of the sound source/speakers. In addition, each microphone is special and only records specific parts of the sound. Therefore, the more different microphones I position in different places on the loudspeaker, the more realistic the sound has to be. The AX FX III itself provides up to 8 IRs that can be used at the same time. I think that's one of the main reasons why the AX FX III can generate so much more realistic sounds and possibly a good reason not to buy a FM3 or other modelers.

Do you also see it like that?

Remarks:
  • The result may be worse if we use too much IRs or too different IRs - Let's assume that we always use the same cab and speaker with different mics/positions.
  • Let's assume we use 100% perfect FRFR speakers
  • Let's assume ears have perfect perception: "Don't trust your ears" is no good basis for this discussion
  • An IR can also be a DynaCab
  • I know CabLab can still be used e.g. for FM3 but not such simple/userfriendly like in AxeEdit.
  • Let's focus on amp/cab in the room sound which shall be achieved, not the sound on records - well, that kind of sound we know from our old amps/speakers
  • "Up to 8 IRs" does not mean that you really shall use 8 IRs in parallel. But 4 IR in parallel is realistic (e.g. 2 mics in front of speaker, 2 left/right mics for room)
 
Last edited:
I'm no expert and I'm trying to keep it simple: if you aim to emulate the cab in the room (without using a 4x12).. maybe that's a way.
My goal is to achieve the sound I hear in the records... it's a mic'd guitar speaker... so in my case it make no sense at all to use more IRs (most records were done with 1 mic).

I suppose that most of the people is trying the 2nd approach (that works for recording / playing live) than the 1st (that aims at a "personal" satisfaction).

Bottom line: that said... as always... use what makes YOU smile!
 
Amp/Cab in the room sound is the topic here but I think that's also correct what you say, but often more than one mic were used for recordings. At minimum 2 at the speaker and one for the room for modern recordings.
 
TheRedDevil said:
but often more than one mic were used for recordings
Click to expand...
that's for sure!

I didn't want to be OT, sorry for the derail.
I started with piano and when I switched to guitar I was chasing the sound I heard in the recordings..
Never owned an amp / cab, only digital devices... so I know I lost all the pleasure of a 4x12 that flaps my pants but I'm also "lucky" that my needs are less demanding when listening through monitors 😂
 
This is kind of true but only up to a point, at least in my experience.

When adding mics on one subject you will accumulate small, difficult to detect phase differences to varying degrees at various points in the frequency spectrum. Along with the difference in frequency response from the microphone at its location.

If you continue down that path long enough the accumulation of mics starts to “take away” from the detail of the subject.

I’ve come across this many times when recording drums, a few too many close mics and the punch and clarity starts to fade and the stereo image gets blurred.

At some point I did an experiment with this on a guitar cab and found that 4 mics of varying types placed carefully (close and distant) ensuring phase coherence seemed to be the tipping point, adding another started to take away. With the 5 signals mixed together something was lost, mute any single one and it came back.
 
Last edited:
I can well imagine. The result may be worse if we use too much IRs or too different IRs - Let's assume that we always use the same cab and speaker with different mics/positions, e.g from cone to edge. What do you think?
 
I also prefer more of a cab i the room type sound, and for me using one of the flatter mics (ribbon or condenser) further away from the speaker gets me closer to that sound.

Think of it in this way: When you listen to an actual cab in the room you are listen from one point in the room, but you don't put your ears right next to the middle of the speaker cone. You usually have your ears some distance away from the speaker, and often quite a bit to the side of it.

So i like using the ribbon mic with the dynacabs almost maximum distance away from center and more than half way from the center.
 
TheRedDevil said:
Do you also see it like that?
Click to expand...

Uh, no. That would only be true if mics and the resulting IRs were 100% neutral and far-field and would capture only a part of the sound spectrum. While in fact most mics / IRs have their own sonic signature and still capture the sound at very close range. So, combining mics / IRs will not produce the true realistic "cab in the room" sound. What will happen when combining though is that the individual characteristics of the mics / IRs (peaks and valleys) will get less prevalent. If that's what you want, just use the Smoothing parameter instead, even with a single IR.
 
There is no perfect result unfortunately, just a less imperfect one.

I started writing a lengthy explanation of the engineering behind it but @yek made a good summary:

yek said:
What will happen when combining though is that the individual characteristics of the mics / IRs (peaks and valleys) will get less prevalent.
Click to expand...

The result is a less complex signal the more mics that are added which is what I was able to reproduce.

This in combination with accumulative phase differences means more IR’s ≠ more realistic.
 
Last edited:
TheRedDevil said:
I can well imagine. The result may be worse if we use too much IRs or too different IRs - Let's assume that we always use the same cab and speaker with different mics/positions, e.g from cone to edge. What do you think?
Click to expand...
This in a simple form is a well used multi mic technique. The issue is when you add too many mics usually beyond 2 close and 1 or 2 distant/room (2 close mics is the common industry standard for a good reason).

They can be different (1 or 2 close with different microphones and another far with a different microphone) the accumulative difference would often be pleasing. Keep adding and it will often deteriorate.
 
I think that's true, I never used more than 4 IRs in parallel, I think because of that. Well that means, 1 until 4 can get better, more gets bad. Could be a good rule.
 
yek said:
Adding to my post: regardless of the IRs used, FRFR monitors simply can't produce the cab-in-the room sound. Read more about here:

https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/...ponses_(IR)#Far-field_IRs_and_close-mixed_IRs

https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/...ity_and_levels#FRFR_and_amp.2Fcab-in-the-room

https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=Cab_block#Cab-in-the-room
Click to expand...
Correct, but x% of it and that seems to be enough for me or better than just 100% cab in the room sound 😄
 
You can get a nice miced cab with miced room sound (close mics and distant/room mics) but it won’t be the “cab in the room” sound people talk about.

There is a lot of physics involved that can’t be manufactured through the use of IR’s and reproduction systems.
 
Well but I think we can say that with just one IR (speaker/mic) we will never get enough % of cab in the room feeling but recorded sound. At minimum 2 in front of speaker plus 1 for room if wanted (reverb is the alternative) should be the basis for a great sound 😉

Well FM3, etc is no alternative for me ...😭
 
Last edited:
I'm happy that I bought the AXE FXIII but I know CabLab can still be used e.g. for FM3 but not such simple/userfriendly like in AxeEdit. I think support for 4 IRs should be mandatory for modelers. I think thats still the reason why I don't like the others.
 
Last edited:
Choosing 2 great irs that combine well together is already a painful thing for me and lot of hours. I can’t imagine having to dial 8 irs…
 
But with DynaCabs it is much easier and 2 are the minimum. With room IR you need 3 or 4.
The 8 IRs I just use to compare sounds quickly. But if you mix two amps you may need 4x2=8.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom