Why I won't be using the cab block for recording any more

FractalAudio said:
And, wow, what a difference it makes with Cab Pack 10. Usually the difference is subtle, with Cab Pack 10 it's very noticeable.
Click to expand...
...sounds like the relatively modest $30 investment for cab pack 10 mightn't be a bad idea at this point so? I recently picked up Cab pack 3 (nice) but cab pack 10's offerings will sound better because of the new MIC + DI technique right?
 
Last edited:
Eanna said:
...sounds like the relatively modest $30 investment for cab pack 10 mightn't be a bad idea at this point so? I recently picked up Cab pack 3 (nice) but cab pack 10's offerings will sound better because of the new MIC + DI technique right?
Click to expand...

I have 3 and like 10 a lot.

Better is subjective though. So best ye be the judge :)
 
FractalAudio said:
In my tests I've found that 8K samples (170 ms) is more than enough. I think 500 ms (24K samples) is overkill and if an IR has significant energy out that far then it has too much room in it.
Click to expand...

i don't get this, i mean how much room does a 57 that's kissing the grill cloth really capture?
a bit for sure but i doubt that it's so much to make anything sound "bad" but maybe this little bit is exactly what's mising when comparing a "mic'd" with an "IR recording".
even with ultra res i think that the "it sounds so sterile/direct" effect is very present, it's absolutely can't hold up with that "3D-round-in place" mic'd sound.
 
Soultrash said:
...maybe this little bit is exactly what's mising when comparing a "mic'd" with an "IR recording".
even with ultra res i think that the "it sounds so sterile/direct" effect is very present, it's absolutely can't hold up with that "3D-round-in place" mic'd sound.
Click to expand...
That 3D "cab-in-the-room" thing is an acoustic phenomenon. It's about guitar cabs radiating sound not just out the front, but off the sides and back as well. It's enhanced by the fact that the cab is usually firing at the player's knees, so he doesn't get as much direct sound from his speakers. And it's local to the guitarist himself; that effect rarely makes it out into the venue.

If you just gotta have the amp-in-the-room sound, you need to switch off cab modeling and get yourself a power amp and cab.
 
Chris@AxeFxTutorials said:
add some room parameter.
Click to expand...

yeah, it's not perfect but it surely helps!

Rex said:
That 3D "cab-in-the-room" thing is an acoustic phenomenon. It's about guitar cabs radiating sound not just out the front, but off the sides and back as well. It's enhanced by the fact that the cab is usually firing at the player's knees, so he doesn't get as much direct sound from his speakers. And it's local to the guitarist himself; that effect rarely makes it out into the venue.

If you just gotta have the amp-in-the-room sound, you need to switch off cab modeling and get yourself a power amp and cab.
Click to expand...

i am not talking about the "amp in the room sound, which to me is lots on the feel side" when standing in front of a cab,
i am referring to recordings and how punchy and clear they are sounding (if done well of course) but just without that sterile "direct" note to them.
adding room in the cab block helps but it leads to that "cloudy" sound that cliff has described in the original post i've quoted from.
however when listening to mic'd tracks that "cloudy side effect" is just not there. i know it makes not much sense but i trust my ears very well,
though this whole thing seems like a mistery that's condemned to remain unsolved, haha.
 
Soultrash said:
i am not talking about the "amp in the room sound, which to me is lots on the feel side" when standing in front of a cab,
i am referring to recordings and how punchy and clear they are sounding (if done well of course) but just without that sterile "direct" note to them.
adding room in the cab block helps but it leads to that "cloudy" sound that cliff has described in the original post i've quoted from.
however when listening to mic'd tracks that "cloudy side effect" is just not there. i know it makes not much sense but i trust my ears very well,
though this whole thing seems like a mistery that's condemned to remain unsolved, haha.
Click to expand...
I think that's the room you're hearing. That's why adding a little room parameter helps (I think the Reverb block is more effective and realistic than the Cab block's Room parameter). Reflections reduce the "direct" sound, even if they're not perceived as distinct reflections. Also, try mixing in one of the "back" IRs, maybe with a little delay to taste.

And of course, trust your ears, regardless of what I say. :)
 
Soultrash said:
yeah, it's not perfect but it surely helps!



i am not talking about the "amp in the room sound, which to me is lots on the feel side" when standing in front of a cab,
i am referring to recordings and how punchy and clear they are sounding (if done well of course) but just without that sterile "direct" note to them.
adding room in the cab block helps but it leads to that "cloudy" sound that cliff has described in the original post i've quoted from.
however when listening to mic'd tracks that "cloudy side effect" is just not there. i know it makes not much sense but i trust my ears very well,
though this whole thing seems like a mistery that's condemned to remain unsolved, haha.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, if I read this correctly and you are of the belief that the IR's are the factor in this phenomenon, you are aimed in the wrong direction. Any of the IR's out in the last 6 months from CK, OH, or FAS that I have heard would not be the culprit. I cannot say more on the topic out of a requirement for tact and professional courtesy, but rest assured it's not the IR's, or the technology surrounding them. Major label records are made all the time with IR's now, and they sound fantastic if all the other factors are well taken care of. I could, but won't for aforementioned reasons, site examples of mine that have been on Billboard #1 rock tracks and the guitars sounded crystal clear. Even prior to that, IR's from the last few years are extremely close to the live mic'd counterparts. With Nebula, you can't tell a functional difference. I've done the comparative tests. The voicing alterations and/or technology improvements in the last 6 months have, in my opinion and my own personal design have been less to compensate for a lack of realism in IR's, more that they have been to compensate for everything else in what are the commonly used signal paths and requirement of the inexperienced novice/amateur user, while still beneficial to the expert users as well. The use of these files requires, in some cases, a paradigm shift in the approach to mic'ing cabinets, as the source and destination mediums are not the same, nor are the sonic standards for commercial recordings. We're not blasting a Plexi through a Neve console to tape without a computer in sight anymore. The loudness wars, brightness wars, all in the box mixing, lack of proper budget allowance for not only gear, but professional specialists in the process flow of the amount of hands that albums used to go through, all that stuff is a factor now.

Rest assured the IR's are fine, and if this is an issue for anyone, they need to check this one off the list and look elsewhere in the wild wilderness that is 'everything else'. :)

Hope this helps to get pointed towards resolution, and if I interpreted this completely wrong, my apologies!
 
Last edited:
ownhammer said:
With Nebula, you can't tell a functional difference.
Click to expand...

Are you doing anymore work on nebula IR's? I remember you selling them at one point, are they still available to purchase? How does one load them in a daw? and do the ones you have previously had available offer any advantage over your V3 ir's?

I'm still waiting for someone to offer a hardware nebula loader to use with the axe, I think it's a logical next step.
 
FractalAudio said:
And, wow, what a difference it makes with Cab Pack 10. Usually the difference is subtle, with Cab Pack 10 it's very noticeable.
Click to expand...

I would 100% agree with this
I use Plexi Marshall sounds a lot and have been doing a lot of testing of 4x12 IRthrough my accurate monitors (ATC 100A) in a well tuned room
I was not happy with FW 18.06, the sound was weird and unnatural but since 18.07 I have retested all my favourite 4x12 IR.

The ATC really do reveal large differences between the IR which are clearly audible.

I used the 4x12 Fractal GB factory preset and this was by far the best IR and sound that I have achieved to date with the Plexi 1959 jumpered amp. Outstanding
I am going to get the Cab pack 10 for sure
 
Rex said:
I think that's the room you're hearing. That's why adding a little room parameter helps (I think the Reverb block is more effective and realistic than the Cab block's Room parameter). Reflections reduce the "direct" sound, even if they're not perceived as distinct reflections. Also, try mixing in one of the "back" IRs, maybe with a little delay to taste.

And of course, trust your ears, regardless of what I say. :)
Click to expand...

i always trust my ears, but might get biased when it comes to the "feeling of a tone" haha.

ownhammer said:
IR's from the last few years are extremely close to the live mic'd counterparts. With Nebula, you can't tell a functional difference.
Click to expand...

extremly close might be good for everyone, even in a highly professional environment that's absolutely correct.
though, i didn't say that IR's sound bad, i just think that there is still something missing between "extremely close" and "dead on".
of course it's arguable if the missing part is something that you can hear or something that you can feel, i think, i always did that it's more of a "feel" thing.
the question is, how can someone capture it, even that there seems absolutely no demand for this as far as i can see...

cheers
S.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom