Dyna-cab, general consensus is that they're "better" than legacy?

Coming from two notes which already used dynacabs i told at the beginning that to me dynacab is a simpler way to obtain the sound you want.. But you have to know mic position and carachteristics otherwise the time you spend searching for that sound is the same you ll do scrolling hundreds of irs.. So i prefer for example York mixes which are supposed to give the best combination you can obtain by yourself having the same knowledge/ability..
 
I think I like them the same although I finally got around to using the LT TV Mix 7 which @2112 kindly put up on Axe Change for us to download for free. This IR with the Euro Red amp gives me the best crunch and lead tones I've ever had so far. All I did was adjust negative feedback, depth, speaker thump, gain, bass, middle and treble on the amp and that was it, mind blowing Lukather tone ! At this point in time, I couldn't care less if all my other cab sims and Dynacabs burned to the ground, the TV Mix 7 is perfect across most amps that I use right now.

The other cab I use is the 4x12 USA MC90 which is a Dynacab and that doesn't need any tinkering with either.
 
bread said:
At this point in time, I couldn't care less if all my other cab sims and Dynacabs burned to the ground, the TV Mix 7 is perfect across most amps that I use right now.
Click to expand...
I feel the same way about the ML Sound Lab's "Best IR in the World". Dynacabs are pretty cool and I've used them to lay down a few songs where I needed different sounds, but that particular IR is just so perfect!
 
Evan Davidson said:
So from what you said, I'm gathering that you use them more with a clean setup...or dirty, but not full chug?...what sound do you like most with them? I agree that the legacy sounds thicker,...but I have really dark sounds already and I think my chug metal tones are having more bite and some kind of dimensions....but I go back and forth...I would think for live you want more bite, but for recording, whatever works at the moment is best....good to have good options...
Click to expand...
Since I'm a « mesa guy », I like sounds that are big/full and not trebly. But yes, I like them more with combos for vintage and low gain sounds. Then, everyone has their vision of the sound they like in their head, there is not just one rule. What matters is that you like the sound you play, whatever you use. Dynacabs are another option for me, but I haven't given up on standard IRS.
 
AlGrenadine said:
Scientific consensus (if these words still can cohabit these days) : dynacab is not ultrares, so legacy irs can be better. But if better is easier to tweak then... You know
Click to expand...

So....I know Cliff has said that the benefit of UltraRes is mostly in the subs....but I'm curious how low (in Hz) he meant. It seems like a lot of people are using a low-cut around 80Hz (if not higher in some circumstances)....if the difference is actually substantially below that, we're filtering it out anyway, and there's nothing nonlinear after the cab...it shouldn't make a difference, right?
 
I don't really understand how one can evaluate / perceive general overall sonic differences (ie thickness, bite, fullness...) globally between DC and Leg/3rdPty IRs, or determine a preferred overall application of one type over the other (ie DC more suited to low gain / vintage usage...) when there's no known existing instance of a Leg/3rdPty IR and a Dynacab IR taken from the same cab using the same mic / mic position to objectively compare between, with the aim of determining overall differences just resulting from the different (DC vs Leg/3rdPty) capture processes. Other than preference for hirez which DC does not do, I could understand someone simply not finding a DC selection with the qualities he/she is looking for, and finding it in a leg/3rdPtr IR (or vise versa) but thats about it.
 
Last edited:
sprint said:
I don't really understand how one can evaluate / perceive general overall sonic differences...globally between DC and Leg/3rdPty IRs...when there's no known existing instance of a Leg/3rdPty IR and a Dynacab IR taken from the same cab using the same mic / mic position to objectively compare...
Click to expand...

You know....sometimes, I really dig the scientific approach: isolate all the variables, explore one at a time, etc.. I've done a decent bit tweaking small things with a looper in front of the change; I still own a gigrig quartermaster mostly because I can cover up the lights with my foot and semi-blind swap between similar pedals; etc..

But at some point....it seems like you have to give up on perfect comparisons and try things that might work and see what you like.

For a lot of these things...the options are all plenty "good enough" and the differences are so slight...some of the details really don't matter...and it seems okay to just pick one and move on.
 
marsonic said:
So....I know Cliff has said that the benefit of UltraRes is mostly in the subs....but I'm curious how low (in Hz) he meant. It seems like a lot of people are using a low-cut around 80Hz (if not higher in some circumstances)....if the difference is actually substantially below that, we're filtering it out anyway, and there's nothing nonlinear after the cab...it shouldn't make a difference, right?
Click to expand...
TBH i use legacy IRs just because of that... i felt the bass lack with dynacabs, playing mostly Metal...
 
marsonic said:
You know....sometimes, I really dig the scientific approach: isolate all the variables, explore one at a time, etc.. I've done a decent bit tweaking small things with a looper in front of the change; I still own a gigrig quartermaster mostly because I can cover up the lights with my foot and semi-blind swap between similar pedals; etc..

But at some point....it seems like you have to give up on perfect comparisons and try things that might work and see what you like.

For a lot of these things...the options are all plenty "good enough" and the differences are so slight...some of the details really don't matter...and it seems okay to just pick one and move on.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but my point is that if I'm going to make some overall conclusions like "DC is more suited to low gain so I'll mostly just consider DC for that in future", and I've based that conclusion and change in my practice on listening to IR samples possibly not even captured from the same cab / speaker / mic type, then I've made a fairly significant change in my practice / perception (and possibly recommended that to others) based on what I'd say is a flawed logical basis.
 
Last edited:
i find them really nice for when i just wanna dial up a tone real quick.

but i found that i couldnt replace them with my existing live tones. Probably because my ears are accustomed to hearing the legacy cabs sound.
 
sprint said:
Agreed, but my point is that if I'm going to make some overall conclusions like "DC is more suited to low gain so I'll mostly just consider DC for that in future", and I've based that conclusion and change in my practice on listening to IR samples possibly not even captured from the same cab / speaker / mic type, then I've made a fairly significant change in my practice / perception (and possibly recommended that to others) based on what I'd say is a flawed logical basis.
Click to expand...
YMMV, but IME, it is exactly like that.
I much prefer standard IR’s for hi gain.
DC can work for me for low and mid gain.
Simply the more gain you pump into the preset, the more standard IR’s shines IMO.
Coming from playing 4x12 cabs, standard IR’s are closer to give me that sensation when playing real cab.
There’s not right or wrong approach.
We can be happy we have the choice :)
 
Last edited:
sprint said:
Agreed, but my point is that if I'm going to make some overall conclusions like "DC is more suited to low gain so I'll mostly just consider DC for that in future", and I've based that conclusion and change in my practice on listening to IR samples possibly not even captured from the same cab / speaker / mic type, then I've made a fairly significant change in my practice / perception (and possibly recommended that to others) based on what I'd say is a flawed logical basis.
Click to expand...

Before saying that, I have tried the dynacab and put the mics in many many positions. Any of the DN 4x12 wins against my favorite IR combinaison. Even if it is not a « fair comparaison », it don’t change the fact that you can put the mics everywhere with the few 4x12 dynacabs that we have, you never got the tone of one of the OH IR of the unit for example.
Then nothing important hm. If we are already 3 in 5 posts who prefer IR for high gain, maybe …

And « prefer them » Doesn’t mean that dynacabs are bad
 
Last edited:
My name is mud said:
Before saying that, I have tried the dynacab and put the mics in many many positions. Any of the DN 4x12 wins against my favorite IR combinaison. Even if it is not a « fair comparaison », it don’t change the fact that you can put the mics everywhere with the few 4x12 dynacabs that we have, you never got the tone of one of the OH IR of the unit for example.
Then nothing important hm. If we are already 3 in 5 posts who prefer IR for high gain, maybe …

And « prefer them » Doesn’t mean that dynacabs are bad
Click to expand...
I'd agree that in the absence of more apples to apples processs comparison examples, statistical analysis might provide some insight, but I'm not sure the number of posts here is a big enough sample size to prove anything, + there's likely some "groupthink" here that could skew the numbers to some extent.
 
Last edited:
there's likely some "groupthink" here that could skew the numbers to some extent.

Even though I don’t think this is the case at all, I’m just curious..Is that a good or a bad thing ?
 
Thomas Obester said:
there's likely some "groupthink" here that could skew the numbers to some extent.

Even though I don’t think this is the case at all, I’m just curious..Is that a good or a bad thing ?
Click to expand...

If the truth can be objective/scientific, it's a bad thing.

If it's purely cultural....there isn't really an alternative.

Better & Worse in terms of music.....there are objective judgments possible but I honestly don't think this is one of them.
 
sprint said:
depends on the quality / accuracy of the group'd thought I guess
Click to expand...
how can you judge quality / accuracy of the group’d thought ? what are the conditions ?
I think you can like what you like and it doesn’t mean you have more or less accurate / quality thought.. is just your thought, that’s it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom