• We would like to remind our members that this is a privately owned, run and supported forum. You are here at the invitation and discretion of the owners. As such, rules and standards of conduct will be applied that help keep this forum functioning as the owners desire. These include, but are not limited to, removing content and even access to the forum.

    Please give yourself a refresher on the forum rules you agreed to follow when you signed up.

AITR

DLC86

Fractal Fanatic
I started reading this thread elsewhere and when I got home and listened to the actual sound-clips, I thought 'Aha!'
Regardless of whether or not I would use this feature, it sounds impressive.

You guys who've done lots of recording with real mics and so forth....
Is this sound always something that's been present on our favourite records to a greater or lesser degree or is it something that's deliberately added in by the producer?
Are there any famous albums you can name where you consider the 'amp in the room' sound very important to he overall mix/feel and/or where you consider it to be quite prominent? [So I can find them and listen carefully].

Just trying to get an understanding of this.

Thanks.
In records from 50s to 70s you'll find a lot of examples, going to 80s and forward not so much probably..

Some time ago I read an Alan Parsons interview where he said he never uses close mics, he always places it at least 1ft away

EDIT: here is the interview https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pr...n-parsons-on-dark-side-of-the-moon-2651075527
 

mixermang

Inspired
Is this sound always something that's been present on our favourite records

always. here's a perfect example of both, it starts off just close mic, but when it kicks off, the room mics on the guitar cab get added in. producers do it deliberately but they usually try to do it tricky where you don't notice a huge difference




here's an example of basically 100% room guitar tone that's not a live recording

 

Chuck P

Member
Is it meant for recording though?

The problem here is that if you want to use a reverb to glue instruments together, it's better to use the same reverb for all of them, IMO - that will kind of create an impression that they are in the same space.

With this reverb hardcoded into an IR, how do you achieve that? It'll be from some room where you can't do anything else, you don't even know where it is. And you can't add reverb to signal already containing reverb, I'm afraid. Neither can you adjust the mix to lower reverb level. Or length. Or anything.

Guess that's the whole point of close micing - to get rid of room influence and add it during mixing.

I think @sprint made a similar point in a post I can't find, but I'm having a but of trouble getting my head around this too. I think of:

  • IRs for capturing the tone and feel of the cab, and
  • Verbs for capturing the ambience of a space.

This seems to be a little of both, and as a result I can't figure out where I would want it in anything other than a super-simple effects chain. If I'm following correctly, this is why some folks are suggesting using this IR in a different downstream block as a standalone ambience effect.

Other than the off-topic stuff, there is a lot of interesting conversation here - I particularly appreciate the cab and IR experts (@York Audio , @dr bonkers , @Valhallir ) being willing to share their insights in a thread where a few owners have their hackles up.
 

mixermang

Inspired
I think of:

  • IRs for capturing the tone and feel of the cab, and
  • Verbs for capturing the ambience of a space

you can use a fullres for a small verb after a regular IR, that's close mic and room mic mixed, or you can just use room mic as the IR itself, without needing a close mic. the further away you get from source the more you get the sound of the cab bouncing off the space. with fullres, if you capture the IR loud enough, you'll even get room information from behind a close mic. you can basically use fullres for any of it, 1.3 seconds. I can't wait to hear a fullres close mic with a fullres room behind it, don't even need to guess how good that is going to sound
 

biggness

Power User
Yes. The two IR Player blocks have been combined into a single, stereo IR Player block with individual level and pan and a mix control.
Awesome. Looking forward to it.

Would it be too much to ask to get you to throw in some low and high cut parameters, and a simple three band EQ in the IR Player as well?
 

erockomania

Experienced
Although this sounds pretty cool and would likely be more fun to play when just practicing in the recording studio, I'd likely rarely use them in a mix.

I've never sought out that "amp in the room" thing because that is not going to happen when you are comparing playing live through a 4x12 cab (or whatever) to playing through 6" nearfields using an IR of a close mic'd cab. They are just completely different things... finished tone for an album (burned in mics/speakers) coming through nearfields or your actual ear hearing all the details of a room while standing in front of a cab (no mics).

I surely look forward to checking this out, though and much appreciate the advance in tech.
 

Jarick

Experienced
Here's an example of how producers commonly do it:
https://www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/AITR_Toad.mp3

The first clip is a regular IR. The second is the same IR with a stereo set of room mic IRs mixed in at -6dB.

The second clip sounds a lot more natural. It smooths out the presence nicely.

Something's Always Wrong? I haven't listened to TTWS in...a long time. I'll have to rectify that.

Doesn't ring a bell with any TTWS song right now but I love that band. They're good to bad song ratio is incredible.
 

JoKeR III

Power User
I've been playing around with the room parameters in the Cab block as well as a couple of Reverbs in an attempt to somehow emulate what the FullRes IR does. I've come close enough to see the benefit; it's one of those things you don't know is missing but when you hear it and play with it awhile, it's something that is hard to do without.

As far as whether or not to implement on the Mk1, it's a new feature that can be added without completely removing an existing feature (User IRs) or affecting the overall performance. I haven't heard an explanation of how reducing the User IR storage from 2048 to 1024 slots impacts their workflow or use case.

I understand the convenience of storing IRs on the unit, as well as needing them stored for use in existing presets, but why the need for more than 1024? How often do users actually access both User banks? Do people really even have 1024 IRs that they must have access to on the Axe III? If so, please explain how you use them or the scenarios you need them for. I'm legitimately curious, I love learning new things and different approaches to creating tones and using my gear.
 
Top Bottom