Amp in the Room?

What are your FRFR speakers?

Many systems have hyped highs, so you set the highcut low to compensate for that. Using that same preset then for studio momitors or a PA, it sounds like through a blanket.
If a certain monitor is the problem I'd change the upper bands in the global eq to get it right.
But when highs are too much everywere, then the problem lies in the preset and cut freq is the right fix.

Besides that mids that seem a bit too much boosted at home, make the guitar sit oerfect in the mix. Needed while to get that. It costs you quite an effort to turn mids more up than it seems right, but that's how amps cut through on stage.

I agree, especially if your "FRFRs" are hyping highs (they aren't supposed to!). You may dial out some "air" if you go low on the Hi Cut, but truthfully most guitar speakers we use and associate with 'tone" put at nothing of value above 6kHz.

In a band mix situation the FOH guy may easily hi cut you even at 4kHz depending on tone, to slot you into the overall mix. That said, I've found some the Class-A Vox style amps like the Hi Cut at 10khz or higher....Overtones or something. Whereas with a Tweed amp you can hi cut at 5kHz and never notice a difference.
 
Last edited:
Eeeenteresting. (Scurries to the studio...)

Am I the only one that heard this in my head in Arte Johnson's German accent?

arte-johnson-laugh-in-1.jpg


Will give this a try later this week when things settle down a bit here....
 
There was a file with that EQ trick as an IR? Where can I get it?

It was just an impulse that I shot with ToneMatching. If you go through what Cliff described in the original post you'll get something in the ballpark.

I'm going to spin up another thread at some point called "Homebrew Speaker Simulation" to see if anyone wants to share their recipes for these sorts of things.
 
It was just an impulse that I shot with ToneMatching. If you go through what Cliff described in the original post you'll get something in the ballpark.

Ah, ok, good idea. I haven't dealed with tone matching for a while, but shooting some EQs is a good trick.
 
IR’s are essentially eq curves of a given speaker and mics response at given position. Changing the mic position, the speaker etc, results in a change of response at a given frequency.

You could hypothetically change mic slightly off axis or raise a frequency in the eq and get a similar response. I think this is what some software amp sims did when they had things like a virtual mic you could slide forward and back etc? Others have a bank of IR’s and you move the virtual mic and it loads the corresponding IR.

I’ve always thought a problem with IR’s is they are static, its how the speaker responded at a given output level at a given moment. There is no way to dynamically change an IR to date, though I think the now mostly forgot Nebula software tried to do soemthing to that extent?

Well, let’s say we are just trying to emulate a speaker through an eq curve. We can dynamically change eq with playing dynamics right ? So we could, I assume, also have the eq curve dynamically over time, with regards to output level etc.

Perhaps this could be the solution to how to do emulate a rotary speaker cabinet, because its dynamic nature and capturing a single IR only results in on position of the drum and/or rotor.

You’d need a bunch of different IR’s taken over it’s cycle of rotation, and then dynamically cycle through them, which isn’t possible.

If we could dynamically adjust the EQ to respond in real time to what happens as it rotates, it seems to me we could have improved rotary speaker emulation with regards to how it would be perceived from a stereo source?

Based on what I've read elsewhere, there are 'some sounds right right but isn't' data above 'IRs being too static'.

Its not that there isn't room for improvement in how we usually capture sounds, but the static part of IR is not relevant. It's understandably confusing one thing for another as guitar players - which is all I am to be clear. I'm no signal theory guy! : )

TL;DR too brief summary, Search the The Gear Page for a deep discussion on this from some folks who make speakers. A user named Jay will come up on some data rich threads, sadly many descend into flameogrpahy. Jay is not the cuddliest guy but he helped design the best FRFR I've ever heard, the CLR from Atomic, so I take his word over other internet experts with no product to tell their story. Jay's data has been pretty impeccable in my travels and creating something great speaks to me.
 
Try this:
Make a patch with no cab block.
After the amp put a Filter block. Reset to make sure all parameters are at default values.
Set the type to Lowpass.
Set the Order to 4th.
Set the Freq to ~5000.
Set the High Cut Freq to ~5000.

Adjust the Freq and High Cut Freq to taste. For more aggressive tones increase both to 6000 or so. For warmer tones decrease both to 4000 or so.

Now, to add some "character" put a Graphic EQ or Parametric EQ block after (or before) the Filter block. Boost 125 Hz a little. Play around with some of the midrange and upper midrange bands to change the character of the tone. This is what I used:
31: 0.0
63 Hz: 0.6
125 Hz: 4.57
250 Hz: 0.25
500: 0.0
1K: -5.0
2K: -2.27
4K: 1.95
8K: -1.0
16K: -5.77

The reasoning behind this is that there is no such thing as a "flat" speaker. All speakers, even really expensive monitors have peaks and dips in the response. That's why they all sound different. The primary thing a guitar speaker does is roll off the highs aggressively at somewhere between 4K and 6K Hz. The Filter block replicates the rolloff but lets the natural response of the speaker come through.

Not meaning to resurrect a dead post, but I tried this on my FX8 MkII (which is wired up to a JC-40). The JC-40 is a bright, snappy, amp, I put a pair of Li'l Buddies in it to tame the highs. They helped but it was still spikey and just as boxy if not more so. With the Filter Block and Global EQ in place - I now have a great little mid volume setup. I had been meaning to try the EQ before but never got around to it. The above settings gave me an excellent starting point and with a little compression - everything kind of fell into place. I have a much greater appreciation for the little JC now, some great sounds are coming of this setup.
 
31: 0.0
63 Hz: 0.6
125 Hz: 4.57
250 Hz: 0.25
500: 0.0
1K: -5.0
2K: -2.27
4K: 1.95
8K: -1.0
16K: -5.77

Nope, can't do it! Mine would look like this:
31: 0.0
63 Hz: 0.5
125 Hz: 4.60
250 Hz: 0.25
500: 0.0
1K: -5.0
2K: -2.30
4K: 2.0
8K: -1.0
16K: -5.80

Can't do the odd numbers! Haha!
 
I like it. I need something simple when playing with a live band that makes my half ass monitors sound better. It allows for clean effective control of what some of these not so flat speakers can't really provide.

Recording purposes an IR works good, but for practice or jam I really only need a few go to tones. I guess I am a simple guy in that respect.

A love having options and exploring new ideas, but most of the time to get the job done it takes a few basic items for the signal path and some skills that sometimes I have and sometimes I don't. Always a work in progress.
 
After googling "Axe Fx 3 amp in the room" this thread was the top result.
I tried the Filter block trick (no add. EQ) and it sounded amazing through my 1x12 FR cabs. My sound was brought to life and not weighted down with coloration of an IR.
When I tried through my Mackie HR624 monitors, the sound was too crispy and crunchy but a little EQ fixed the sound though.

This method got me thinking about mimicking actual speakers. I've been experimenting with the Filter block and adding either a GEQ and/or PEQ and tweaking the freq's to try and represent the response curves from Celestion. This way, any additional outboard gear is omitted from the signal chain that would normally be within an IR. I also realize that this may only end with "ballpark" results but all in all, it seems much more organic and the "amp in the room" vibe is instant.

From one rabbit hole to the next.
 
Back
Top Bottom