any source for quality far field ir's

R

randombastage

Experienced
I've been enjoying AxeFxII through a power amp and guitar 2x12 cabinet (G12-M and G-12-H to be specific) but It bothered me that I wasn't using the versatility of having many cab's to mate with different models. I have a pair of CLR's that were going relatively unused so I decided to try harder to get a 'closer-to-real' result through them.

I've read Jay Mitchell has had great results with far field ir's, I think he may have been the one to create the factory 029 cab so I've committed to myself to getting better results with far-field than I previously had.

By doing a side by side A/B comparison of nearly identical presets into both my power amp/2x12 cab and CLR's I find that I can use the factory cab "F029: 2x12 G12-65 far-field (JM)" and get the CLR's closer to the sound in the room I get using the 2x12 cabinet and SS power amp.

I keep theCLR's about 4 feet apart (one on each side of the 2x12) so there is a bit of a spread to the CLR sound compared to the 2x12 but ignoring that as best as I can I'm definitely hearing a 'sameness' to the 2x12 from the far field ir versus any other close mic'ed ir I've tried.

I find I need to eq in the Amp block to get the far field ir sounding just right, boosting in the 500Hz through 4k range in a 'frown' to make it work for me. I also have the Dephase parameter set to 5. Once that is done however the same preset using no eq boost and close mic ir's (dephase 0) just sound too processed by comparison and don't come near the sound of the SS power amp/real 2x12 cab as the far-field ir preset is able to do.

I used to think the far-field thing was a fairy tale but it was because I was plugging a far-field ir into an existing preset that already sounded good and hearing it instantly sound dull and quiet so I dismissed it without really giving it a chance. Now I think there is something really good in there.

So...any opinions on what I'm doing and/or sharing your experience with far field ir's is most welcome as well as any help finding a source for quality Far-Field ir's is most appreciated.
 
Last edited:
My understanding on far field IR's is they require a large, unobstructed space to record. Finding one of those that also happens to be silent or doesn't have noise leakage is the challenge. My knowledge on this is just picking up snippets here and there thought so I could have a poor understanding or be dead wrong.
 
I've never had any luck with any of Jay's far-field IRs myself.
I'll be following this thread to see if I've missed anything though.

I think that, ultimately, achieving that familiar amp-in-the-room feeling is next to impossible to achieve from an FRFR speaker system.
I think that the way that sound propagates out from even the very flattest FRFR speaker systems is just too different from the way that sound propagates out from both open and closed-back guitar cabinets.
I think that the best we can hope to achieve from an IR based guitar cab emulation system is the sound of a well-mic'd cab.
I.e. FRFR although *can* be made to sound like the very best recorded guitar tones it doesn't capture the amp-in-the-room vibe very well at all.
Still love to be proven wrong on this though.
 
@antcarrier is the only forum member I know that is making and sharing far field captures.

E.g. http://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/vox-ac30-far-field-irs.105199/#post-1268710

From what I understand, the factory IR's from Jay were Minimum Phase Transformed or otherwise post processed. IIRC Jay remarked he never used the post processed versions.

I really believe it possible to create an accurate amp in the room from a far field IR that doesn't contain boundary reflections and a good neutral speaker system like the CLR.

It takes some special test environment, test measurement microphone, skill and practice to achieve. It is hard.

It is easier to just use an SS power amp and guitar cab vs. attempting to create far field IR's.

I do think a good broad far field IR package would get lots of appeal. But the cost to create might never be recouped.
 
Thanks! I don't see a link for the ir files there....was it removed or am I just not seeing it?

barhrecords said:
@antcarrier is the only forum member I know that is making and sharing far field captures.

E.g. http://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/vox-ac30-far-field-irs.105199/#post-1268710

From what I understand, the factory IR's from Jay were Minimum Phase Transformed or otherwise post processed. IIRC Jay remarked he never used the post processed versions.

I really believe it possible to create an accurate amp in the room from a far field IR that doesn't contain boundary reflections and a good neutral speaker system like the CLR.

It takes some special test environment, test measurement microphone, skill and practice to achieve. It is hard.

It is easier to just use an SS power amp and guitar cab vs. attempting to create far field IR's.

I do think a good broad far field IR package would get lots of appeal. But the cost to create might never be recouped.
Click to expand...
 
Hi,

I still use FF IRs exclusively for everything.

I took down the IRs I uploaded because a while ago there was a guy who wanted to sell presets containing an IR of mine. If you're interested I can PM some to you.

I have made some more IRs over the past year or so which are the best I've made. I am considering putting a pack together at some stage after a few more sessions, but I am a bit preoccupied writing an album at the moment so it will be a while. My access to an appropriate venue has also been severely diminished so unfortunately my IR sessions are becoming fewer and farther between. I also have no internet access other that a hotspot on my phone, which makes things fun.

The biggest problem people have with FF IRs is because of a notch filter (usually between 1-3kHz) created by a speaker's cone edge resonance - this is naturally occurring but is attenuated with close miking and sometimes even with room reflections, depending on a few things. Some speakers also exhibit this behaviour more that others. This is why you like the 'dephase' function on FF IRs - it flattens out this problem area - but unfortunately this also flattens out the rest of the IR and removes most of its character.

I have managed to create IRs that don't have this issue but it has taken a lot of work and experimentation. They fit in a mix nicely, don't sound phasey, and have a nice in-the-room tone too.
 
Last edited:
antcarrier said:
Hi,

I still use FF IRs exclusively for everything.

I took down the IRs I uploaded because a while ago there was a guy who wanted to sell presets containing an IR of mine. If you're interested I can PM some to you.

I have made some more IRs over the past year or so which are the best I've made. I am considering putting a pack together at some stage after a few more sessions, but I am a bit preoccupied writing an album at the moment so it will be a while. My access to an appropriate venue has also been severely diminished so unfortunately my IR sessions are becoming fewer and farther between. I also have no internet access other that a hotspot on my phone, which makes things fun.

The biggest problem people have with FF IRs is because of a notch filter (usually between 1-3kHz) created by a speaker's cone edge resonance - this is naturally occurring but is attenuated with close miking and sometimes even with room reflections, depending on a few things. Some speakers also exhibit this behaviour more that others. This is why you like the 'dephase' function on FF IRs - it flattens out this problem area - but unfortunately this also flattens out the rest of the IR and removes most of its character.

I have managed to create IRs that don't have this issue but it has taken a lot of work and experimentation. They fit in a mix nicely, don't sound phasey, and have a nice in-the-room tone too.
Click to expand...
Sorry I was the cause of you taking down your IRs. I'm still a fan and getting great results with them. But to clarify, I never asked to sell presets containing your IRs. I only asked if you would be interested in reposting them in WAV format. That way, people who use my presets could also download (or buy from you, if you preferred) your IRs to use in conjunction with the presets. Helix presets themselves don't contain IRs, they can only link to them, so the user has to separately acquire them. Hope that clears things up.

BTW, this is an example of a preset I dialed up using antcarrier's Bad Cat IR. When you download it from my site, it doesn't contain antcarrier's IR:



I look forward to the release of your IR pack and will definitely refer people your way when you do!
 
To my ears, these far-field IRs just sound like a *mic* in the room with a cab in the room.
The sound the player experiences when playing a cab in the room is *not* that sound.

But I have no idea how to reproduce the cab-in-the-room sound/feel.
I've come to be of the opinion that it's not possible to achieve with the tech (e.g. mics, IRs, FRFR speakers, etc.) currently available.

Although, if someone didn't mind lugging around a really bulky rig they could probably get a bit closer to the open-back cab vibe using 2 FRFR cabs with one facing the rear either with a reverse-phase IR from the front pointing speaker or a back-of-cab IR.

But even still, I suspect that the way that sound propagates out of an FRFR monitor is just too dissimilar to the way that sound propagates out of an open or closed back guitar cab.
To my ears, FRFR cabs have totally different attack characteristics (much more pronounced attack) from guitar cabs.
at least that's where I always notice it the most.
The extreme top end and extreme bottom end can usually be tapered effectively, but the mids often don't seem right with cab IRs thru FRFR speakers either.

Psychologically speaking, when I record and play/listen through near-field monitors I've learned to not expect it to sound the way it sounds in the room the cab is in and can accept it and play more-or-less w/o thinking about it.
But far-field FRFR monitors, even the real good ones like the CLRs, just seem to feel too weird, at least to me.

But the quest goes on.
I'd be very interested in trying antcarrier's ff irs anyway though.
Please pm me if that's doable.
 
I have a cab pac from 'The Amp Factory' that has some far field IRs , but they need to be used in a stand alone (in DAW) plugin due to their length. Not a big deal for recording. I have yet to explore these IRs because i am in the middle of finishing an album.
 
joegold said:
To my ears, these far-field IRs just sound like a *mic* in the room with a cab in the room.
The sound the player experiences when playing a cab in the room is *not* that sound.

But I have no idea how to reproduce the cab-in-the-room sound/feel.
I've come to be of the opinion that it's not possible to achieve with the tech (e.g. mics, IRs, FRFR speakers, etc.) currently available.
Click to expand...
You're hearing clips of these IRs, you're not experiencing these IRs in the room as a player. Keep an open mind and try it firsthand before you decide what's possible.
 
Fractal cab IR's are a bit too short to contain a whole lot of room reflections. UltraRes IR's are limited to 8000 samples or 166.67 ms. That can give you a little bit of ambience, but isn't really enough for a pronounced decay of the room reflections. Depending on what you're after, the Ambience reverb mode can work wonders with a bit of tweaking and is more flexible than having a fixed room sound baked into the IR.
 
I've only been using frfr for a short time but I literally cannot tell the difference between the asm's and my 4x12 cab so I find it hard to understand how you can't get an in the room feel and sound. I could not get a good sound with any of the factory cabs but after experimenting with ML's huge Marshall pack, and the new Zilla cabs it sounds in the room to me. Who knows, maybe that just means my ears are shot.
 
Biggest difference besides frequency response is dispersion. Guitar cabs are usually very directional, so they project and fill the room differently. That can make the acoustic interaction with the guitar a bit different as well. PA style cabs usually have a much wider spread in the upper mids and highs. No amount of EQing will change that. It is a physical difference in speaker design. Often if you get the volume level up higher, the room gets saturated with waves and the differences become much less obvious.
 
mr_fender said:
Fractal cab IR's are a bit too short to contain a whole lot of room reflections. UltraRes IR's are limited to 8000 samples or 166.67 ms. That can give you a little bit of ambience, but isn't really enough for a pronounced decay of the room reflections. Depending on what you're after, the Ambience reverb mode can work wonders with a bit of tweaking and is more flexible than having a fixed room sound baked into the IR.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I would think the IR shouldn't contain any room reflections at all. I want to hear the amp in the room, not the amp in a room in the room. But whatever sounds good, I guess.
 
Tahoebrian5 said:
I've only been using frfr for a short time but I literally cannot tell the difference between the asm's and my 4x12 cab so I find it hard to understand how you can't get an in the room feel and sound. I could not get a good sound with any of the factory cabs but after experimenting with ML's huge Marshall pack, and the new Zilla cabs it sounds in the room to me. Who knows, maybe that just means my ears are shot.
Click to expand...

The Friedman ASM is not flat response. It's designed to sound more like a conventional guitar cab on purpose. For the very reasons being talked about in this thread; to avoid some of the complaints guitar players have had with other FRFR speakers.
 
burningyen said:
Yeah, I would think the IR shouldn't contain any room reflections at all. I want to hear the amp in the room, not the amp in a room in the room. But whatever sounds good, I guess.
Click to expand...

Unless you play completely dry, even using a room reverb or other ambiance effect has the same issue, you are hearing the reverb in a room with it's own reverb etc.
 
mr_fender said:
Biggest difference besides frequency response is dispersion. Guitar cabs are usually very directional, so they project and fill the room differently. That can make the acoustic interaction with the guitar a bit different as well. PA style cabs usually have a much wider spread in the upper mids and highs. No amount of EQing will change that. It is a physical difference in speaker design. Often if you get the volume level up higher, the room gets saturated with waves and the differences become much less obvious.
Click to expand...

While all of that is undoubtedly true, it doesn't seem to be the dispersion characteristics that bother me.
As a matter of fact, the main reason I'm interested in playing FRFR live is to free myself from the directivity issues of guitar cabs.
So far, all I've been able to achieve with my CLRs is a tone that I don't like that sounds just as bad from a much wider listening area. lol
I'm pretty sure that if I could achieve something similar to the freq response that I'm used to hearing from my real cabs (in the sweet spot of course) via an FRFR speaker that I'd be pretty happy.
But then there's the attack transients. (see below or up-thread)

No. For me, the main issues have been the attack transients, which I mentioned earlier.
The attack just seems too pronounced via far field FRFR speakers.
Oddly, with near field monitors, they don't seem to be as pronounced.)
I could tame it somewhat with the Amp Block's Pick Attack parameter or some other way, but then it will affect my power amp + cabs feed as well - and my intention is to use my cabs and FRFR together (although at some point I might ditch the power amp + cabs).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom