Right...but once you move to a Fractal device there's no power amp, and the interaction you are talking about doesn't even occur with a SS amp. Which is why I'm saying with a Fractal device used with a power amp and real cab, you can select/emulate it today, I mean it currently defaults to the standard cab one would run with a given model already. These devices can not know what lies outside the box, that's like expecting it to dial in the right settings for a single coil vs humbucker based on the resistance the guitar is providing, just can never happen. In the box with an IR...again selectable due to IRs being a wav file generally, now the propriety sysex format Fractal uses could potentially store that meta data and makes some automatic changes...but IMHO that's unlikely to occur outside a new in-the-box cab engine which doesn't allow loading random IRs (like the factory Line 6/Neural stuff).
I guess I'm not communicating my thoughts well on this one. I perfectly understand that Axefx cannot know what's connected externally, so for real cab use via SS power amp, the only way to get the IC value to be known inside Axefx, is for the user to measure it, or know it, and input the IC parms into Axefx.
I'm clear on this concept and I've not suggested above (at least not intentionally
) that Axefx should be able to do this. It can't determine anything about devices it's plugged into, and can only determine limited detail about what's plugged into it.
I'll express my thought another way which maybe is clearer - here goes: The process of using Axefx with Amp Models and IRs could be made more realistic to the equivalent analogue experience by automating the selection of a precise IC that goes with the amp and IR models combination chosen by the Axefx user. This could be done by embedding IC information, measured by the IR capturer, into cabIR metadata which would then be available for use by the amp models processes.
That's all I'm getting at - I guess I use the word modelling too loosely, - in my previous post comments I think of modelling as describing the whole process of using Axefx modelled Amps with IRs - not just the mechanics of power section programming. For the whole process to mimic real life as the end goal, IC selection needs to be automatic since we don't choose an IC in real life when we plug a real cab into a real tube amp with resulting correct unique interaction between them. And yes, embedded IC metadata would seem to be the only way at least that I have any grasp of in terms of basic understanding.
So we seem to kind of agree there is a opportunity to advance either 1) in a proprietary way via creating a Fractal grown IR selection process that includes the handoff of embedded IC info into the amp modelling, or, 2) in the case of 3rd pty IRs, to have a standard storage format for IC metadata inside IR packages, which can be extracted by modellers in a standard way when 3rd pty IRs are selected. I agree #2 would would be difficult given the coordination required. Even #1 would be challenging as it would put Fractal more into the IR capture game which the 3rd party IR providers have supported a lot here. In addition, either #1 or #2 would require IR makers (Fractal and/or 3rd Pty) to start capturing detailed IC info whenever they shoot a cab. So ya - challenging, but nothing Fractal's done to this point's been easy I guess, yet here we are with a lot more than many expected re superior accuracy/functionality in the current state. WRT to SS Pwr Amp and real cab, neither solution will solve anything on that, though I and others have expressed desire for some helpful user IC slots where real cab measurements could be input / stored.
Most future feature speculation doesn't excite me too much but this particular one does because of how dramatic the effect of ICs are (my presets sound stinky without them - I'm IC addicted lol!), and how even though ICs are a great improvement that's made my patches come alive, ICs can make IR selection challenging since, in order to audition IRs accurately, I really should be applying a correct IC curve to each audition as I go along given that the different speakers and cab types I'm auditioning may well require different associated ICs (some IRs may even have their own baked in ICs). It's just not practical to do that, so I audition a bunch of IRs under one IC, then at the end, I pick a possibly different IC, more correct to my final IR choice than the one I started with at the outset of my IR auditioning, which may possibly have a dramatic effect on the sound of my final IR choice - but now I may not like what that final, logically correct (from IC description) IC does, and so I may start auditioning ICs by ear against my final IR choice (now I'm essentially into EQing my IR with IC selections), but maybe I should go back and audition IRs again because maybe the starting IC that I auditioned all those IRs under, was not the best IC to use ... ... ... around and around ... ... - the IC functionality is totally awesome addition, but I think needs to go further. How likely is it to happen? - dunno: depends on the business case I guess.
