Axe-Fx III Firmware 22.00 Public Beta (Beta 6)

[∞Fractals]

Is that the only difference?

i’ve been saying this for a while… But I guess we got to relearn all those lessons of the 1970s again

 

[Dave Merrill]

Anyone who wants to try the "alternate" Dyna-Cabs can install this:
https://www.fractalaudio.com/downloads/firmware-presets/axe-fx-3/22p0/dyna_cabs_alt.zip

The 57 has been replaced by an SM7.

Very cool, thank you!

Do I gather that the long term implication is that it has to be one set or the other, permanently, no going back, cherry picking, switching in the fly, building your own custom set from the option provided, etc?

 

[Smittefar]

I am completely on board with the first notion that any set of IRs or similar must include a 57. How else are you going to recreate the Van Halen 1 tone in the box.

 

[Steven Persson]

I see a few people here talking about how there isn’t enough bottom. I’m curious, what does everyone consider “bottom” frequency wise?
I admittedly feel like the bottom is pretty ample in my option, to where I’m high passing in the preamp up to around 80hz, sometimes close to 100hz depending on the amp or cabinet being used. I don’t generally turn the low end up on the amp models either, so I find it strange that people aren’t getting enough low end.

Yep. I always use a high cut at around 7400.

With a real mic+cab setup, what is the "standard" way to tame highs and lows? Is it moving the mic and not apply high/low cut, is it using low/high cuts or a combination of them? I've never miced a cab in my life, so I've got zero experience.

With Dyna Cabs, I'm not sure which procedure I like (I like 'em both), but I'm just curios how micing a real cab is done by pros in real life.

 

[yek]

With a real mic+cab setup, what is the "standard" way to tame highs and lows? Is it moving the mic and not apply high/low cut, is it using low/high cuts or a combination of them? I've never mixed a cab in my life, so I've got zero experience.

With Dyna Cabs, I'm not sure which procedure I like (I like 'em both), but I'm just curios how mining a real cab is done by pros in real life.

Both. Mic placement as well as EQ-ing.

 

[rcm78]

With a real mic+cab setup, what is the "standard" way to tame highs and lows? Is it moving the mic and not apply high/low cut, is it using low/high cuts or a combination of them? I've never mixed a cab in my life, so I've got zero experience.

With Dyna Cabs, I'm not sure which procedure I like (I like 'em both), but I'm just curios how mining a real cab is done by pros in real life.

It's both and also, there are no rules... I've been messing around with it and immediately found I can dial in the IR much faster with the DynaCab then cycling through IR's...

 

[JoKeR III]

My next question would be why keep the mics in a mic placement feature beta a secret but I know there's always a good reasons to their methods so I'll cease and desist on such questions.

My guess is so we're only able to use your ears and not be influenced by a particular brand or model of mic. Imagine if it was discovered that the condenser and ribbon mics were Behringer or MXL mics? Can you truly say that wouldn't affect your opinion on how the Dyna Cabs sound?

 

[Darrin66]

My guess is so we're only able to use your ears and not be influenced by a particular brand or model of mic. Imagine if it was discovered that the condenser and ribbon mics were Behringer or MXL mics? Can you truly say that wouldn't affect your opinion on how the Dyna Cabs sound?

You know that once you say something on the internet, that it’s now true. . Just waiting for one of the guys from TGP to breeze down through this too fast, just looking for anything to start sh!t, and within 10 minutes there’ll be a new post over there labeled “Fractal Using Behringer Mics for Dyna Cabs”

 

[sprint]

My guess is so we're only able to use your ears and not be influenced by a particular brand or model of mic. Imagine if it was discovered that the condenser and ribbon mics were Behringer or MXL mics? Can you truly say that wouldn't affect your opinion on how the Dyna Cabs sound?

sorry man - not a fan of the "just use your ears" mantra, particularly in the scenario you seem to suggest (hopefully not reality) where we'd only know the mic category (ie dyn, cnd, rib) and not the specific mic in use. Like amps models, mic models captures are representations of precise reference bemchmarks so replicating real world cab micing in a graphical modelling feature imo needs to ID what specific mic the user is moving around (same for what specific speakers are in a cab enclosure).

 

[JoKeR III]

sorry man - not a fan of the "just use your ears" mantra, particularly in the scenario you seem to suggest (hopefully not reality) where we'd only know the mic category (ie dyn, cnd, rib) and not the specific mic in use. Like amps models, mic models are representations of precise reference bemchmarks so replicating real world cab micing in a graphical modelling feature imo needs to ID what specific mic the user is moving around (same for what specific speakers are in a cab enclosure).

If only one mic model is being used for each type (Dynamic, Ribbon and Condenser), how does knowing the exact model matter?

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

I very much like the new Dynacabs - it‘s a game changer for me!
But i am not happy with the sound of the SM57 in the DynaCab, its to thin, sounds not like the real thing - like there is a high pass activated!
I am a long time broadcast engineer, working in professional ob vans and i do a lot of pop, jazz and classical recordings in different venues. So the SM57 is the main Mic for most Live Shows i see (and hear) before a guitar cab.
I have the pleasure to hear the sound isolated in the recording van with high end studio monitors and console in an acoustic treated environment and cant remember to hear a 57 before an amp that sounds that thin! Maybe the used one is broken?

Distance 0 (right on the grille) so the proximity effect helps fill in the bottom, and slide position until the shrill backs off a little. Just like IRL.

 

[sprint]

If only one mic model is being used for each type (Dynamic, Ribbon and Condenser), how does knowing the exact model matter?

yur kidding right? plenty of discussion here on the nuances of Sm7 vs SM57 for the dynamic category where we know the specific mic. Are we really going to debate if its good or not to know what specific mic the user is deploying in a mic placement app/feature? (rhetorical). I see no reason to conceal that basic useful info - but whatever - I'm thrilled to have this new feature overall particularly the IC connection aspect which is totally unique to Fractal (along with whatever other secret sauce).

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

yur kidding right? plenty of discussion here on the nuances of Sm7 vs SM57 for the dynamic category where we know the specific mic. Are we really going to debate if its good or bad to know what specific mic the user is deploying in a mic placement app/feature? (rhetorical). I see no reason to conceal that basic useful info - but whatever - I'm thrilled to have this new feature overall particularly the IC connection aspect which is totally unique to Fractal.

A 58 works better than a 57 much of the time, also, and is my go-to dynamic mic choice in the few sets I have that include it as a choice. I can work with any of them and get satisfactory results, but the 57 is the most limiting of them, and/or requires a bit of preamp EQ to finish the job that mic placement starts....

 

[deathbyguitar]

I wonder if the space limitations have to do with Mk I vs Mk II and if there's a possibility of Mk II/Turbo users getting more mic options. Otherwise, was the extra memory just for FullRes cabs?

 

[Steven Persson]

Played some more with the Dyna Cabs hooked up the Mark IV using my Solar Baritone S1.6-PB27 with D'Activators and LiquiFire pickups. Getting some serious, serious sick lead tones with these settings. Holy moly!

These Dyna Cabs are so, so tight sounding. Very direct and clear, especially with a PEQ after the Cab notching out some annoying frequencies around 2.3k, 4k and some in the 8k region.

4x12 - MESA STRAIGHT

• Dynamic
  • 0 db
  • Position 8.00
  • Distance 0.00
• Condenser
  • -5 db
  • Position 4.00
  • Distance 0.00
• Preamp
  • Transformer (High Quality)
  • Drive 8.00
  • Saturation 2.00
  • Low Cut 100 Hz (12 dB/Oct)
  • High Cut 10000 Hz (6 dB/Oct)
• Align
  • Condenser 15 ms

4x12 - MESA SLANT

• Dynamic
  • 0 db
  • Position 7.00
  • Distance 0.00
• Condenser
  • -5 db
  • Position 4.00
  • Distance 0.00
• Preamp
  • Transformer (High Quality)
  • Drive 8.00
  • Saturation 3.00
  • Low Cut 100 Hz (12 dB/Oct)
  • High Cut 10000 Hz (6 dB/Oct)
• Align
  • Condenser 15 mm

4x12 - MARSHALL 1960TV

• Dynamic
  • -5 db
  • Position 6.00
  • Distance 0.00
• Condenser
  • 0 db
  • Position 4.00
  • Distance 0.00
• Preamp
  • Transformer (High Quality)
  • Drive 8.00
  • Saturation 3.00
  • Low Cut 100 Hz (12 dB/Oct)
  • High Cut 10000 Hz (6 dB/Oct)
• Align
  • Condenser 15 mm

 

[unix-guy]

Is the mic itself modeled along with the IR?

Actual mics are used to capture IRs.

Note that IRs are not "modeled", they are captured.

 

[bread]

Be interesting to hear the vendor dyna cabs as well.

 

[JoKeR III]

yur kidding right? plenty of discussion here on the nuances of Sm7 vs SM57 for the dynamic category where we know the specific mic. Are we really going to debate if its good or not to know what specific mic the user is deploying in a mic placement app/feature? (rhetorical). I see no reason to conceal that basic useful info - but whatever - I'm thrilled to have this new feature overall particularly the IC connection aspect which is totally unique to Fractal (along with whatever other secret sauce).

Not really kidding. If there are two or more mics being used, I can see the merit of knowing the models but at the end of the day, how it sounds is more important than the specific model.

My point and main question is when only one mic is used, why the need to know the model? IF the dynamic mic was an Audix I5, would even consider using it on the Dyna Cab even if it sounded good?

 

[unix-guy]

Not really kidding. If there are two or more mics being used, I can see the merit of knowing the models but at the end of the day, how it sounds is more important than the specific model.

My point and main question is when only one mic is used, why the need to know the model? IF the dynamic mic was an Audix I5, would even consider using it on the Dyna Cab even if it sounded good?

While I tend to agree, if it's a specific model then labeling it as such is useful.

Many people know what an SM57 is but may not know it's a dynamic mic.

As they are specific and not intended as "generic" types, there's (IMO) no harm from labeling as what they are.

 

[sprint]

Not really kidding. If there are two or more mics being used, I can see the merit of knowing the models but at the end of the day, how it sounds is more important than the specific model.

My point and main question is when only one mic is used, why the need to know the model? IF the dynamic mic was an Audix I5, would even consider using it on the Dyna Cab even if it sounded good?

I'm assuming our comments here as 2ndary beta testers could reasonably anticipate the possibility of more "dyna-mics" to be added either directly or indirectly via cablab / 3rd pty. If there'll only ever be one of each category (which I doubt), then, ok, I'm kinda down with what you say