Behold, the power of EQ matched IR...

Am I the only person who struggles with the mark II stuff? I find it very undergained, a bit fuzzy and not sure about its responsiveness. Very difficult to get right. Obviously this is the primary black album (and master of pups?) but I feel like I would have more luck applying the curve to das metal or a recto.

EDIT! I think that was all due to the recto v30 4 x 12. Changing to the marshall 4 x 12 v30 all is shite is gone.
 
Last edited:
BK-Amps said:
20 years from now, the Black album will still be as heavy and incredible as Led Zepplin IV is today.
Click to expand...

Dude, the black album is ALREADY over 20 years old!

The real question is what album released today will be as awesome as the Black album and LZ IV?
 
Any body know if there is a big difference between ozone 3 and ozone 5 as far as the EQ matching goes? I can only assume that the filters are better with the new version and there should be less artifacts but I am curious if any one has experience with both and your thoughts.

I am thinking about getting ozone 5 for the EQ matching, any thoughts?
 
Your track sounds awesome Shotgun! Got side tracked writing that last post and forgot to mention that. Really nice job man.
 
This works great in protools but when I create a syx file and load it into the axe2 it doesnt sound quite the same! In protools with ozone running it sounds almost identical, but after deconvolving and creating the syx it sounds different? Any one having this issue?

PS: I followed shotgunns tips EXACTLY! Not sure what I am doing wrong...
 
toolfanem said:
Any body know if there is a big difference between ozone 3 and ozone 5 as far as the EQ matching goes? I can only assume that the filters are better with the new version and there should be less artifacts but I am curious if any one has experience with both and your thoughts.

I am thinking about getting ozone 5 for the EQ matching, any thoughts?
Click to expand...

I don't know really. I bought V5. I haven't seen V3 anywhere. I saw V4, for the same price as V5 so naturally I went for V5. I think the EQ match algorithm is the same. I'd check there site for details.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I have a feeling this is going to change my tone shaping on the Axe for the better!!

Thanks Shotgunn, Adam and Clark, great info! Very nice job on the recording as well Shotgunn.

Dave
 
Dude thanks for posting the step by step, really good pre set!! The scooped aspect comes in with your IR! Are you running the Rat OD ON?

shotgunn said:
In Axe Edit you have to...

1. Click Axe Manage
2. Click User Cabs
3. Right Click any available slot.
4. Click Import Cab
5. Navigate to where you saved my .syx.syx.syx IR file and double click it.
6. Right click the slot you just imported the .syx.syx.syx file to and click Send To Axe-FX 'selected cabs.

After that the selected cab slot will change from red to green.

7. Go to the Sad But True preset.
8. Click on the cab block.
9. Select 'Sad But True 3 IR' or whatever IR I uploaded. I don't remember which one.
10. Rock out to one of the greatest tones you'll ever play through.
11. ENJOY!!!
Click to expand...
 
DaveZ said:
I have a feeling this is going to change my tone shaping on the Axe for the better!!

Thanks Shotgunn, Adam and Clark, great info! Very nice job on the recording as well Shotgunn.

Dave
Click to expand...

Thanx man!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I backed the MV on the amp block down the 4.0 and it seems tighter through my rig. I actually like it with the rat on! I a/b'd with various era YT metallica clips and it is very close to the 90's tone they used. Current tone sounds like a newly tubed amp on steroids for a lack of words to describe how it is better, you should do an IR on it too! By the way are you using active pups?
 
Last edited:
PhillAnselmo said:
... IR files processed by the axe. In general the used IR should be a FIR filter with linear phase. That means that the coefficients of the IR are symmetrical...
Click to expand...
I'm interested in seeing if you get an answer; you might do better at TGP. I don't think you want to use a symmetrical FIR with the Axe; wouldn't that appear to be non-causal? The negative part of the symmetrical wave does not contain any unique information, so it can be discarded.
 
PhillAnselmo said:
Hi all,

just have a question about IR files processed by the axe. In general the used IR should be a FIR filter with linear phase. That means that the coefficients of the IR are symmetrical, but all the files i've created with some deconvolution tools are not symmetrical. Is the axe mirroring the IR?
Today I tried to eq match two of my guitars with different pickups. And I used the impulse offered in this section. Thx for the file. The IR I obtained after applying the EQ matching was symmetrical (I applied the FX to the track impule.wav). I uploaded the symmetrical IR to the axe and the result sounded strange. Then i cutted of the first half of the symmetrical part and the ir created this way sounded better ... Probably this is not consistent with all DAWs and plugins. Can somebody clarify this issue?

Cheers
PhillAnselmo
Click to expand...

No, most definitely the IR's should not be linear phase if the IR is a representation of a speaker cabinet. Linear phase does not really occur in nature :)

Linear phase filters are causal with symmetrical coefficients:
h[n] = h[N-1-n] for n=0 to N -1

If they are symmetrical from 0, they are called zero phase filters which are acausal.

If you intend to use the cab block as a generic EQ and your FIR filter happens to be linear phase (like the output of Ozone Match EQ appears to be) then you have to use the response as is. By cutting the first half off you are by definition creating a completely different Impulse response. Linear phase filters create pre-echo artifacts, most audible on transient sounds (like a snare for example). So it's reasonable that you may want to make the response minimum-phase instead to keep the amplitude response the same (i.e. the main purpose of the MatchEQ process) and avoid the pre-echo artifacts.
 
Last edited:
cragginshred said:
I backed the MV on the amp block down the 4.0 and it seems tighter through my rig. I actually like it with the rat on! I a/b'd with various era YT metallica clips and it is very close to the 90's tone they used. Current tone sounds like a newly tubed amp on steroids for a lack of words to describe how it is better, you should do an IR on it too! By the way are you using active pups?
Click to expand...

Dimarzio Blaze Custom. Passive.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
AlbertA said:
No, most definitely the IR's should not be linear phase if the IR is a representation of a speaker cabinet. Linear phase does not really occur in nature :)

Linear phase filters are causal with symmetrical coefficients:
h[n] = h[N-1-n] for n=0 to N -1

If they are symmetrical from 0, they are called zero phase filters which are acausal.

If you intend to use the cab block as a generic EQ and your FIR filter happens to be linear phase (like the output of Ozone Match EQ appears to be) then you have to use the response as is. By cutting the first half off you are by definition creating a completely different Impulse response. Linear phase filters due create pre-echo artifacts, most audible on transient sounds (like a snare for example). So it's reasonable that you may want to make the response minimum-phase instead to keep the amplitude response the same (i.e. they MatchEQ process) but remove the pre-echo artifacts.
Click to expand...

I used to think I was smart... Then I read that. ^


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom