Cab-Lab 4 Version 1.00.01 Release

Can anyone tell me what the big advantage is in using Cab Lab 4 as opposed to what Cliff has already developed for us AXE FX 3 users with the release of the Dyna Cabs update in the cab block in recent months? I watched Cooper's introduction video and tutorial, and I just can't see what the big advantages are other that it could be used in your stand alone DAW if need be. Other than maybe introducing some more unique cab packs that you have to purchase separately, I feel that the Dyna Cabs we have received already in the recent firmware updates covers most of the desired speakers that most of us would use anyhow, plus, the existing Dyna Cab interface in the speaker block does a good job of mixing them. With all of the variables in the AXE FX 3 we have now, I personally feel that adding the Cab Lab 4 software is just another headache to deal with. I say this due to what I have read today on the different Cab Lab 4 posts in the forum.
Don't get me wrong, I always want the latest and greatest firmware updates that Fractal has to offer. I just didn't hear any major improvement in Cooper's demonstration to warrant installing additional software and then purchasing extra cab packs.
If I am missing something, please let me know...
 
Kenny Burch said:
Can anyone tell me what the big advantage is in using Cab Lab 4 as opposed to what Cliff has already developed for us AXE FX 3 users with the release of the Dyna Cabs update in the cab block in recent months? I watched Cooper's introduction video and tutorial, and I just can't see what the big advantages are other that it could be used in your stand alone DAW if need be. Other than maybe introducing some more unique cab packs that you have to purchase separately, I feel that the Dyna Cabs we have received already in the recent firmware updates covers most of the desired speakers that most of us would use anyhow, plus, the existing Dyna Cab interface in the speaker block does a good job of mixing them. With all of the variables in the AXE FX 3 we have now, I personally feel that adding the Cab Lab 4 software is just another headache to deal with. I say this due to what I have read today on the different Cab Lab 4 posts in the forum.
Don't get me wrong, I always want the latest and greatest firmware updates that Fractal has to offer. I just didn't hear any major improvement in Cooper's demonstration to warrant installing additional software and then purchasing extra cab packs.
If I am missing something, please let me know...
Click to expand...

For me liking Ultrares IR’s and using the FM3, I can mix down Dynacab IR’s and export into one Ultrares. There are more mics and they are shot at 360 degrees around the cone. There are sweet spots in there as you rotate around the cone at the same distance. It’s like the stock Dynacabs on steroids. Beautiful interface too. That’s it for me. With you being on the Axe and able to run higher resolution Dynacabs, maybe the benefit wouldn’t be as great for you as it is for me. I bought the TV cab and my results with Cab lab 4 are better than what I can get from the stock DC.
 
I’ve had a quick play and love it. As above - Ultrares, full speaker, more mics (and I like the name). Effortless workflow.

It’s stunning
 
Kenny Burch said:
Can anyone tell me what the big advantage is in using Cab Lab 4 as opposed to what Cliff has already developed for us AXE FX 3 users with the release of the Dyna Cabs update in the cab block in recent months? I watched Cooper's introduction video and tutorial, and I just can't see what the big advantages are other that it could be used in your stand alone DAW if need be. Other than maybe introducing some more unique cab packs that you have to purchase separately, I feel that the Dyna Cabs we have received already in the recent firmware updates covers most of the desired speakers that most of us would use anyhow, plus, the existing Dyna Cab interface in the speaker block does a good job of mixing them. With all of the variables in the AXE FX 3 we have now, I personally feel that adding the Cab Lab 4 software is just another headache to deal with. I say this due to what I have read today on the different Cab Lab 4 posts in the forum.
Don't get me wrong, I always want the latest and greatest firmware updates that Fractal has to offer. I just didn't hear any major improvement in Cooper's demonstration to warrant installing additional software and then purchasing extra cab packs.
If I am missing something, please let me know...
Click to expand...
see here
 
Kenny Burch said:
Can anyone tell me what the big advantage is in using Cab Lab 4 as opposed to what Cliff has already developed for us AXE FX 3 users with the release of the Dyna Cabs update in the cab block in recent months? I watched Cooper's introduction video and tutorial, and I just can't see what the big advantages are other that it could be used in your stand alone DAW if need be. Other than maybe introducing some more unique cab packs that you have to purchase separately, I feel that the Dyna Cabs we have received already in the recent firmware updates covers most of the desired speakers that most of us would use anyhow, plus, the existing Dyna Cab interface in the speaker block does a good job of mixing them. With all of the variables in the AXE FX 3 we have now, I personally feel that adding the Cab Lab 4 software is just another headache to deal with. I say this due to what I have read today on the different Cab Lab 4 posts in the forum.
Don't get me wrong, I always want the latest and greatest firmware updates that Fractal has to offer. I just didn't hear any major improvement in Cooper's demonstration to warrant installing additional software and then purchasing extra cab packs.
If I am missing something, please let me know...
Click to expand...

I second @skolacki's points, but especially to underline the point about mic positioning, that aspect is huge to me. Compared to what is available in the Axe-FX III, a single mic has many more positions available, and the parts of the speaker now accessible make the range of tones far greater. You can move all around the speaker, up down, side to side, all points between, at every distance. Speakers really do sound significantly different at different placements radiating from the center cone, even at the same distance. I think it's hard to appreciate just how much you're missing until you move the mic around yourself.

Now if you're getting everything you need from the DynaCabs included in the Axe-FX III, then of course there's no need at all to try the ones in Cab Lab 4. This is really just about providing even more options. I really believe one position cannot accommodate different guitars optimally. I think the unique output of your guitar with your playing will have an optimal mic positioning that is likely not going to be the same as what's optimal for another guitar, so having that many more positions available makes all the difference in the world. My two cents.
 
Dave Merrill said:
TBH, if the DynaCab options were available in AxeEdit, or even better, on-unit, that'd be great. But having to "premix" in another program takes a lot of the fun out of the process.
Click to expand...

Definitely less fun and convenient, but to me the tones outweigh those considerations. I'm sure it's just an issue of storage, that it wasn't originally designed to hold this much cab data. If FAS does make an Axe-FX IV one day, that might be part of the design, which would be awesome.
 
State of Epicicity said:
I second @skolacki's points, but especially to underline the point about mic positioning, that aspect is huge to me. Compared to what is available in the Axe-FX III, a single mic has many more positions available, and the parts of the speaker now accessible make the range of tones far greater. You can move all around the speaker, up down, side to side, all points between, at every distance. Speakers really do sound significantly different at different placements radiating from the center cone, even at the same distance. I think it's hard to appreciate just how much you're missing until you move the mic around yourself.

Now if you're getting everything you need from the DynaCabs included in the Axe-FX III, then of course there's no need at all to try the ones in Cab Lab 4. This is really just about providing even more options. I really believe one position cannot accommodate different guitars optimally. I think the unique output of your guitar with your playing will have an optimal mic positioning that is likely not going to be the same as what's optimal for another guitar, so having that many more positions available makes all the difference in the world. My two cents.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I appreciate you guy's comments on the Cab Lab 4 positioning.
I guess I can't fathom how the radiated sound from a particular round guitar speaker would be different than any particular position on the top quarter section of the speaker like Cliff's Dyna Cab block allows, versus being able to position a mic in the southern hemisphere of the speaker in the same position only 180 degrees apart. I would think the distance from the center of the cone and the distance away from the cone would sound the same anywhere in the 360 degree circle of the speaker as long as the two parameters I just mentioned were the same in distance.
If that is not the case I would be interested in the technical theory of how the extended placement of the mic in the lower half of the speaker would sound different than the same placement in the top portion of the speaker, as an example.
 
Kenny Burch said:
Thanks, I appreciate you guy's comments on the Cab Lab 4 positioning.
I guess I can't fathom how the radiated sound from a particular round guitar speaker would be different than any particular position on the top quarter section of the speaker like Cliff's Dyna Cab block allows, versus being able to position a mic in the southern hemisphere of the speaker in the same position only 180 degrees apart. I would think the distance from the center of the cone and the distance away from the cone would sound the same anywhere in the 360 degree circle of the speaker as long as the two parameters I just mentioned were the same in distance.
If that is not the case I would be interested in the technical theory of how the extended placement of the mic in the lower half of the speaker would sound different than the same placement in the top portion of the speaker, as an example.
Click to expand...
The difference is reflections. Different positions around the speaker means different distances to the floor or walls. And that means different phase cancelations at different frequencies.
 
Kenny Burch said:
Thanks, I appreciate you guy's comments on the Cab Lab 4 positioning.
I guess I can't fathom how the radiated sound from a particular round guitar speaker would be different than any particular position on the top quarter section of the speaker like Cliff's Dyna Cab block allows, versus being able to position a mic in the southern hemisphere of the speaker in the same position only 180 degrees apart. I would think the distance from the center of the cone and the distance away from the cone would sound the same anywhere in the 360 degree circle of the speaker as long as the two parameters I just mentioned were the same in distance.
If that is not the case I would be interested in the technical theory of how the extended placement of the mic in the lower half of the speaker would sound different than the same placement in the top portion of the speaker, as an example.
Click to expand...

In a 4x12 one huge thing is, e.g. placing the mic on the top left speaker, but putting that mic more toward it's right side, at the outer part of the cone. Now you're next to the top right speaker too, and you're going to get bleed from that speaker. But what about a 1x12? Then you're talking about the construction of the cabinet and room acoustics. The cab itself will resonate of course, and it's not going to sound uniform to mic all over it's construction. And the acoustics! How is the sound reflecting off the walls, ceiling, and floor? Is it isolated at all? If so, how much? Since sound is so 3D in reality, mics totally track along with that. What I mean by sound being 3D is that something will sound different at every point in space, and, to a mic, unless you painstakingly create an anechoic chamber, which is very rare and, from my understanding, never really used in music recording, you're dealing with some level of the acoustics of a room positively coloring the sound of the cab. Because yes of course the cab is its own sound generator, but to the mic there's no distinction between the cab and the room. It's always the cab and the room. And even if you had a speaker cabinet that could sound the same all the way around it, the spot in the mic where the mic would have to sit to capture each part of the speaker would impart a different coloring of that capture because of the room! It's tremendously fun to think about, but the main thing is, it gives so many more tonal options than one might first imagine!
 
Kenny Burch said:
Thanks, I appreciate you guy's comments on the Cab Lab 4 positioning.
I guess I can't fathom how the radiated sound from a particular round guitar speaker would be different than any particular position on the top quarter section of the speaker like Cliff's Dyna Cab block allows, versus being able to position a mic in the southern hemisphere of the speaker in the same position only 180 degrees apart. I would think the distance from the center of the cone and the distance away from the cone would sound the same anywhere in the 360 degree circle of the speaker as long as the two parameters I just mentioned were the same in distance.
If that is not the case I would be interested in the technical theory of how the extended placement of the mic in the lower half of the speaker would sound different than the same placement in the top portion of the speaker, as an example.
Click to expand...

Due to the inconsistencies in the paper the cone is made from making a difference in how the cone flexes or not at pretty much every point on the cone's surface, every spot on the entire cone is going to sound a little different. The cone is far from a 100% stiff perfect piston. Then on top of that, the spider and surround are also made of materials that may or may not flex perfectly consistently. TBH, it's sort-of miraculous they are as consistent from 3m back as they are, but when you stare at the elephant through a straw, each part looks different....

Simplified models help initial understanding of basic concepts, but the devil is in the details.... 👹
 
Dave Merrill said:
TBH, if the DynaCab options were available in AxeEdit, or even better, on-unit, that'd be great. But having to "premix" in another program takes a lot of the fun out of the process.
Click to expand...
Using Cab-Lab with SW Live Mode is very much like using DynaCabs on the hardware. You mix it live just like the Cab block.

Your experience would be very similar (only more flexible) in Cab-Lab as it would in Axe-Edit.
 
unix-guy said:
Using Cab-Lab with SW Live Mode is very much like using DynaCabs on the hardware. You mix it live just like the Cab block.

Your experience would be very similar (only more flexible) in Cab-Lab as it would in Axe-Edit.
Click to expand...
Good to know, thanks.

Does SW Live Mode require the current Axe beta firmware? (I don't have enough playing time to mess w betas.)
 
I ran the beta and had some instances in SW Live mode where I could mute all cabs and still get audio. The cab block on my FM3 was bypassed and I could hear the adjustments working. But I don’t trust what I’m hearing since the mutes not working. So I have the same issue with the release. Anyone know what’s up with this?
 
In the zoom panel, is it possible to fix the numbers box?
The numbers don’t highlight when we select them to change them and that lead to some confusion when typing.
Really minor bug I know lol. But a bit annoying.

I’m on the Mac version (10.13)

Also if I have fm3 edit opened and in pause, when I pause communications in CabLab and get back to fm3 edit, I restart communication but it does not find the fm3 I’m stuck on a empty preset.
 
The loudness problem still persists.

Would you please comment if we should stop expecting a fix for it and start playing with the level sliders of all the tracks in our projects? @Admin M@
 
I have updated to the new 1.00.01 version, and now I cannot use the packs that I have purchased. It says "This pack is not authorized for this device (Mismatched device id)". What can I do?
1698397166955.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom