• We would like to remind our members that this is a privately owned, run and supported forum. You are here at the invitation and discretion of the owners. As such, rules and standards of conduct will be applied that help keep this forum functioning as the owners desire. These include, but are not limited to, removing content and even access to the forum.

    Please give yourself a refresher on the forum rules you agreed to follow when you signed up.

Can the Mic be eliminated by sum and difference?

yeky83

Power User
What im saying is that the Fractal is half modeler(amp section) and half Sampler, like the Kemper(Cabs IR). What i say is employ the same modeling technology for the Cab recreation. The mic element is a necessity at this point because of the sampling., Its not an aesthetic choice. Its only a technical obstacle.
Uh, no. The use of IRs isn't the problem. And it's not a technical/modeling obstacle, it's a physical obstacle -- as in, a particular guitar cab's directivity characteristic cannot be replicated through an FRFR due to the laws of physics. Did you read what I wrote out in my previous comment?
 

chris

Legend!
Uh, no. The use of IRs isn't the problem. And it's not a technical/modeling obstacle, it's a physical obstacle -- as in, a particular guitar cab's directivity characteristic cannot be replicated through an FRFR due to the laws of physics. Did you read what I wrote out in my previous comment?
It doesn’t matter man. He thinks no one has tried certain things because he wants it all to work a certain way. We can give facts forever, but because we can’t specifically say we tried every idea he (or anyone) can come up with, it won’t be respected as an answer. It’s a common argument fallacy. It’s the same as saying “how can you prove that _____ didn’t happen in [insert a date very long ago]? You weren’t there physically to see it, so it’s possible it did happen.”
 

egonle

New Member
Hi dumbeat, I (roughly) tried to invert the frequency „response“ of a SM57 (e.g.) to cover this in a PEQ. Set this PEQ after a "SM57 cab block". Maybe this works for you as a work around not a final solution.

PS: I will not step in the discussion. If you like it ... ok, if not ... ok also ;-)
 

Attachments

JoKeR III

Power User
Use clean cab when fit and use mic'd cab when fit. Where is the contradiction? there are all kinds of situations.
Pump the brakes a tad there sport. Simply trying to clarify the end product of this new technology other than some speaker modeling thing 'so everyone can hear how my amp sounds in the room'.
 

shatteredsquare

Fractal Fanatic
Huh? This either makes little sense or I don't understand what you're trying to say.
Create an IR synthesis engine, one that creates an IR that never existed, a synthetic one, that can be manipulated / adjusted...like the modelling done already to simulate speaker drive, speaker excursion, compliance...all that, plus the frequency response information of a speaker, plus its directional dispersion characteristics (the ability to place your virtual ears wherever you like within the virtual room, in front of the virtual driver.)

Instead of an IR player, an actual virtual cabinet+speaker. It's kind of already halfway done, with all the non-linear speaker behavior modelling available.
 

bdrepko

Fractal Fanatic
Why are we trying to solve a problem that already has a solution. If you want AITR sound there is a very simple fix. Use a power amp and a guitar cab. There. Done. Problem solved. How hard was that?
 

Capt Nasty

Experienced
It seems that the the OP is viewing the differences between FRFR and amp in the room as a problem that is caused by EQ coloration from the mic. As has already been said, near field versus far field is a big part of what is going on. Near field sound promotes articulation and definition whereas far field has much more of the effect of the room and is more hi-fi. Said another way near field is like focusing on small details in a photo whereas far field is more like taking in a whole photo.

A guitar amp produces a very complex acoustic field. This field is not consistent. There are many acoustic profiles emanating from the transducer. We witness this inconsistency when we move around a room and note that it sounds different in one location compared to another. The recording process does not capture an acoustic field in its entirety. Recording captures a location within an acoustic field that presumably exhibits desirable characteristics.

As sound emanates from near field to far field, the room and interactions between different sound waves have a more noticeable affect upon the acoustic field. Think of the eddys and currents within a flowing river. The acoustic waves within an acoustic field would exhibit similar behavior. The eddys and currents interact with one another as well as reflective objects. This creates a highly dynamic environment.

The location of a mic or listener within an acoustic field is the single most significant factor in what is heard. When a mic is placed within an acoustic field to capture a specific, desirable location within the acoustic field, the data that were not captured are lost. No amount of summing or EQ can reliably and deterministically recreate/restore those lost data. As a result an IR cannot recreate the original acoustic field. It can only recreate the captured location from the original acoustic field and thus the AITR issue is born.

The idea of diffing an inversion of the mic EQ curve against the output of the cab block would seem (at least mathematically) to work to eliminate mic coloration, but what you are left with is a corrected version of the captured location that is still missing most of the data that were present in the original acoustic field.

I can imagine what some may be thinking: “ok so capture IRs in far field”. But this is no different from near field capture in one critical way: you are still not capturing the entire acoustic field. You are only capturing a small location within the acoustic field. The impact of the room and the interaction of sound waves within the field would be more present in such a capture, but it is still only a subset of the data within the full acoustic field.

TL;DR - AITR == a complete acoustic field. IR == a capture of one or more specific locations within an acoustic field at a specific point in time.

@bdrepko nailed it. If you want AITR, the tech already exists: use a guitar cabinet and power amp.
 
Last edited:

shatteredsquare

Fractal Fanatic
uhhh an FRFR driver is just a speaker, in some kind of cab. what does it sound like to just run an amp block into an FRFR monitor?? Do they have a boatload more high end than a "guitar speaker" so it sounds bad? An FRFR driver and its built in crappy class D solid state power amp IS an amp in the room. Shouldn't you be able to just EQ to taste to get the low end and high end and mids how you want it to resonate? I've never played on any FRFR stuff, i figured they would be basically tiny guitarist PA systems. It's still just a speaker in a cab of some variation.
 

iaresee

Moderator
Moderator
uhhh an FRFR driver is just a speaker, in some kind of cab. what does it sound like to just run an amp block into an FRFR monitor?? Do they have a boatload more high end than a "guitar speaker" so it sounds bad? An FRFR driver and its built in crappy class D solid state power amp IS an amp in the room. Shouldn't you be able to just EQ to taste to get the low end and high end and mids how you want it to resonate? I've never played on any FRFR stuff, i figured they would be basically tiny guitarist PA systems. It's still just a speaker in a cab of some variation.
No. It's not EQ, it's physical properties, that give you amp-in-the-room sound. You can't, for example, EQ your way to making a closed-back cabinet in the room sound like an open-back cabinet would in the same room.

This is what people have been trying to say on this thread but it doesn't seem to be landing with a handful of people. Physics does not allow what is being asked for here. Full stop.
 

chris

Legend!
Shouldn't you be able to just EQ to taste to get the low end and high end and mids how you want it to resonate? I've never played on any FRFR stuff, i figured they would be basically tiny guitarist PA systems. It's still just a speaker in a cab of some variation.
not really. the physical design of a 4x12 or 2x12 or even 1x12, and the speaker design itself causes the sound to disperse in specific ways and sound different, physically and spatially. it's not just EQ. if it was just EQ, we'd easily be able to nail the sensation by now.

i just want to remind everyone that it's 2019. amp modeling technology has been around for a very long time. of course new things can be created and not everything has been done yet. but at the same time, people are here "arguing" or at least postulating that designers of the gear simply haven't thought of "this simple thing." it's a bit silly if you step back and look.

it's like telling a car designer "but if you JUST add wings, then cars can fly, it's so simple. wings are what make things fly. just add wings, it's so simple."

there is a reason why NO ONE in the entire history of guitar amp modeling has done this. yes, keep having ideas, yes keep pushing boundaries. but if a solution is being given, 20 or more times in a thread by many people including the designers and others clearly familiar with the field, perhaps they are correct.
 

RDH

Fractal Fanatic
Simply put: Amp modelling technology has gotten very realistic and accurate, as has speaker response and enclosure characteristics. (things you can change) However show me a recording that hasn't been captured by mic's of some sort, or amplified for live sound. No? Doubtful it will happen. (things you can't change). Why is it during rehearsals and or live events(where instruments are blasting ) no one can hear themselves, or it all sounds like mush? They turn up their guitar to hear it then the others turn theirs up because they've been covered up by the other. Overlapping frequencies canceling each other out! Hence turn down mic it and shape it with EQ to fit in a mix. It's what works! Someone mentioned in an earlier post (the tones we chase come from recordings) All I can do is speak for myself, but it's certainly true in my case, and I think if your honest with yourself it's true in yours as well. Once the sound leaves the speaker it's different in every different environment, room correction EQ helps, but it isn't the same . Amp in the room, Which room? who's ears every one is different (Physics) Can't change it! Solution? change the things you can change, and accept the things you can't and move on!
 

bdrepko

Fractal Fanatic
If this thread were about picking up a gallon of milk at the store it would go as follows:

Man "I need to pick up some milk at the store"

Wife "Take the car"

Man "I need to find a way for the store to bring the milk to me"

Wife "Take the car and get the milk"

Man "The store needs to invent a teleportation device to beam the milk to my house"

Wife "Just take the car"

Man "Maybe the store can send me a cow so that I will always have milk"

Wife "uhhhhhg!"
 

RDH

Fractal Fanatic
If this thread were about picking up a gallon of milk at the store it would go as follows:

Man "I need to pick up some milk at the store"

Wife "Take the car"

Man "I need to find a way for the store to bring the milk to me"

Wife "Take the car and get the milk"

Man "The store needs to invent a teleportation device to beam the milk to my house"

Wife "Just take the car"

Man "Maybe the store can send me a cow so that I will always have milk"

Wife "uhhhhhg!"
IMG_2257.PNG IMG_2257.PNG IMG_2257.PNG
 

shatteredsquare

Fractal Fanatic
Uhh no this thread started as a question of how to remove mic coloration from an IR to make it sound like just the speaker. It turned into a problem when the OP didn't say "thank you" for being told 1. It can't be done, 2. No need to do that, 3. Why would you want to...etc. Then it shifted towards the reasons why it wouldn't be the same as a guitar speaker, and it became a discussion about the specifics of why it's not feasible. It's a "problem" because it's pressing a point/idea the majority doesn't currently subscribe to. Less of a problem than a screaming adolescent demanding that new algorithms be ported to discontinued hardware for free. Which was done?!?!! FAS for life man.
 

R.D.

Power User
Uhh no ..., here's his exact quote ....

"i am wondering if the Mic can be eliminated from the cab sim equation in order to be able to hear the axe fx as you would a real amp, using frfr."

The portion of the quote ( as you would a real amp ) is the important part .... Because implicit in that portion is the search for the Amp in the room sound ....

That's why the thread devolved in the direction it did ....
 
Last edited:

dumbeat

Inspired
After endless comparisons with traditional original gear and sleepless nights on the Axe Fx, and sheer frustration with how the Digital domain mimics the original gear and enviournment/experience, my conclusion is that the only thing Digital gear can have going for it is to offer a sound that a Tube Amp and Guitar Cabinet can not do, otherwise its going to chase forever the original thing unsuccesfully, as it is not it, its a different thing.. Just like no Hendrix imitator can sound like Hendrix, because he is not him...
I am hoping that with this conclusion i can move on and stop annoying the forum...
 
Top Bottom