• 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.

Clawfinger's IR page closed. Thanks people!

voes

Fractal Fanatic
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

Clawfinger said:
It's 50+ IR's from four different cabs, including those "EAW480" that everybody seems to like. (Cliff, you want to include them in 6.0?)
Good Idea!
 
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

sheguitarplayer said:
(Cliff, you want to include them in 6.0?)
My thoughts exactly!
That would be awesome, but I'm assuming there isn't enough space/memory to hold that many cabs... What would he do, just pick 1 or 2 IR's of each of the 4 cabs?
 

Clawfinger

Veteran
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

I meant that the EAW -IR's from the Marshall cab (two, one off and one on axis) that seems to be liked by several ppl on the forum. At least the old one ;)
 

plexi59

Forum Addict
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

Why are they SO LOUD compared to the "stock" cabs? Pretty inconvenient.
 

javajunkie

Moderator
Moderator
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

plexi59 said:
Why are they SO LOUD compared to the "stock" cabs? Pretty inconvenient.
They are +6db louder. They were done with an older version of AlbertA's converter which happened to render then +6db. Clawfinger hasn't has time to redo them. Still more convenient than doing them yourself :D
 

AlbertA

Forum Addict
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

plexi59 said:
Why are they SO LOUD compared to the "stock" cabs? Pretty inconvenient.
They were made that way so that you could still hear them even with your head fully inside your asshole....
 

plexi59

Forum Addict
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

AlbertA said:
plexi59 said:
Why are they SO LOUD compared to the "stock" cabs? Pretty inconvenient.
They were made that way so that you could still hear them even with your head fully inside your asshole....
:?: :?: :?:

That was uncalled for.
 

Clawfinger

Veteran
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

plexi59 said:
Why are they SO LOUD compared to the "stock" cabs? Pretty inconvenient.
I made them loud because I play loud music. Also, it's nice to annoy people. It's a free service provided by me, so don't use them if you don't like it.
 

plexi59

Forum Addict
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

Well, in spite of the hype, I don't find them any better than stock cabs, so I'll probably follow your advice. :lol:
 

Jay Mitchell

Fractal Fanatic
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

plexi59 said:
Well, in spite of the hype, I don't find them any better than stock cabs, so I'll probably follow your advice. :lol:
You get your money back, then. All of it. Happy?

Dammit, the folks who develop add-ons like IRs aren't doing so to please you. They're doing it for their own purposes, and then sharing the results of their work with other users. For free. They don't have to share any of them, and - this is really important - they don't benefit in any way from your decision to use them. If you like them, fine. If not, that's fine, too, but it doesn't give you any justification to bitch about them here.

If you ever manage to create IRs that you think are better than these, you are welcome to share them. If you have any positive contribution to make, that would be welcome as well.
 

Cam

Inspired
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

In an attempt to turn this into a positive. I for one very much appreciate Jay, Claw, Admins, Cliff and EVERYONE else who contributes and shares. I feel like a leach taking advantage of all this and not even sharing patches. But it's only because I have no resources YET to even record.... a couple more weeks and I'll have my laptop :D .

So thanks to everyone... you guys are brilliant and selfless!
 

Friedlieb

Inspired
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

Cam said:
In an attempt to turn this into a positive. I for one very much appreciate Jay, Claw, Admins, Cliff and EVERYONE else who contributes and shares.
+1

I'll second that.

Best regards
Friedlieb
 
S

Soultrash

Guest
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

@Clawfinger
have you planned to make a few BASS cab IR's?
this would be awesome!

cheers
Soultrash
 

Jay Mitchell

Fractal Fanatic
Re: Clawfinger's IR-page (repost)

Soultrash said:
have you planned to make a few BASS cab IR's?
this would be awesome!
Not likely. In order to capture an IR with any worthwhile response detail at the lowest bass frequencies (~35Hz for a four-string), the IR would have to be at least one period in length at that frequency (29ms), ideally as much as twice that. That would require a minimum 2048-point IR. As things now stand, you would have to split the IR into four parts and use two delay blocks to implement that in the Axe-Fx. And your playback speaker's response would have to extend to a substantially lower frequency than the cab sim, otherwise you'll just be hearing your playback speaker's lower cutoff. The possibility of getting an IR that is longer than 30ms without early room reflections is pretty remote. Finally, most bass parts are recorded direct and reinforced live via a DI straight from the instrument. The speaker sound is not nearly so great a factor in most bass sounds as it is with guitar.
 
Top Bottom