Cutting Cab High's and Low's??

Jason King

Member
Been following a few guys on YouTube with Fractal gear and then their resultant patches have been downloaded and/or the theory applied.

That is it seems to adjust the frequencies on the cab block to filter out the extreme high's and low's. Something like below 80 and above 8000 so you end up with a V shaped midrange style of tone. The idea is to cut the boom and the fizz!

Now speaking to other pro musos using Atomic CLR's and alike they tell me that there is no cutting of frequencies required with their gear.

I'm using an EV ELX 112P http://www.musiciansfriend.com/pro-audio/electro-voice-elx112p-active-12-loudspeaker .

It's sounds pretty good to me and also seems strange that all these IR's need to be heavily edited using this method to sound good with our monitoring solution?

Is it that I am and maybe you are using sub standard FRFR solutions?
What are you guys doing, especially the guys who play live a lot through decent FOH systems?
Maybe I'm approaching this in the wrong way and just need better quality monitoring solutions?
Thoughts?
 
I have a pair of Evzlx's...and also a pair of yamaha hs8's and they sound pretty close, not exact, but the presets translate pretty well. I would imagine that the "ELX's" are superior to the ZLX's in pretty much every way and that presets would translate even better. In any event, I find that a cut in the hi's of -12db at about 6k and also around roughly 100 hz helps whether I'm using the yamaha's or the EV's. I am using a strat with kinmans and it is a bright guitar. I also use factory IR's pretty much exclusively. Listen very very carefully as you bring down the Hi frequency to make that adjustment. Do the same for the low frequency. Different amps and IR's will require a different treatment and, maybe none at all. Most freq curves of guitar speakers I have seen start rolling off pretty hard at around 6khz and 100hz. A green back actually starts at about 4k and is down about 10db by the time we get to 6K. The lows start rolling off at about 150hz according to the chart I was just looking at. Also, the ir may have attributes added to it because of how it was mic'd. These attributes may be helpful, or not helpful. In addition, No speaker is perfectly flat. According to my very sophomoric test, the EV's are actually pretty good. All of this really adds up to one thing.....are you ready.....you simply got to use your ears man! Find some guitar tones you like, preferably isolated tones, and use them as a reference. And realize, these are recorded tones not"amp in the room" sound. If you want amp in the room run your unit into a guitar speaker with a quality solid state amp. Interestingly, if you run this way, I bet you will need to cut at all. Don't be afraid to put a peq before and after the amp and cab to further enhance your tone. You know they did this in the studio! USE THE TOOLS, GET THE REWARD! Over and out.
 
I hear you, and that's essentially what I've been doing, ..... using my ears and tweaking. I think from a monitoring point of view it sounds pretty great anyway. Just a little thrown when others I respect say they don't meddle with cab blocks or peq's. In the end I trust my ears!
 
graph.gif

This is the green back chart I referenced. Obviously I am speaking generally about the frequencies and their respective roll off's. But you can see a roll off starting at roughly 150hz, maybe 130. And, although there is a boost slightly before 2k, at 4k we are above 100db and at 6k we are at 90db. So I would say that's a pretty major roll off on the hi's. Onward and upward !
 
Yep, it depends on the guitar, the speaker, the IR, the sound you are going for....many variables. Finding a reference track is a good trick. It helps keep our ears honest, they'll trick you if your not careful. I have tweaked for hours and walked away thinking I've got the best tone ever. Come back the next day and it sounds like crap. A reference for the ears is a great tool to use.
 
The IR is a special recording of how the original cab displays. And if it's taken right it should have content below 80 hz when the original cab displays content there (most probably it does) and if it's taken right it should have content above 8K when the original cab displays content there (most probably there isn't much up there).

When you cut the outer ends off, it is only logical when you believe that some IRs are taken wrong and have wrong content there or when you don't like these freqs no matter if they get displayed by the original cab or when you say your monitors a
or the PAs can not handle these freqs right anyway.

So what's your reason? Let's say the IR is taken well and you like everything about the sound of the original cab.
Then there's only the problem with the audio system left to let it sound bad in the outer range.
Below 80 hz I'd say that's a range where many small FRFR systems don't display as flat as in the mids, most have a roll off below 100hz anyway, cuttIng the rest off will not change much - at home! Since big PA systems display these freqs flatter you could have unwanted content there and at home you didn't even noticed it. You could place a cut in the lows if you subscribe to that thought.
Most stage monitors hype the highs and often enough you can hear that. You could compensate that with a high cut, but if the same signal goes to your monitorIng and to the FOH you still don't know what it makes to the FOH. An 8 Khz filter will not damage much, at the other hand, if the IR is taken right there isn't much above 8k anyway, so cut it or leave it.

My 2ct to that
 
My initial logic was exactly that! If the IR was recorded correctly the necessary information is already there. The roll off occurs naturally anyway, ideally nothing to do!!
 
The IR of a speaker and the guitar sound recorded onto an album are two different things. Every recorded guitar sound has had eq and more done to it to make it sound the way it does. The recorded sound is not just a mic'd up cab; it is a mic'd cab (IR) plus eq shaping at the very least. It stands to reason then, that if we are going to replicate the sound of a recorded guitar, which is what FRFR is really all about, we would have processing that extends beyond just an IR.

Having said that, it is entirely possible that you find a sound you like with minimal processing; especially for live situations. But to sound like the vast majority of recorded guitar sounds, additional processing is needed because those sounds are a combination of the mic'd cab, EQ, dynamics processing, ect.

Think of FRFR like your working in a studio. Many times low end is cut just so the bass frequencies sit better in the mix. The guitar sound by it self might not sound that great, but the total mix does. This what is done in a studio and this is the beauty of FRFR. Excellent sound and excellent mixes at any volume. Listen to some isolated guitar tracks, you will find that there are basically very few absolute rules, but many techniques.
 
^^^ agreed

IRs are generally captured close and in front of the speaker, (same is when micing a speaker on stage) which means it captures the "character" of the speaker & cab well, but it's not a sound you really want to hear. A live desk will usually cut highs and lows to make it more mix-friendly and ear-friendly. So we need to do the same when using IRs with FRFR systems.

I use the amp graphic EQ usually with gentle rolloff of lows and highs (I could do the same in the cab block), and also boost low-mids to offset single coil pickups with low gain amps and for a fuller sound with high gain amps.
 
Maybe that's the problem with IRs. They are just captures of Mics on cabinets and what many people are going for is the album style tone that's had a bunch of EQ applied.
I struggled with high gain IRs and this high cut/low cut business ever since I got the Axe Fx. Cleans and crunch were always fine but I've only in the last few days discovered a couple of extremely cheap IRs that really work for me.
 
I suppose though, do we do the cuts before the FOH live desk, or give the engineer a tone that they expect to cut anyway as they would have done with a miked up cab with an SM57 typically in the past.
Maybe that's the problem with IRs. They are just captures of Mics on cabinets and what many people are going for is the album style tone that's had a bunch of EQ applied.
I struggled with high gain IRs and this high cut/low cut business ever since I got the Axe Fx. Cleans and crunch were always fine but I've only in the last few days discovered a couple of extremely cheap IRs that really work for me.
Hey man tell us more about these alternate IR's. Are you saying they are plug and play really??

I'm working towards a tone I can give to FOH where they could ideally run it flat. Maybe I'm overthinking it !!
 
I'll give you my personal take for what it's worth. I feel there's an issue with how some of these IR's are shot. Now, I know I'll get a few responses disagreeing with me along with the science about how this stuff works etc.....but hear me out.

I've played through so many amps and cabs, I'd consider myself blessed. When I tell you so many, that's probably an understatement. That said, I have NEVER heard the low end garbage and synthetic razor sharp high end out of real cabs like I do on some of these.

I know, different pups, different guitars, different modeled amps through the cab...right, I get it. But let's look deeper.

There may be elements under 80 hz in cabs, but not like the stuff we get. We get rumble low end that is in bass guitar territory. I don't recall ever hearing those elements in a real cab unless I'm super clean and jack the bass up on my neck pup with all the treble out.

Here's the other thing on the low side....if you do have a little low end "whoomf" as I like to call it, it's getting dialed out in the studio and definitely dialed out live. So why allow it to be so excessive that it sounds like ass? I just don't get that and will never agree with the decision to leave the garbage in.

I have always felt we needed IR's that actually sounded good without massive tweaking. There are a few of course, but not enough. The immediate razor sharp high end in some is also a killer. Some are so bad it makes the tube artifacts we so despenrately love in our Fractal gear seem transistor in character.

Like I say, I know the issues that can arise using modeled stuff, but that doesn't mean it needs to be this way. I've created my own cabs that don't have any of that super low stuff and razor sharp high stuff in them. I even tweaked one of the stock cabs that I think sounds pretty good and doesn't have any of those annoying elements in it. Sometimes I really think being more authentic with this stuff is more a hindrance. Just my 0.2.
 
So can anyone point to one IR that they use, perhaps one of the factory cabs that hasn't needed to be filtered at all? I'm thinking why don't we have IR's that are presented to us that are fully EQ'd and ready to go? Or is the approach here's the block of marble, now you go off and try and create a sculpture? I'm a guitarist not an engineer!! That said I'll trust me ear and do what I need to get it sounding good. The editing seems like it should be unnecessary??
 
I'll give you my personal take for what it's worth. I feel there's an issue with how some of these IR's are shot. Now, I know I'll get a few responses disagreeing with me along with the science about how this stuff works etc.....but hear me out.

I've played through so many amps and cabs, I'd consider myself blessed. When I tell you so many, that's probably an understatement. That said, I have NEVER heard the low end garbage and synthetic razor sharp high end out of real cabs like I do on some of these.

I know, different pups, different guitars, different modeled amps through the cab...right, I get it. But let's look deeper.

There may be elements under 80 hz in cabs, but not like the stuff we get. We get rumble low end that is in bass guitar territory. I don't recall ever hearing those elements in a real cab unless I'm super clean and jack the bass up on my neck pup with all the treble out.

Here's the other thing on the low side....if you do have a little low end "whoomf" as I like to call it, it's getting dialed out in the studio and definitely dialed out live. So why allow it to be so excessive that it sounds like ***? I just don't get that and will never agree with the decision to leave the garbage in.

I have always felt we needed IR's that actually sounded good without massive tweaking. There are a few of course, but not enough. The immediate razor sharp high end in some is also a killer. Some are so bad it makes the tube artifacts we so despenrately love in our Fractal gear seem transistor in character.

Like I say, I know the issues that can arise using modeled stuff, but that doesn't mean it needs to be this way. I've created my own cabs that don't have any of that super low stuff and razor sharp high stuff in them. I even tweaked one of the stock cabs that I think sounds pretty good and doesn't have any of those annoying elements in it. Sometimes I really think being more authentic with this stuff is more a hindrance. Just my 0.2.

Put your ears half an inch from the speaker cone and you'll get it though (totally not recommended). The low end boom is a proximity effect from close micing, and as you said you'd dial that out at the desk anyway.

Personally I like the IR to be as accurate a representation of the cab/mic as possible so that I can choose what to leave in and what to leave out. Having the cab block low cut default value set at 80hz would be an easy work around to help out players who aren't used to deep editing and would probably make life easier for a lot of users. From memory the high cut defaults to 10k in recent firmwares which helps take out a lot of that obnoxious high end sizzle.

As you say in the last sentence, untamed IR's are often why people complain about modellers "sounding digital".
 
Put your ears half an inch from the speaker cone and you'll get it though (totally not recommended). The low end boom is a proximity effect from close micing, and as you said you'd dial that out at the desk anyway.

Personally I like the IR to be as accurate a representation of the cab/mic as possible so that I can choose what to leave in and what to leave out. Having the cab block low cut default value set at 80hz would be an easy work around to help out players who aren't used to deep editing and would probably make life easier for a lot of users. From memory the high cut defaults to 10k in recent firmwares which helps take out a lot of that obnoxious high end sizzle.

As you say in the last sentence, untamed IR's are often why people complain about modellers "sounding digital".
Thanks for chiming in Leon
 
It's all a balance and compromise too.
What sounds great by yourself can sound like mud in a mix.
I'm not a big fan of my main patches when I play alone, a little thin sounding compared to my old mesa roadster.
But in the mix they work great, I'm not competing with the bass player or other guitarist, and overall stage volume is reduced because I can hear clearly. That makes our whole band sound better.

Thankfully we have the tools to have it both ways. No harm in experimenting to see what works for you, there isn't only one right answer here.
 
Put your ears half an inch from the speaker cone and you'll get it though (totally not recommended). The low end boom is a proximity effect from close micing, and as you said you'd dial that out at the desk anyway.

Personally I like the IR to be as accurate a representation of the cab/mic as possible so that I can choose what to leave in and what to leave out. Having the cab block low cut default value set at 80hz would be an easy work around to help out players who aren't used to deep editing and would probably make life easier for a lot of users. From memory the high cut defaults to 10k in recent firmwares which helps take out a lot of that obnoxious high end sizzle.

As you say in the last sentence, untamed IR's are often why people complain about modellers "sounding digital".

Totally with you. Here's another scenario to maybe illustrate my point.

I get what you're saying about being up close to the cab, but that isn't the final result we hear with IR's. The thing to think about here is this...

In real life you buy a new cab for your head, you of course have to adjust the head for the cab. With IR's, the user is not only sculpting the amp, but the cab too to remove nastiness that isn't normally in a cab. If it weren't so easy to just press an arrow and load another IR and each one cost $500-$800 like a real.cab, there would be an uproar.

Yet in the modeling world, it's acceptable to spend $20 or whatever on a cab pack and only have 2 cabs that actually work for you out of 50. I consider that a flaw in the system somewhere.

Science to the side, I'm looking at reality. I don't think anyone feels like sculpting every aspect all the time. Seriously....some of the tweaking we have to do is intense. Case in point, find a cab that sounds bad. You either tweak with cab lab, an XL+, go through all 259 amps to see what may work.with that cab, or you press the arrow and load another impulse. I really think that's bogus.

Having cabs that behave a little better without the need to massively tweak would be something I feel is necessity.

I know tone is and always will be subjective. However, we live in a world where things are auto-done for us. What's wrong with actually making these things sound good out of the box while having more than 2 that actually work for people, know what I mean?

As much as I'm a tone tweaker, it sure is nice to just fire something up, twist a little knob or two and go. Some IR's just do not compliment our amps in the least. Like so bad it makes you wonder what the guy that shot them was thinking.
 
Totally with you. Here's another scenario to maybe illustrate my point.

I get what you're saying about being up close to the cab, but that isn't the final result we hear with IR's. The thing to think about here is this...

In real life you buy a new cab for your head, you of course have to adjust the head for the cab. With IR's, the user is not only sculpting the amp, but the cab too to remove nastiness that isn't normally in a cab. If it weren't so easy to just press an arrow and load another IR and each one cost $500-$800 like a real.cab, there would be an uproar.

Yet in the modeling world, it's acceptable to spend $20 or whatever on a cab pack and only have 2 cabs that actually work for you out of 50. I consider that a flaw in the system somewhere.

Science to the side, I'm looking at reality. I don't think anyone feels like sculpting every aspect all the time. Seriously....some of the tweaking we have to do is intense. Case in point, find a cab that sounds bad. You either tweak with cab lab, an XL+, go through all 259 amps to see what may work.with that cab, or you press the arrow and load another impulse. I really think that's bogus.

Having cabs that behave a little better without the need to massively tweak would be something I feel is necessity.

I know tone is and always will be subjective. However, we live in a world where things are auto-done for us. What's wrong with actually making these things sound good out of the box while having more than 2 that actually work for people, know what I mean?

As much as I'm a tone tweaker, it sure is nice to just fire something up, twist a little knob or two and go. Some IR's just do not compliment our amps in the least. Like so bad it makes you wonder what the guy that shot them was thinking.
BIG LIKE DANNY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
So can anyone point to one IR that they use, perhaps one of the factory cabs that hasn't needed to be filtered at all? I'm thinking why don't we have IR's that are presented to us that are fully EQ'd and ready to go? Or is the approach here's the block of marble, now you go off and try and create a sculpture? I'm a guitarist not an engineer!! That said I'll trust me ear and do what I need to get it sounding good. The editing seems like it should be unnecessary??

There's no such thing. EQ-ing depends on the content (other instruments), type of guitar (baritone, Strat, etc.) type of music (funk, metal etc.), environment (home, studio, gig etc.) etc. etc. etc. etc.

80 Hz might be the go-to high-pass setting for some, but others like it much higher (I do: up to 150 Hz), or lower (down to 40 Hz for bass players). Same applies to high-cut (low pass).
 
Last edited:
While the IR vs cab (as with the FRFR vs amp in the room) is a false equivalence, since the microphone plays such an integral part of determining the character of a recorded guitar tone, I totally agree that finding a decent IR can feel like a needle in a haystack. The disadvantage of IR's is that you can't reach into the box and move the mic 1/10 of an inch further into the sweet spot, you have to rely on the person who shot the IR to have dialled that in.

My work around is having a PEQ block saved that I can throw after the cab with my go-to low/high pass and boost/cut settings and tweak from there.

The upshot of IR's, for me at least, is having the chance to try microphone and speaker combinations that would otherwise be out of the scope or budget of a project; being able to compare a Royer 121 against an M160 or SM7 on the same speaker with the same positioning is incredibly convenient in that context.
 
Back
Top Bottom