Do You Guys Mostly Use 3rd Party IRs or Are You Happy with Factory Cabs/IRs?

Ever since I've started using IRs I have only ever used Ownhammer and I'm very happy with them. A lot of the factory IRs are from third party companies/people as mentioned above, but having my own selection (i.e. Ownhammer's ridiculous selection of IRs per cab, there's like 1000 for every speaker, it's insane) of specific sounds helps me get what I want a lot faster.

I've tried a lot of other people's IRs but most of them have been very muddy or so scooped that they might sound cool on their own but disappear in any mix. Ownhammer seem to have an extended high and low end compared to other people's, which suit me perfectly when I want something hi-fi sounding.
 
I use both. As well as some that I've shot myself. I've used third-party IRs since the Ultra days so I'm more familiar with how they sound. As we all know, IRs are a huge part of your sound. I'm partial to the ML sound lab, Fractal and York Audio ones.

The Factory Cabs in the AxeFXIII are absolutely stellar, since most are from third party producers anyway. I would recommend trying the "tried and true" mic combinations, such as 57 + 121 to get a stellar sound. I have some basic tutorial vids on youtube on how to do this.
 
I have some older OH IRs, some newer ML IRs, some from on here, and of course a ton of factory ones.

I tell you. It's really overwhelming to me. I just don't have enough time to go through the factory ones, much less the 3rd party ones I bought over the years. Just the ear fatigue from trying to A/B them, and the endless menu diving to get to them on the computer. I have some mixed IRs from the OH heavy hitters that I'll load up for some inspiration, but I'd rather just be playing.
 
I have some older OH IRs, some newer ML IRs, some from on here, and of course a ton of factory ones.

I tell you. It's really overwhelming to me. I just don't have enough time to go through the factory ones, much less the 3rd party ones I bought over the years. Just the ear fatigue from trying to A/B them, and the endless menu diving to get to them on the computer. I have some mixed IRs from the OH heavy hitters that I'll load up for some inspiration, but I'd rather just be playing.
Completely agree, hence I am dreaming about an innovation on IR selection interface, @FractalAudio please consider/envision it :)
 
Completely agree, hence I am dreaming about an innovation on IR selection interface, @FractalAudio please consider/envision it :)

I think if there were some standards with naming, or some type of metadata, it would help a lot.

Imagine the cab picker with some filter options. Say, you only want 4x12, so everything else goes away. Now say you want a M57, everything else goes away. This stays for no matter what bank you look at, or browse to. Or maybe speaker is a filter also, so maybe you set the speaker and mic, and just those cabs show up. Or base amp is another. If all Mesa amps showed up, no matter which company made the IR, it would save a bunch of time. If everyone used the same metadata of course.

I wonder how a tree selection would go. Like, you're presented with two IRs, and maybe you don't even know what they are, but sort of like an eye exam, A or B. Maybe you have to start with a base sound. I haven't really thought about it a ton. Then picking one, takes you to two more, A or B, and then you just sort of end up in the direction you were wanting to go, but maybe not sure how to get there. So maybe you only get five choices to make before you're in the range of what you're looking for.
 
I think if there were some standards with naming, or some type of metadata, it would help a lot.
Why would it help?

Imagine the cab picker with some filter options. Say, you only want 4x12, so everything else goes away. Now say you want a M57, everything else goes away.
I can do this now in the picker in Axe-Edit.

Just use your ears.
 
Why would it help?

Accurate info in a normalized format is easier to parse when trying to find what you want when you know what you want already.

I can do this now in the picker in Axe-Edit.

Just use your ears.

Ears are subject to fatigue after listening for a while, which is not at all unexpected with so many IRs to go through. If I already know I like the way a 57 on cap edge 2" out sounds when mixed with a 160 on center of cap 2" out, it saves a lot of hunting and listening and ear fatigue. There's a reason certain mic combos are industry standards--they just work....
 
ccurate info in a normalized format is easier to parse when trying to find what you want when you know what you want already.
Doubt it. The vast majority people wouldn't know what to do with the information. Reference the Big Box collection from Redwirez if you want to see meticulous meta data in IR names that ultimately means nothing to the users. You use your ears in the end.

And it all falls apart when you have multi-microphone mixes with multple cabinet and speaker types.
If I already know I like the way a 57 on cap edge 2" out sounds when mixed with a 160 on center of cap 2" out
$100 says you can't identify a 57 on cap edge 2" out sound from a 1" out sound or a 121. If I gave you 10 samples with different IRs you'd do no better than chance identifying the mic and position. $100 says no one on the forum can do better than chance.
 
I mostly use factory irs but have lots of 3rd party ones that I haven't used much since getting the III . After finding something in the ballpark I'm after, trying different impedance curves is a quick way to tweak.
 
Doubt it. The vast majority people wouldn't know what to do with the information. Reference the Big Box collection from Redwirez if you want to see meticulous meta data in IR names that ultimately means nothing to the users. You use your ears in the end.

And it all falls apart when you have multi-microphone mixes with multple cabinet and speaker types.

$100 says you can't identify a 57 on cap edge 2" out sound from a 1" out sound or a 121. If I gave you 10 samples with different IRs you'd do no better than chance identifying the mic and position. $100 says no one on the forum can do better than chance.
The point is to help users develop a methodical/consistent approach to find IRs, associating IRs with its common sense metadata helps that. Sure some are happy with sticking with a few small number of IRs and be done with it. But many would love to better take advantage of various cabs, mics, and tonal characteristics but working with a large IR collections.

“Just using your ears“ may work OK for auditioning a small number of IR, but is VERY counter productive when working with large collections.

Factory cabs/IRs seem to contain a lot, but my main problem with them is the following two:
1. They lacks consistency, as many are assembled from various(random) venders.
2. They may look like they at least provide "variety" on the surface, but not really, as most of them seem to be chosen as close range off-axis ones, and a lot of them do not sound good to my ears in similar ways.

Using Helix's stock cabs for many years, I can say that it provides consistency and at the same time covers a wide range of tonal spectrum. Once users learned how to use/navigate it, finding the right cab is no longer a randomly listening-by-ear hit-or-miss mess...

It's convenient/easy to throw in tons of IRs with the "golden listen by ear" argument, but it'd take innovation and efforts to design a user-friendly interface to help users (power users, professionals) navigate among the sea of IRs. Helix did not a bad job on this, and Mikko's work was a great eye-opening proof of concept for this as well!

I am NOT saying this as a complain to Fractal, but consider it a motivation and challenge from an avid fan/user.

Innovation, by definition, hinges on reevaluating and questioning the things we use to believe or disbelieve.
 
Even if there was value to IR metadata, there are a lot of IR makers out there. The chances of enlisting a significant number of them in any kind of consistent scheme are Low.
 
2. They may look like they at least provide "variety" on the surface, but not really, as most of them seem to be chosen as close range off-axis ones, and a lot of them do not sound good to my ears in similar ways.
I think there a very limited number of off-axis IRs in the factory IR list.

Most of them are close mic'd because that is the typical way guitar speakers are mic'd.
 
I find all that information and metadata and mike positions totally useless. I use my ears.

I tried to follow the norms of what sounds good long time ago (SM57 on that position and blah blah) but it was a total waste of time.
 
Even if there was value to IR metadata, there are a lot of IR makers out there. The chances of enlisting a significant number of them in any kind of consistent scheme are Low.
They managed to get plumbers to do it.

Imagine how much fun plumbing would be if everyone did whatever they felt like with pipe threads, sizes, etc.

Certainly these guys are smarter than and friendlier/more cooperative than plumbers....
 
Back
Top Bottom