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

[Piing]

A while ago, when the Axe-FX III came, some preset sellers at this forum thought about reserving different slots for their personalized IRs, to avoid overlapping. That never happened, even though it is the most simple thing in the world.

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

Ultimately, the info is a time saver if you already know what mics/positions you prefer. Why bother tasting every kind of mayonnaise the store offers on your ballpark frank if you know you prefer mustard?

 

[iaresee]

Ultimately, the info is a time saver if you already know what mics/positions you prefer. Why bother tasting every kind of mayonnaise the store offers on your ballpark frank if you know you prefer mustard?

Because the information doesn't accurately translate to a "a sound"? $100 is there any time you think you can do it.

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

Because the information doesn't accurately translate to a "a sound"? $100 is there any time you think you can do it.

I have yet to hear a 421 on any cab that didn't make me immediately choose something else. The mayonnaise of microphones, I guess.

I used Leon @2112's suggestion loop some guitar, not look at the display, just hit the arrow key, and color mark the ones I liked. That helped speed the process some, but overwhelmingly and far outside the realm of chance, I landed on the same mics and postions, give or take an inch or letter. If I were on the clock, I would want to zero in on it faster via ruling out the mayonnaise....

 

[Dave Merrill]

The basic stuff like 1x10 vs 4x12, and the maker's abbreviated name should be there, and usually is as part of the name, but not in a consistent order, so simple text matches only work medium well. Also, on the unit itself, it only handles the 2x12 part, not even maker.

 

[iaresee]

I have yet to hear a 421 on any cab that didn't make me immediately choose something else. The mayonnaise of microphones, I guess.

I used Leon @2112's suggestion loop some guitar, not look at the display, just hit the arrow key, and color mark the ones I liked. That helped speed the process some, but overwhelmingly and far outside the realm of chance, I landed on the same mics and postions, give or take an inch or letter. If I were on the clock, I would want to zero in on it faster via ruling out the mayonnaise....

$100 could be yours...

 

[Mark Al]

Because the information doesn't accurately translate to a "a sound"? $100 is there any time you think you can do it.

I would disagree, it may not translate among IRs from different/random venders, but within a single vender, eg OH or Redwires, it translate pretty well, so does it translate well in real studio work.

Hence I was arguing consistency.

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

I would disagree, it may not translate among IRs from different/random venders, but within a single vender, eg OH or Redwires, it translate pretty well, so does it translate well in real studio work.

Hence I was arguing consistency.

There's gotta be a reason these robotic mic positioning devices exist to precisely position whatever mic at whatever position with ludicrous precision. The info provides a likely starting point to start listening to individual IRs. Just like studio recording engineers generally start from a particular mic/position combo and adjust from there.

I don't personally feel the need to get into a forum fracas over the subject. If listening and picking without any info works for you, the info being available will certainly not hurt your process. I have done the research and testing myself, and picked particular mics/positions by ear with pretty good regularity across a variety of different speakers/cabs. I don't need to prove it to anyone. @iaresee, can you grant that other people may have other processes that work for them, as well as time constraints that may restrict them from listening to every one of the 5000 IRs in their collection?

 

[iaresee]

I would disagree, it may not translate among IRs from different/random venders, but within a single vender, eg OH or Redwires, it translate pretty well, so does it translate well in real studio work.

Hence I was arguing consistency.

$100 could be yours too...

We can even limit it to "a single vender" [sic].

I posit you don't know what that information sounds like, hence it's useless.

 

[iaresee]

@Mark Al and @Joe Bfstplk: you have the ability to rename IRs in the user section any way you like. You can add all the metadata, in any way you like, to organize those IRs.

Go for it.

Report back on on how futile it was, eh?

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

@Mark Al and @Joe Bfstplk: you have the ability to rename IRs in the user section any way you like. You can add all the metadata, in any way you like, to organize those IRs.

Go for it.

Report back on on how futile it was, eh?

Hard to do if you don't have the info from the source. No need to start a war over it....

 

[iaresee]

Hard to do if you don't have the info from the source. No need to start a war over it....

Which only further proves my point the information is useless because no one knows what it sounds like. A, B, C, D are just as good as "cap edge 2 inch" and "cap edge 2.5" on the IRs when it comes to disambiguating them. There's a reason, a decade on, we've landed on this way of doing things around here. It's not arbitrary.

You're asking a lot of people to spend a lot of time cataloging data that won't help anyone in the end.

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

Which only further proves my point the information is useless because no one knows what it sounds like. A, B, C, D are just as good as "cap edge 2 inch" and "cap edge 2.5" on the IRs when it comes to disambiguating them. There's a reason, a decade on, we've landed on this way of doing things around here. It's not arbitrary.

You're asking a lot of people to spend a lot of time cataloging data that won't help anyone in the end.

If you don't have any way to attribute any consistency to A B C and D, then they are mostly meaningless. The descriptions you chafe at provide some degree of meaning.

FWIW, I overwhelmingly picked G or thereabouts for 57s and A, B, or C for 160s across various types via the 'no info for you' ear nazi (apologies to Seinfeld) listening tests, which suggests at least some consistency of the letters' meanings, but it wasted a lot of time listening to IRs that could have been better spent playing music. Didn't pick any 421s, as I just don't like mayonnaise....

 

[Mark Al]

@Mark Al and @Joe Bfstplk: you have the ability to rename IRs in the user section any way you like. You can add all the metadata, in any way you like, to organize those IRs.

Go for it.

Report back on on how futile it was, eh?

@iaresee , I feel you largely miss the point, not sure if you read my earlier posts and about what I proposed...

Not trying to argue with anyone, I meant to give this as a feedback to Fractal. I think it's a fair and valid point, and obviously I am not the only one who feel this way, look at the response of this threads, e.g. auditioning factory cab/IRs systematically is nearly impossible, and listening by ear is often a hit or miss.

Both Helix stock cabs and Mikko's work are better mechanism for IR selection, and that's hard to argue around... It should not be hard for anyone to acknowledge that, regardless he/she agrees with it... not to even mention something called customer empathy.

How Fractal takes customer feedbacks like this, I have no clue, I hope they do give it a thought. I do believe the current Factory Cab/IR section mechanism is not ideal, and can/should be largely improved. Maybe besides what I proposed earlier, they have something else in mind, who knows, but I do hope they do something about it.

Using Axe III for two weeks, IR selection remains the least favorite part I fee about it.

 

[iaresee]

not sure if you read my earlier posts and about what I proposed...

I did not. I only read the posts arguing for more metadata like mic and position. Useless. It's been tried and abandoned. Even by Mikko and his IR packs.

Someone, maybe it was you, mentioned a way to start from a reference point and ask a system to refine a selection based on wants. "I want more mids...", "I want more highs in the 10k range...", "I want more presence..."

Now that would be very interesting. And it wouldn't require any effort on the part of the IR creators because you have all that information encoded in the IR already in the impulse that has been captured. It would require some pre-knowledge of all the IRs you'd want to consider refining from but it might be worth the wait to have a system catalog a collection to use it like that.

It also works with mixes.

I'd say that'd be useful. Was that what you described? Someone said "decision tree" and that's kind of what it would implement.

 

[Mark Al]

I did not. I only read the posts arguing for more metadata like mic and position. Useless. It's been tried and abandoned. Even by Mikko and his IR packs.

Someone, maybe it was you, mentioned a way to start from a reference point and ask a system to refine a selection based on wants. "I want more mids...", "I want more highs in the 10k range...", "I want more presence..."

Now that would be very interesting. And it wouldn't require any effort on the part of the IR creators because you have all that information encoded in the IR already in the impulse that has been captured. It would require some pre-knowledge of all the IRs you'd want to consider refining from but it might be worth the wait to have a system catalog a collection to use it like that.

It also works with mixes.

I'd say that'd be useful. Was that what you described? Someone said "decision tree" and that's kind of what it would implement.

Here is what I proposed earlier, a bit more ambitious than just metadata labeling, perhaps

Wouldn‘t it be awesome, if @FractalAudio comes up with a new interface for cab/IR selection? Something like:

1. Select a cab
2. Select a mic
3. Select a position, eg cap, cap edge, cone or cone edge.
4. Then select a distance.

Perhaps they don’t need to shoot IRs for all combinations above, instead just a subset of them, them extrapolate/model the rest of combinations. Then Fractal will be providing a consistently set of IR/sounds, covering a whole wide range that allow users to methodically find what they need.

This may require some nontrivial amount of work... but I think this will be hugely better than relying on “randomly” assembled 3rd party IRs which often sound inconsistent and incomplete... And it will be a huge step above Helix!

I love the amp modeling of Axe 3, but I think we can a lot better on the cab/IR side, which is at least 50% of the tone if not more... Just a suggestion, please think about it

 

[iaresee]

Here is what I proposed earlier, a bit more ambitious than just metadata labeling, perhaps

My "useless" critique stands. See above: no one, or at least very few people, are helped by selecting mic and position. This information doesn't readily translate into "sounds like A" in anyones head. AND it isn't usable with mixes.

But..now...that "I need more or less..." idea...now, that has legs.

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

I did not. I only read the posts arguing for more metadata like mic and position. Useless. It's been tried and abandoned. Even by Mikko and his IR packs.

Someone, maybe it was you, mentioned a way to start from a reference point and ask a system to refine a selection based on wants. "I want more mids...", "I want more highs in the 10k range...", "I want more presence..."

Now that would be very interesting. And it wouldn't require any effort on the part of the IR creators because you have all that information encoded in the IR already in the impulse that has been captured. It would require some pre-knowledge of all the IRs you'd want to consider refining from but it might be worth the wait to have a system catalog a collection to use it like that.

It also works with mixes.

I'd say that'd be useful. Was that what you described? Someone said "decision tree" and that's kind of what it would implement.

That's fine if it jives with your workflow.

I know what certain mics sound like and how to move them around the speaker and get different sounds. I studied studio music recording ages ago under a guy who worked with people like Paul McCartney, Lyle Lovett, the Pointer Sisters, and more. Kinda wish I'd've listened to him and gone forward with that instead of listening to the FIL, who was the Director of Technology for Prodigy at the time, and staying in college to get a real job, but that ship has long since sailed.

If a particular IR is not what I want to hear, it is much more efficient to pick one via the metainfo about mic type and position than it is to blindly poke a stick out into the dark. I am not sure why that info being available is such an unreasonable eequest....

 

[iaresee]

I know what certain mics sound like and how to move them around the speaker and get different sounds.

And you don't want to make $100 with that knowledge?

I'm good for it. I'm sure people on the forum can vouch for me.

I am not sure why that info being available is such an unreasonable eequest....

People have tried it and it turned out to be too much more for too little value. And then they pivoted away from it. If it was a good idea, it would have stuck. But literally all of the IR producers save one have given up on it.

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

And you don't want to make $100 with that knowledge?

I'm good for it. I'm sure people on the forum can vouch for me.

I don't need to prove it or need the $100.

Mikko's tool is great, as I can whip up a sound in a minute, as I know where to drag which virtual mics to get what I want. The cab selection is small, and focused on metal, though, so it is, ultimately of limited utility to me. I guess that those cabs are Oscar Meier weiners, which I don't particularly care for, even with mustard instead of mayo. If Mikko would add some Hebrew Nationals and Nathan's dirty water dogs....

People have tried it and it turned out to be too much more for too little value. And then they pivoted away from it. If it was a good idea, it would have stuck. But literally all of the IR producers save one have given up on it.

I am accustomed to being an edge case, even amongst other edge cases. C'est la vie....