Dyna-cab, general consensus is that they're "better" than legacy?

[stephenclark1]

This right here ^^^.

Soooooo much more intuitive to move the mic than to guess at what A, B, C, D, or E mean in a list of IRs. So much less wasteful of time listening to a bunch when trying to decide on the one....

Appreciating that most IR packs cost less than a dozen Titleist golf balls, it is a little frustrating to open one up and there is hundreds and you load them, audition them and most sound the same, at least to my ears. If moving the mic a quarter inch to the right is going to make or break my sound then I've got a bigger problem. On a side note it would be a hell of a conversation while sitting around bitching about your jobs and you chime in with "I had to move a mic 100 times today..."

 

[Alainarose]

I prefer the Legacy cabinets as to me they sound fuller and bigger and more out front. I do agree about the ease of the workflow with the Dynacabs in lieu of downloading and auditioning a ton of legacy cabinets. But for me in the end I like the legacy cabs better.

 

[State of Epicicity]

I prefer the Legacy cabinets as to me they sound fuller and bigger and more out front. I do agree about the ease of the workflow with the Dynacabs in lieu of downloading and auditioning a ton of legacy cabinets. But for me in the end I like the legacy cabs better.

I'd try the DynaCabs with mics placed closer to the edge of the speaker, and out from it just a little. You'll normally get more present midrange there. If you focus more toward the center, the tones are much sharper, and I think many IRs are likely captured closer to the edge.

Another thing to keep in mind is that when you use more than one mic in the DynaCabs, Cliff keeps them all aligned in the firmware, which is not accurate to the real world. Many people prefer to align mics, but I do not; I get much smoother tones with better midrange to my ears by misaligning the mics, which represents how the signals would mix with mics at different distances in the real world. I've requested for FAS to include an option not to align the mics automatically.

 

[Dave Merrill]

I prefer the Legacy cabinets as to me they sound fuller and bigger and more out front. I do agree about the ease of the workflow with the Dynacabs in lieu of downloading and auditioning a ton of legacy cabinets. But for me in the end I like the legacy cabs better.

I don't think the dynacab technology has "a sound" in that sense. You might prefer some particular legacy or "middle period" (post legacy pre Dyna) cabs to some particular dynacabs, but i don't think it's * because * the dynacabs are dynacabs.

In the end, they're all IRs or IR mixes.

I think.

 

[Smittefar]

One of the feats of the ultra res IRs length is that it has better resolution in the low end compared to a shorter IR (DC), which could explain the fuller sound.

 

[wire_twerp]

I go back and forth between them depending on the amp and my specific needs at the time.

I also find that my appreciation of tone varies from day to day even on the same preset so I believe subtle psychoacoustic phenomena/mood are influential on my perceptions.

Both are great options and I like to pick the option that suits. For dialling in a tone quickly the Dyna cabs are great.

I tend to only use York Audio IRs or the Dyna cabs fwiw.