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



I wanted to do such a video since the Dyna-Cabs were released : a comparison between the cab blocks of three different modelers, Axe-Fx III, Helix, Quad Cortex, in which you can freely chose your mics and position them, in front of the virtual speaker.

At the end of the video, as a bonus and for reference, I also show some "traditional" static IRs : my own, the ones from the John Petrucci Tonemission pack, and three different Ownhammer packs.

I recommend watching this on youtube, as there's a long description there, with chapters, my thoughts on each of these cabs (and yes, the Dyna-Cabs are my favorites here !), and why I used such a cliché riff ;)
 
To me the Legacy cabinets sound better for playing live in a FRFR setting and require very little tweaking whereas the DynaCabs I can get to sound close but require lots of adjustments of the mic placement and blending different cabinets to get the same sound as the Legacy cab's. In the end both are extremely useful options at our disposal but for me personally I have found a few Legacy cab's that work for me across most of my settings. No right or wrong by any means.
 
Alainarose said:
To me the Legacy cabinets sound better for playing live in a FRFR setting and require very little tweaking whereas the DynaCabs I can get to sound close but require lots of adjustments of the mic placement and blending different cabinets to get the same sound as the Legacy cab's. In the end both are extremely useful options at our disposal but for me personally I have found a few Legacy cab's that work for me across most of my settings. No right or wrong by any means.
Click to expand...
You have a point here.

Third party IRs often come with suggested starting points, "Mix 1" or some such. DynaCabs don't come with anything like that, at the least the factory ones. The default mic position is dead center, right up against the grill cloth.

Each of us has to figure out from scratch what works for us. Or course we have to do that eventually anyway, but a clue from an experienced pro in the field isn't exactly a bad thing.

Maybe if DynaCabs have room in the file format for a default mic and its position, Fractal and other future makers could provide human-selected starting points.

Of course those won't be universal - people have different guitars, playing styles, amp tendencies, and desired results, but still.
 
sprint said:
I'm not a "fan" - I just recognize a significance to it that, on or off, outweighs many other aspects to even my limited range ears.
Click to expand...
Not to belabor the point, but how can you hear a difference with auto SIC disabled? It has no impact in that scenario because it's not being used.
 
unix-guy said:
Not to belabor the point, but how can you hear a difference with auto SIC disabled? It has no impact in that scenario because it's not being used.
Click to expand...
When using DC, if the "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." control on the Amp Speaker Tab is changed from "on" to "off", then the SIC aspects of the overall speaker curve change from the measured SIC associated directly to the DC selected, to the generic SIC (from list) that is either the one associated to the amp selection by default, or an alternate curve user selected from the list (or custom curve values input) to override the default prior to "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." being "On". The difference one hears in DC mode changing from "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." = "On" to "Off" or vice versa may be larger or smaller depending on how different the measured DC SIC is with "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." = "On", compared to what SIC values are there with "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." = "Off". The only way I see to turn the overall speaker curve (including the cab side SIC values and the amp side reacting transformer values) completely "Off" is to turn off power amp modelling, tho one can "quazi disable" the SIC aspects of the overall speaker curve by selecting the "Resistive Load" generic curve with "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." = "Off", or by custom editing all the overall speaker curve controls to get the overall speaker curve graph line as flat as possible with "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." = "Off". (doing this results in a dramatic changes in my presets - I only use resistive load when routing output (with power amp modelling on) through my hi-headroom tube power amps with lowish coloration + real cabs which generate their own interactive effect automatically - I might also consider using resistive load if I know SIC values were baked into the IR I'm using (I'd still want the reacting transformer values in the overall speaker curve for that scenario)).
 
sprint said:
When using DC, if the "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." control on the Amp Speaker Tab is changed from "on" to "off", then the SIC aspects of the overall speaker curve change from the measured SIC associated directly to the DC selected, to the generic SIC (from list) that is either the one associated to the amp selection by default, or an alternate curve user selected from the list (or custom curve values input) to override the default prior to "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." being "On". The difference one hears in DC mode changing from "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." = "On" to "Off" or vice versa may be larger or smaller depending on how different the measured DC SIC is with "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." = "On", compared to what SIC values are there with "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." = "Off". The only way I see to turn the overall speaker curve (including the cab side SIC values and the amp side reacting transformer values) completely "Off" is to turn off power amp modelling, tho one can "quazi disable" the SIC aspects of the overall speaker curve by selecting the "Resistive Load" generic curve with "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." = "Off", or by custom editing all the overall speaker curve controls to get the overall speaker curve graph line as flat as possible with "Auto Dyna Cab Imp." = "Off". (doing this results in a dramatic changes in my presets - I only use resistive load when routing output (with power amp modelling on) through my hi-headroom tube power amps with lowish coloration + real cabs which generate their own interactive effect automatically - I might also consider using resistive load if I know SIC values were baked into the IR I'm using (I'd still want the reacting transformer values in the overall speaker curve for that scenario)).
Click to expand...
I get what you're saying, but to my thinking (and I might be wrong) there is no difference between Auto SIC off and the legacy IR behavior.

In both cases (Off or legacy), you either get the default from the Amp or you select which you want.

That's really what I meant when asking about hearing a difference (DC + user selected SIC vs Legacy + user selected SIC).

Anyway, thanks for providing a detailed response.
 
I am a new FM3 user and I spent exactly 1 day with 6.02. To me the Dyna-Cabs do sound crisper and more hi-fi than the legacy cabs. This is the first time in years (Helix for 7 years) that I don't feel the need to run one side into a tube amp return and the other to PA. I am totally happy with PA and FRFR only.
 
unix-guy said:
I get what you're saying, but to my thinking (and I might be wrong) there is no difference between Auto SIC off and the legacy IR behavior.

In both cases (Off or legacy), you either get the default from the Amp or you select which you want.

That's really what I meant when asking about hearing a difference (DC + user selected SIC vs Legacy + user selected SIC).

Anyway, thanks for providing a detailed response.
Click to expand...
yes - I guess I answered in a long winded way (as usual lol!) - "Off" in DC behaves like
legacy in terms of the Speaker curve / SIC. The differences heard between DC and legacy with auto=off, would be just related to what was shot and how for the selected DC IR(s), vs what was shot and how for the selected Legacy/3rd pty IR(s).
 
Is there anything magical about having an exact match of speaker impedance curve and IR from the same speaker vs having them measured from two different speakers of the same type/model?
 
giantslayer said:
Is there anything magical about having an exact match of speaker impedance curve and IR from the same speaker vs having them measured from two different speakers of the same type/model?
Click to expand...
The simulation just behaves more accurately, as if the cab was connected to the amp.

Obviously you can set the impedance curve to whatever you prefer instead.
 
giantslayer said:
Is there anything magical about having an exact match of speaker impedance curve and IR from the same speaker vs having them measured from two different speakers of the same type/model?
Click to expand...
I think your asking 2 different things:
  • Is an exact SiC match somehow magical?
    • I'd say more accurate, but only magical in the sense that it better represents a a real life amp/cab combination that a given playe may find subjectively "magical".

  • How different would 2 SiC measurements taken from two speakers of same make / models be?
    • I'd guess there could be a little variation between speaker instances, but currently we can only have one overall speaker curve per amp block so if you wanted that level of accuracy you'd have to average them or use multiple amp / cab blocks. Imo, trying to further the SiC accuracy this way is not worth the effort given the hair differences it would probably make - 1 curve per amp/cab combo ad we have now makes practical sense (And someone will probably say "what about multiple differing cabs connected to the same amp eh!?" - to that I would say trying to satisfy that would make it all just too complicated for where things are at today).
 
Last edited:
giantslayer said:
Is there anything magical about having an exact match of speaker impedance curve and IR from the same speaker vs having them measured from two different speakers of the same type/model?
Click to expand...

It probably won't be all that different between different examples of the same cab. You're talking about manufacturing tolerances at that point. Maybe cabs/speakers use crazy loose tolerances that would make it different, but I'm under the impression that's not really the case.

But...it is different for different cabs, however subtly. So, for example, greenbacks in a 2x12 vox cab, greenbacks in a 2x12 marshall "bluesbreaker" cab, greenbacks in a 4x12 TV cab, and a bare greenback on a test bench will all be different. That's true both for impedance curves (and even the nominal impedance value if you change the number of speakers or how they're wired) and the IRs.

It's a rather complex thing, owing at least partially to the fact that guitar amp power sections are very far from being ideal amplifiers. The load significantly changes the response of the amp because the damping factor of the amp is far too low for them to be "right" in a pure, objective sense.

I do think that the SiC, based on what I know about other modelers, is probably one of the big reasons I prefer Fractal. But as far as "magic"...no. It's all just preferences and math as far as I'm concerned. I do have strong preferences. But, they're preferences, not magic.
 
unix-guy said:
Yes, the whole Fractal paradigm is built on accuracy, and it's excellent at that... But not everyone cares about that. I've never played most of the amps, cabinets, effects, etc in the box. What I care about is can I get a sound and a feel that I like.
Click to expand...
I think that is pretty much everyones primary care/goal. I think the more anyone learns the tools of this box which are quit vast, the easier it is to get to this goal. I admit to not knowing/caring much about half of them, myself. It is like going to the doctor and saying you just want to feel better. Well don’t we all? None of us want to hear about how B12 is metabolized on a molecular level to fix this widget illness, we just want to feel better. If we knew, we’d know!

Which brings me around to the point of how dismissive many guitar players can be over a particular piece of gear, or in this case, a feature. It either sounds good or it doesn’t. If it doesnt, I think very few of us ask why, myself included. We just go on to the next noise maker. Meanwhile, biasing the amp a little hotter or colder, changing a tube type, using heavier strings or a million other things may have gotten us right where we wanted to be. I guess no one knows until they know?
 
My name is mud said:
To me dynacabs aren’t « better », they sound different. They are more bright and trebly globally. I still use the legacy irs more than dynacabs. For metal music, I prefer the legacy ones, they sound bigger and fuller to me. After a lot of time I’ve found some cool combinations with dynacabs and I like them too now. Sometimes I play with the dyna, sometimes with legacy… yes « different » sound. Depends the song you play. Both are useable
Click to expand...
So from what you said, I'm gathering that you use them more with a clean setup...or dirty, but not full chug?...what sound do you like most with them? I agree that the legacy sounds thicker,...but I have really dark sounds already and I think my chug metal tones are having more bite and some kind of dimensions....but I go back and forth...I would think for live you want more bite, but for recording, whatever works at the moment is best....good to have good options...
 
With four channels X four slots you can do anything you want to. I guess I’m not looking for one specific sound like most people. I’ll try some weird combinations just for kicks. Between Dyna, factory and 3rd party packs I’d hate to think I couldn’t find something cool sounding.
 
Evan Davidson said:
So from what you said, I'm gathering that you use them more with a clean setup...or dirty, but not full chug?...what sound do you like most with them? I agree that the legacy sounds thicker,...but I have really dark sounds already and I think my chug metal tones are having more bite and some kind of dimensions....but I go back and forth...I would think for live you want more bite, but for recording, whatever works at the moment is best....good to have good options...
Click to expand...
I would say it´s the other way around, at least for me.
For recording I use much brighter sound.
For live performance with very loud drummer, you need darker IR with smoother top end, IME.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom