Dyna-cab on FM3?

shanesiegle said:
I agree, the new cab thing looks amazing but I doubt it’s a huge improvement over my favorite York ir’s sonically. It looks to be just easier to fine tune what you want.
Click to expand...
Um… the sound is really good. I have several vendor’s IRs in my user cabs, including York’s, and I like his IRs, and these are at least as good. I don’t think Cliff is trying to hurt the 3rd-party vendor’s sales, he’s trying to improve the entire technology and has done it. And he’s making the technology available to the vendors who want to improve their offerings. It’s a win-win all the way around and a huge win for us.
 
Greg Ferguson said:
I checked the CPU % difference between the “Legacy” and “Dyna-Cab” types in the FX3 Cab block, and it’s 3% whether there’s 1 or 3 slots in use. If two cab blocks are running it should only be 6%. I don’t consider that “significant”.

Whether that will scale linearly on the FM9 is unknown but it has a DSP allocated to the Cab blocks. The FM3 runs the Cab block in an FIR accelerator when the CPU % isn’t available, so it might see 3%, or it might be something higher, Fractal will eventually tell us.
Click to expand...

I think it's quite reasonble to assume it will have a bigger cpu impact on the FM3.

Some people where expecting that these new Cabs would translate in some CPU saving (like the stuff in Line 6 ), but to me it was quiet obvious from the start when the new Cabs where first described that this is an all new "game" (meaning, superior algorithms in comparsion with the Line 6 offering).

I didn't expect any less form Fractal.Of course that comes with a cost, and that cost being more CPU usage.

For Axe III users it's meaningless given the raw power of those units, for us here on Fm3 world...not so much.

Like i said, i belive we will see these new Cabs in some capacity ported to the FM3. Maybe if you use just one cab it's feasible?

From the videos i've seen these Cabs sound as good as the best IR's out there (wich makes total sense). The real selling point (of course great sounding quality is a given) is mainly the ease of use without geting into the usual IR rabbit hole.

If it's not possible to port it...well, i have to be honest and t say it wouldn't bother me terribly (altough i have that feeeling it will be ported).

Whille i may be a minority, i actually enjoy the Fractal stock IR's on the Fm3 (i bought mine used and it came loaded with the Wellspring pack, sounds so good!). Most of the times i just match the amp with it's respective cab, cab 1 with a 57 and the second one with a 121. Done! It works like a charm 95% of the time.

I do get lost tweaking effects tough, but the thing i like most on the FM3 is just how quick and easy is to get good amp tones (i hated the amp modeling on the Helix...).

Anyway, soon we should know how this will work on the Fm3.
 
skolacki said:
In the end, it’s still just IR’s. Or am I wrong?
Click to expand...
Traditional IRs are used as the basis, yes, but that seems like an attempt to be dismissive because "they're just IRs". Similarly, sand is used to make bricks, so by the same thinking bricks can't be better or more useful?

Cliff's been working on this for a while, and to my ear, it's the same type of improvement as Cygnus and its follow-alongs. It's something to pay attention to.
 
Gianluca Caloini said:
hello everyone, I wanted to know from someone, if the Dyna-cab will ever arrive on fm3?

sorry for my bad english 😅
Click to expand...
This is just my personal opinion/guess, but I wouldn't count on it. At least not anytime soon. I think the main "hurdle" may be the very large difference in CPU performance between AFX III and FM3 (I own both of these units, so I know what I'm talking about). Additionally, I find it generally premature to ask this question, given that the firmware for the AFX III itself is still in beta.
 
I could see the FM3 having two slots, with the choice of Legacy or Dyna-Cab for each, as many use standard IR's for acoustic sims etc, so IMO it would be important to have both cab slots configurable differently.

As a long term Two Notes user with decades of pro studio experience, I love this real world inspired work flow while hoping that eventually the virtual mic locker will be fully stocked with at minimum the following...

  1. Neumann U87 or U67
  2. Royer R121
  3. Shure SM57 or SM7
  4. Sennheiser MD421
  5. Sennheiser MD409
  6. Beyerdynamic M160

This virtual Mic Locker is enough to get just about anything you need from any cab/speaker IME.
 
Last edited:
Greg Ferguson said:
Um… the sound is really good. I have several vendor’s IRs in my user cabs, including York’s, and I like his IRs, and these are at least as good. I don’t think Cliff is trying to hurt the 3rd-party vendor’s sales, he’s trying to improve the entire technology and has done it. And he’s making the technology available to the vendors who want to improve their offerings. It’s a win-win all the way around and a huge win for us.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t implying it doesn’t sound great I was just saying my York IR’s sound great and thought these would be similar albeit a lot easier to tweak etc. I’m hoping we get it to the fm3 at some point since it seems like it’s cool and the fx3 is way more than I need.
 
Greg Ferguson said:
Traditional IRs are used as the basis, yes, but that seems like an attempt to be dismissive because "they're just IRs". Similarly, sand is used to make bricks, so by the same thinking bricks can't be better or more useful?
Click to expand...

I wasn’t attempting to be dismissive.
 
skolacki said:
I’m just wondering if a Dynacab IR could be exported as a single IR that could run on anything that uses IR’s. Including the FM3. 2-3% isn’t too bad. Depends on how big an improvement it is over what we have now.
Click to expand...
If you found a setting you liked with dynacab, you could definitely run a frequency sweep through the cab block and into a DAW, and then convolve it into a single IR just as you would with any other source, but you would obviously lose the ability to "dyna the cab", as it were.

Dyna would definitely be a great option to have on the FM3, especially for recording, but thankfully finding a kickass IR isn't too difficult to begin with.
 
Last edited:
kywabunga said:
Dyna would definitely be a great option to have on the FM3, especially for recording, but thankfully finding a kickass IR isn't too difficult to begin with.
Click to expand...
this! 100% agree. Cool toy for recording, but we always have 2x IR option and there are plenty of great IRs out there
 
skolacki said:
I’m just wondering if a Dynacab IR could be exported as a single IR that could run on anything that uses IR’s. Including the FM3. 2-3% isn’t too bad. Depends on how big an improvement it is over what we have now.
Click to expand...
Dynacab isn't a single IR, it'a a collection of hundreds or thousands with an interface that lets you switch between them like you were moving a real mic. So any single mic position in it could be exported as a standalone IR and loaded anywhere else that uses it. But you can't export the whole thing as a single IR.
 
Greg Ferguson said:
Traditional IRs are used as the basis, yes, but that seems like an attempt to be dismissive because "they're just IRs". Similarly, sand is used to make bricks, so by the same thinking bricks can't be better or more useful?

Cliff's been working on this for a while, and to my ear, it's the same type of improvement as Cygnus and its follow-alongs. It's something to pay attention to.
Click to expand...

What is cliff doing that's any different than the newest Line6 built in cabs with mic position selection, or any of the NuralDSP cab IRs that simulate mic position?

It's an intuitive interface guitarists seem to enjoy, and doesn't pigeonhole you into the handleful of mic positions an IR maker chose in order to keep their IR offering from being to large, cumbersome, and confusing. But the same way some people seem to be getting dismissive that "they're just IRs" others seem to be pushing to the other extreme calling it a fundamental sea change.

I feel it's in the middle: It's implementing an interface others have used successfully in the past on the Axe FX to give people more fine tuned control of their cab micing.

If Fractal proposes the standard for how to organize store and load these types of captures and other IR makers and platforms start using it that could be cool, the same way a single IR has become fairly standard industry-wide now. But the other main modellers both have their own formats for this already so I'm not sure how one manages to become the defacto format.
 
IronSean said:
What is cliff doing that's any different than the newest Line6 built in cabs with mic position selection, or any of the NuralDSP cab IRs that simulate mic position?
Click to expand...
As I understand it, Fractal is using longer 2048 point IR's for the Dyna-Cabs (which is considered the minimum length to accurately capture the speaker/cab/mic response), seeing many other OEM's use 1024 point IR's or smaller in their adjustable cab models, as the smaller processing window requires less CPU/FPU to real-time process.

Even more importantly, Fractal is tying the cab and it's actual impedance curve together as desired, which will be a first in the industry AFAIK (seeing that many other OEM's just use a generic impedance curve for everything)!

I'm not 100% sure that all of the above is 100% accurate, but hopefully someone will correct it if it's not!
 
Last edited:
DJD100 said:
As I understand it, Fractal is using longer 2048 point IR's for the Dyna-Cabs (which is considered the minimum length to accurately capture the speaker/cab/mic response), seeing many other OEM's use 1024 point IR's or smaller in their adjustable cab models, as the smaller processing window requires less CPU/FPU to real-time process.

Even more importantly, Fractal is tying the cab and it's actual impedance curve together as desired, which will be a first in the industry AFAIK (seeing that many other OEM's just use a generic impedance curve for everything)!

I'm not 100% sure that all of the above is 100% accurate, but hopefully someone will correct it if it's not!
Click to expand...
It'd be rad to have the cab load with the "correct" impedance curve, but hopefully users will still have the ability to change this setting if they wish.

I no longer use my Fractal in the interests of what sounds "most accurate", just whatever sounds best to my ears. Sometimes that involves doing things differently!
 
kywabunga said:
It'd be rad to have the cab load with the "correct" impedance curve, but hopefully users will still have the ability to change this setting if they wish.

I no longer use my Fractal in the interests of what sounds "most accurate", just whatever sounds best to my ears. Sometimes that involves doing things differently!
Click to expand...
That's why Fractal gives you the options to defeat the Dyna-Cab impedance curve association or use static IR's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom