Rex
Dignified but Approachable
How so?A naming convention that includes the mic, mic position, speaker and cab is useful, in my opinion.
How so?A naming convention that includes the mic, mic position, speaker and cab is useful, in my opinion.
I think it’s a combination of what you can fit in the IR name and amount of useful information that actually affects choosing a sound.
People definitely choose with their eyes more than their ears in many aspects of audio.
How so?
I think one problem (as this thread demonstrates) is that the IR name is just a string of characters, and you can't enforce this proposed naming standard, so it would never work.What's not useful about a naming convention that includes the mic, mic position(on / off axis), speaker and cab?
I think one problem (as this thread demonstrates) is that the IR name is just a string of characters, and you can't enforce this proposed naming standard, so it would never work.
If an IR had metadata like an MP3 file, then maybe that sort of thing would be easier...
But, micing a speaker is art. Even the best description of art does a poor job of describing the art.
The best it can do is give you a general starting point.
I get what you’re saying. But small differences in mic position can have a big effect on sound that goes well beyond the average sonic characteristics of a given mic position. By narrowing down the list of IRS to the ones that suit your eyes instead of your ears, you could be passing up IRs that suit you better.Mics, mic positions and speakers have certain sonic characteristics. When you're interested in those specific sonic characteristics, narrowing down the list of choices based on the available attributes can be useful.
I agree that Fractal could have done that. But then THEY would need to decode all of the meanings from the various IR producers AND change the IR name from that designated to it by the creator of that IR. Which also means they would have to have all of that information... Which said IR creators may not provide.You can't enforce a standard naming convention on everyone, but you can use a standard naming convention for a particular product that incorporates 2048 cabs.
I get what you’re saying. But small differences in mic position can have a big effect on sound that goes well beyond the average sonic characteristics of a given mic position.
By narrowing down the list of IRS to the ones that suit your eyes instead of your ears, you could be passing up IRs that suit you better.
I agree that Fractal could have done that. But then THEY would need to decode all of the meanings from the various IR producers AND change the IR name from that designated to it by the creator of that IR.
Which also means they would have to have all of that information... Which said IR creators may not provide.
Not arguing, but I’m curious if someone who likes “off axis” for example has only ever liked IRs labeled as such, and honestly never liked one that was on axis (or some similar situation). Did that label definitely provided them with the sounds they like?Sure, while there are undoubtedly going to be sonic differences extraneous to the on / off axis positioning, if you know you have a preference for on axis positions, you stand a better chance of narrowing down the IR's that are more likely to suit you by offering some indication as to which ones are on / off axis.
Not arguing, but I’m curious if someone who likes “off axis” for example has only ever liked IRs labeled as such, and honestly never liked one that was on axis (or some similar situation). Did that label definitely provided them with the sounds they like?
I’ve definitely been surprised when I blindly scroll through a list of cabs, like one, then look at its description and it’s something I probably wouldn’t have chosen just given the words.
You left out the part where I said why it's likely they don'tAt worst, they don't have to change the names of the IRs in the unit itself. Including an IR addendum with that information is doable.
Most do... Which is why I say "may not" and didn't say "do not".Commercial IR vendors such as Ownhammer provide it in the Docs for their cab packs.
The cabinets and mics used are pretty much a universal part of the labeling, so I'm not really sure you have a valid point.I think there is a conceptual error in this conversation. In my opinion, if you go and "Sample" a real acoustic cabinet there is a reason. The reason is that the Acoustic cabinet has a sound. In this case its a sound of an electric guitar being amplified and sent to that Cabinet, as we know for the last 60 years or so...
The goal is clear- To get THAT sound of THAT cabinet, In which case, why beat around the bush? Tell me what the IR's are.
If you want to sculpt new original digital tones that have nothing to do with the original sounds you are sampling, fine, call them Trump's Wall as far as im concern..
But sampling traditional, well known gear and then not submitting the info under the pretense of "Letting you work with your ears" is counter logical to me, but that's me.
The cabinets and mics used are pretty much a universal part of the labeling, so I'm not really sure you have a valid point.
Your post was about the type of cabinet. I noted that this is usually already part of the label. I'm not sure what's unclear?The whole conversation is about not labelling in a logical way... haven't you been part of the conversation...?
You left out the part where I said why it's likely they don't
Most do... Which is why I say "may not" and didn't say "do not".
To me, it sounds like you really want this information.
I'm sure with a little bit of effort, YOU could create it.
Start a new thread, ask for contributions to the content, consolidate the results. Done
I commented on your specific post, where you mentioned a specific example of a cabinet. Nothing to do with anything else. Please reread my comments relative to the post I responded to.I originally said that the 1A,2A, 2B and so forth are the confusing element and cliff said its intentional. We've been there already,
And without an addendum (as you mentioned after this), they would. Just because the creator of the IR provides the details doesn't mean Fractal doesn't still need to decode that information for each IR...You said:
"THEY would need to decode all of the meanings from the various IR producers AND change the IR name from that designated to it by the creator of that IR."
Which is why I said they don't have to change the names.