"ML Greatest Hits" - 2018 BLACK NOVEMBER PACK!

Front loaded cabs are usually sealed even better than a "regular" guitar cab so I don't think there's a big difference. This may not be scientifically correct but I think when speakers are front-loaded they have a slightly different character to them. They're being advertised as "not being so beamy but spreading the sound better" which I haven't really noticed but there are some things in the mids that I feel are a bit different. Like around 1500hz there's a peak resonance sometimes but not always. I've only had about 6 front loaded cabs at the studio so it's hard to say.

Ported... I've only had bass cabs that are ported so I'm not entirely sure. I tend to much prefer closed back vs open back so punching a hole in a cabinet doesn't sound like a solution to me but I may be wrong. Again, no experience of 4x12s that are ported I think. Someone once said that it's similar to punching a hole in an acoustic guitar, as in it only messes with the focus of the cab. I don't have an opinion on it because I want to study things before forming an opinion. :)

Thanks for the detailed response and let me start by saying these IRs do sound good and I intend to buy them.

Not to go far out on a tangent but please bear with me as I do have a larger point. It’s my understanding that a properly designed ported/bass reflex enclosure is more efficient in terms of SPL per watt due to it’s phase correction of the front and rear speaker waves, flatter in its response due to the port limiting/canceling out the speaker’s resonant peak, and an extended low frequency response thanks to greater amount of air being displaced during excursion compared to a sealed cabinet. All this of course being dependent on the skill of the designer and the choice of speaker around which the design must be based. While I think you are right that there can be midrange interference from the internal enclosure reflections, these can be minimized by, as you also mentioned, not having a perfect square between width and height. The only ported production guitar cabinet I know of is the aptly named 1x12 Theil Mesa cabinet.

I bring this up because it seems to me that most guitar speaker enclosures are not well designed for any particular speaker or objective beyond the better damped and faster transient response of a closed cabinet. So, when we talk about a particular guitar speaker’s characteristics, they are only partially known to us, why? Because how much of what we are hearing is the speaker’s inherent characteristics, vs how much is the cabinet and it’s physical limitations of internal volume, material choice/construction, dampening material or total lack of, bracing, whether or not the cabinet is coupling/sitting directly on the floor or another cabinet, etc?

This is a long way to explain that I have been out of touch with the guitar cabinet world as I gave up long ago trying to figure out which guitar speakers “sound best” because beyond more or less breakup, I could never really tell whether what I was hearing was the speaker or the effects of a set cabinet design and it’s construction, like a slanted Marshall 4x12, and different speakers fighting more or less against that same basic design. Why do I make this point here?

I think this is a major source of fatigue as I wade through the many IRs: when a cabinet sounds “good” it almost seems like an accident, never mind whether the IR is done well. There are lots of different spec models of the same speakers, V30’s for instance, then we have the different wattages, magnet compositions and place of manufacture. But are any of these cabinets even designed around the resonant peaks and Theil small parameters of the V30 models? I doubt it as a big company like Marshall has not changed its cabinets very much at all for the last 50 years. As an IR producer, it certainly is not your fault if a speaker cabinet is not designed well, but it would go a long way in explaining why it’s so hard to find an IR we like. If we think we like a particular speaker and an amp company puts one in their cabinets, we might buy it. But then, it doesn’t sound like the last cabinet we had with V30’s in it, why? Were they Chinese? Was the cabinet made out of heavy birch ply with tight joinery? Was it the particular cloth grill? The variables are too many as are their interactions. I put off using the cabinet block in my Axe 2 for these reasons but now jumped in with both feet on the 3, what have I done?! It certainly is a long and deep rabbit hole..:)
 
Last edited:
Guitar gear in general has many "design flaws" that have become the industry standard because that's "the sound we know" as the way guitars should sound. F.ex. a Gibson Les Paul and Fender Strat both are still the most common guitars you'll find while both have many things that would be done differently if making a "perfectly working instrument". I guess it's fair to say both are really bad at staying in tune for example. Wood materials used were just what was easy to get around that time. Same goes for pretty much all the parts. I doubt they chose to use mahogany, maple or rosewood because of their tonal characters. Even the original designers have said that they started using rosewood fingerboards because they liked how it looked.

I actually sold my 1x12 Mesa Thiele frontloaded a few months back. There will be no pack of it and that may tell you my opinion on the sound. I did keep the EV speaker just in case I ever need it. What I'm getting at here is that all of the "perfect imperfections" have been a part of guitar cabinet design for over 50 years now. If you design a speaker that's scientifically perfect... who knows what you'll get. Maybe it'll sound awesome. Maybe it'll be 100% perfect in theory, yet the sound is weird because it's different in a bad way. I think it's worth exploring. Personally I would be much more interested in creating a cabinet with intended harmonic resonances rather than trying to use resonances that cancel each other out.

I use this theory when tuning drums at the studio. For example my band plays in two tunings: C and A. That is not by accident. C and A create a very pleasing harmony and out drums are all tuned in a fitting key. Our snare top head is a C and the bottom head is an A I believe. That's really the best way to make drums sound really nice. I think it would be really interesting to try a cabinet where all three dimensions are designed so that the resonances work great together. For example a C and an A and then a fifth for either of the two for the last dimension (that would mean G or E). Having resonances for E, A and C would be pretty cool since they're probably the most common guitar notes... not if the resonance interference sound bad then this all falls apart. :D Obviously it's a little bit more complicated than that but still I'd rather have a cabinet with a good resonance than something that scientifically resonates as little as possible. Once again, might make no difference at all but I think it would be a really interesting experiment.
 
As geeky as you think I was before... I really outdid myself this time. I will be using the metric system for these measurements because everyone should use it anyways. ;) If we were to design a guitar cabinet with these resonances: E, A and C (essentially an A minor chord) the measures for those resonances would be: 329mm (C) x 522mm (E) x 391mm (A). That's the size of the inside cavity of the cabinet which can only fit one speaker so that's a 1x12. If you double the A measure it should still be A, not entirely sure if it works that way but then it would be a 329mm x 522mm x 782mm sized cab. (inside measures once again) 2x12 design.. a 4x12 would be a really tall or wide cab at 329 x 1044 x 782. Not sure if any existing cab gets close to these, you may want to add two times 25mm for each measure for the wood thickness on all sides. Now I'm thinking the minor chord might not be the best way to go. A nine chord would be a more pleasant sound and it's not major nor minor.
 
Well... A 9 is major.

You might be thinking of a sus2 or add9 (no 3).
Yup, meant adding a B instead of C. B being the add9 for A.

Hmm... after some investigation it looks like at least Mesa 4x12 Oversize is accidentally or purposefully made so that it's not resonating at any note so it's trying to avoid resonances. Hmm... maybe we're on to something here.
 
Continuing this monologue! So, I'm thinking a perfect intentional resonance would be a 2x12 that's enclosure is 349mm deep (actually not that far from a Zilla Fatboy) and that's a higher B note than the height of 521mm that's the E note (actually not that far from a Zilla Studio Pro) and an even lower A from a width of 782mm that'll be the A note which is an unusually wide 2x12. So... should I start manufacturing these without testing? Why not!

This is what it would look like:


EDIT: Holy shizniz.. those are really close to the Orange 2x12 dimensions...
 
Thanks for all the info and thoughts. Yes I’m aware of the drum tuning issues you mention and there is definitely something to it. However, drums are a purely acoustic phenomenon and their size and construction are the limiting factors, whereas a speaker cabinet must deal with acoustics and electric transfer of energy.

And as such there are fewer, but still very limiting factors. I think shooting for a flat response is still a good thing, even with guitar cabinets. Otherwise, only music with the right pitches or timbre will sound best with them. Obviously that approach would not work with studio monitors, nor any consumer systems. Maybe there is something in between guitar and hifi speakers that hasn’t been tried yet.

My previous post was meant to highlight the problematic relationship of cabinets which are not properly designed around the speakers put in them. I would love to hear a guitar speaker design which was more neutral in its tonality, such that it’s character came more from a kind of even breakup/distortion across the broadest possible spectrum, then design a cabinet around that speaker. Of course the interplay between the output section and any speaker plugged into it will have a large impact on its tonality, regardless of its design goals. Unless someone were to design a speaker and an output stage to work specifically together.

Otherwise, there are too many speakers and not enough cabinets designed properly for them for me to know what I’m hearing and why. I much prefer having comprehensive control over shaping my tone inside the Axe or an actual amp than working against a speaker which is in a cabinet that wasn’t designed for it. I would not liken that to the wood of a guitar as wood is all they had to work with in the beginning. I have a carbon fiber guitar and it sounds good, but it is tonally dark as compared to a similar scaled wooden instrument. Speakers and their cabinet designs we have much more control over than a single predominate piece of physical material like mahogany. Speaker breakup seems pretty unique and it would be good to try and emphasize the flattering parts of it and minimize the rest through a comprehensive design approach.

PS: I tried the Theil Mesas and didn’t like them either. My cabinets are designed, ported and tuned around Eminence Delta Pro12As, which are a PA speaker and designed not to break up much at all. They are flat down to 70 and slope down fairly steep after. I play 7 string through them and my bass player plays 5 string through the exact same cabinets and they are tight, loud and clear...
 
Thanks for all the info and thoughts. Yes I’m aware of the drum tuning issues you mention and there is definitely something to it. However, drums are a purely acoustic phenomenon and their size and construction are the limiting factors, whereas a speaker cabinet must deal with acoustics and electric transfer of energy.

And as such there are fewer, but still very limiting factors. I think shooting for a flat response is still a good thing, even with guitar cabinets. Otherwise, only music with the right pitches or timbre will sound best with them. Obviously that approach would not work with studio monitors, nor any consumer systems. Maybe there is something in between guitar and hifi speakers that hasn’t been tried yet.

My previous post was meant to highlight the problematic relationship of cabinets which are not properly designed around the speakers put in them. I would love to hear a guitar speaker design which was more neutral in its tonality, such that it’s character came more from a kind of even breakup/distortion across the broadest possible spectrum, then design a cabinet around that speaker. Of course the interplay between the output section and any speaker plugged into it will have a large impact on its tonality, regardless of its design goals. Unless someone were to design a speaker and an output stage to work specifically together.

Otherwise, there are too many speakers and not enough cabinets designed properly for them for me to know what I’m hearing and why. I much prefer having comprehensive control over shaping my tone inside the Axe or an actual amp than working against a speaker which is in a cabinet that wasn’t designed for it. I would not liken that to the wood of a guitar as wood is all they had to work with in the beginning. I have a carbon fiber guitar and it sounds good, but it is tonally dark as compared to a similar scaled wooden instrument. Speakers and their cabinet designs we have much more control over than a single predominate piece of physical material like mahogany. Speaker breakup seems pretty unique and it would be good to try and emphasize the flattering parts of it and minimize the rest through a comprehensive design approach.

PS: I tried the Theil Mesas and didn’t like them either. My cabinets are designed, ported and tuned around Eminence Delta Pro12As, which are a PA speaker and designed not to break up much at all. They are flat down to 70 and slope down fairly steep after. I play 7 string through them and my bass player plays 5 string through the exact same cabinets and they are tight, loud and clear...
If you start giving guitar speakers more range I'm afraid they're going to sting your ear really bad. Probably if guitar distortion was more full range in the 50s already, I think people would be okay with it. Or maybe the limited range of those vintage speakers was the real magic why people fell in love with the electric guitar. Maybe it's not so popular now that Celestion isn't making speakers that sound that great anymore? A lot of maybies. Even the best V30s that I can find are as old as they come with a very limited range. :)
 
Honestly want to try this but too many times I buy and am disappointed. would love a money back guarantee...
That's not possible with digital products that are not protected with a license. Hmm... I get a lot of feedback but I can definitely say that I've never ever ever ever received a message from someone being so disappointed that they want they money back. Also the pack has a -40% discount right now.
 
If you start giving guitar speakers more range I'm afraid they're going to sting your ear really bad. Probably if guitar distortion was more full range in the 50s already, I think people would be okay with it. Or maybe the limited range of those vintage speakers was the real magic why people fell in love with the electric guitar. Maybe it's not so popular now that Celestion isn't making speakers that sound that great anymore? A lot of maybies. Even the best V30s that I can find are as old as they come with a very limited range. :)

Yes, I know what you mean, but even the best single transducer 12” speakers are only capable of about 7k. And again, I’d rather start with as full a spectrum speaker as possible, drive it to the level of breakup and compression that sounds best in an enclosure well designed for it to show its true capacity, then shape the tone in the Amp/Axe and limit what is sent to it, which is what we all used to doing in the Axe already..:)
 
Yes, I know what you mean, but even the best single transducer 12” speakers are only capable of about 7k. And again, I’d rather start with as full a spectrum speaker as possible, drive it to the level of breakup and compression that sounds best in an enclosure well designed for it to show its true capacity, then shape the tone in the Amp/Axe and limit what is sent to it, which is what we all used to doing in the Axe already..:)
Could sound interesting. I feel like you'll be using a lot of high cut to get it where it needs to be and it'll not sound as natural as a real speaker doing that high cut naturally. I might be completely wrong but I would expect a Palmer or Redbox type high end if you need to cut the highs. Might sound cool and awesome though!
 
That's not possible with digital products that are not protected with a license. Hmm... I get a lot of feedback but I can definitely say that I've never ever ever ever received a message from someone being so disappointed that they want they money back. Also the pack has a -40% discount right now.
Yeah but I wasn’t enamored with your best ir in the world so ya know. Could be I’m less interested in ‘in the mix’ vs solo playing.
 
ML IR's are extremely rich in mids making them really good in the mix. I'm an audio engineer, not a bedroom guitarist. Still my emphasis is creating IR's that sound amazing in the mix but also jaw dropping soloed. I think I've posted enough examples throughout the years and I never use ANY post EQ or post processing on guitars. Here's an example with this pack:



That's guitar -> Friedman BE with default settings -> Mikko's Cab and absolutely nothing else.

It should be really easy to get amazing results with my IR's. Just understand that if you have a preset that you've tweaked to death with some other IR, you need to start with a fresh preset if you change to my IR's. F.ex. most people will boost middles when using other manufacturers IR's since they are often scooped because of an unclean capture. Then when they use my IR's they'll have too much mids when in reality my IR's are 100% natural, raw and unprocessed and they've tweaked the preset to compensate for a lacking IR. (not saying every IR out there that isn't mine but there are many of them to look out for)
 
I always seem to come back to the ML 4x12 Djent IR... Well, I'm a Djent kid. :D Pretty much stock 5153 blue 50W settings and the IR + OD808 in front of the amp.
 
I always seem to come back to the ML 4x12 Djent IR... Well, I'm a Djent kid. :D Pretty much stock 5153 blue 50W settings and the IR + OD808 in front of the amp.

Nothing wrong with that! :) Sounds great and it's got more cut than the other Mesa cabs I've done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTS
Back
Top Bottom