My Live tone FRFR vs Cabs

Lets just call it SOUND IN A ROOM, it sounds how it sounds, make it sound how you want. Im sure the axe fx can sound like an old amp in a room, though it isnt intended to. (mic'd cab yes we all know). We also know 99.999% of what we hear in the music world are mic'd cabs live or recorded.

I get it, loud beefy , make your heart beat cab pushing air at your legs. I think one can do this still with frfr.
 
DLC86 said:
Sure, if the goal is to reproduce a tone just like you hear it on a record there's no better solution than IRs and FRFR.
But that simply doesn't work for me when playing with a live band in a small environment.
It might work on a big stage where everything goes thru PA and monitors though (which sadly never happens for me these days)
Click to expand...

Found this while browsing another thread.

@AndyOrr posted: iMHO, tube amps always sound better when compared head to head against digital. It is what it is. The place where digital amps and modelers shine, besides portability, is when playing with others. I don’t miss the amp-in-the-room feel when I hear the tone I want at the volume I need for a band setting - which isn’t always possible with a tube amp.
Click to expand...

Definitely no 'one size fits all' in this discussion!
 
Donnie B. said:
Definitely no 'one size fits all' in this discussion!
Click to expand...
That quote adds another variable though, he's comparing a whole amp to modelers and, in that case, I agree with him cuz you can't always push the amp to its sweet spot and that's a compromise regarding tone.
But with a modeler fed to a cab you can lower the volume without losing that sweet spot on the master volume and still retain that (what I like to call) cab-in-the-room feel.
 
DLC86 said:
That quote adds another variable though, he's comparing a whole amp to modelers and, in that case, I agree with him cuz you can't always push the amp to its sweet spot and that's a compromise regarding tone.
But with a modeler fed to a cab you can lower the volume without losing that sweet spot on the master volume and still retain that (what I like to call) cab-in-the-room feel.
Click to expand...

This gets back to my earlier point. After at least two solid years of reading AITR posts/debates/arguments I've never seen a real general consensus coming through where lots can agree.

For example:

ethomas1013 said:
It's really simple. And it has been explained many times in a way that nearly everyone agrees upon.
Click to expand...

That statement didn't hold up for very long.
And when I say agree I'm not talking about the patently obvious stuff.

IMO:

AITR =
giphy.gif
 
So after 7 years now with the Axe-FX II, and seeing this topic come up often here, and on other forums, my suggestion is quite simple.

Stop comparing and scrutinizing.

If you want to "feel the warmth" of that particular speaker, then use the Axe-FX or FM3 out to a Flat Response power amp, into that speaker / cab.

There is no other way.

Impulse Responses are made from a mic at a set position on speaker, and is influenced by all the gear used to capture it, while your ears and body in a room with that same speaker is not even remotely the same thing, and here is where the problems start because a lot of people simply don't understand this prior to getting into what is currently the way modeling is done.

Stop Comparing and Scrutinizing. Trust in the fact that Cliff has meticulously measured and modeled the amps to accurately represent the real thing (and this is key, because the amp he modeled is not the same one in your living room, maybe different components/build/tubes/bias, etc even though it's the same build and make) and treat it like a tool to dial in a great tone and spend your time playing it.
 
Donnie B. said:
This gets back to my earlier point. After at least two solid years of reading AITR posts/debates/arguments I've never seen a real general consensus coming through where lots can agree.

For example:



That statement didn't hold up for very long.
And when I say agree I'm not talking about the patently obvious stuff.

IMO:

AITR =
giphy.gif
Click to expand...
There might be no general consensus on "what's better" cuz that's just legitimate personal preference, not on the fact that they're two different things.

What's usually called "amp in the room" is actually referred to hearing a guitar cab directly, the sound produced by guitar speakers being captured by your ears.
Guitar cab -> ears
That's quite different than: Guitar cab -> mic -> preamp -> PA/FRFR speaker

And it's not just a matter of EQ, there are also other factors like:
  • different dispersion pattern (which causes different reflections in the room)
  • comb filtering caused by the mic position
  • comb filtering caused by cabs with more than one speaker
  • proximity effect of the mic
  • far-field vs near-field response
  • and so on..
That's what @ethomas1013 was probably referring to
 
DLC86 said:
What's usually called "amp in the room" is actually referred to hearing a guitar cab directly, the sound produced by guitar speakers being captured by your ears.
Guitar cab -> ears
That's quite different than: Guitar cab -> mic -> preamp -> PA/FRFR speaker
Click to expand...

Which one(s) are 'AITR'?

1) guitar > amp > Guitar Speaker Cab
2) guitar > EQ > amp > GSC
3) guitar > amp > EQ in loop > GSC
4) guitar > modeler > amp fx rtn > GSC
5) guitar > modeler > IR > amp fx rtn > passive FRFR
 
Donnie B. said:
That statement didn't hold up for very long.
Click to expand...

I can't help it I'm right and everyone else is wrong!

Its so simple. Play and amp and then play a modeler through FRFR. They are not, and do not, sound the same. I've been doing that for the last hour. I can't help it that so many people just don't get it.
 
Donnie B. said:
Which one(s) are 'AITR'?

1) guitar > amp > Guitar Speaker Cab
2) guitar > EQ > amp > GSC
3) guitar > amp > EQ in loop > GSC
4) guitar > modeler > amp fx rtn > GSC
5) guitar > modeler > IR > amp fx rtn > passive FRFR
Click to expand...
That's exactly why I think it's more appropriate to call it "cab in the room", and by this definition I'd say 1-4.

It's not having an amp in your room that magically produces what people call AITR, cuz if you connect it to a load box or to an FRFR speaker you simply don't get that.
It's the cab.
 
Donnie B. said:
Which one(s) are 'AITR'?

1) guitar > amp > Guitar Speaker Cab
2) guitar > EQ > amp > GSC
3) guitar > amp > EQ in loop > GSC
4) guitar > modeler > amp fx rtn > GSC
5) guitar > modeler > IR > amp fx rtn > passive FRFR
Click to expand...


Ok, I'll play.

1-3 are all the same. Adding EQ is like adding any effect or turning the BMT control of the amp (if it has them) which are just another method of EQ. 2 and 3 should be eliminated from the discussion.

4 is also the same as #1. All you have done is change the preamp. So, technically, it's the same as 1, just with a different (modeled) preamp.

5 is the same as a powered FRFR. All you have done is replace the power amp of a powered FRFR with the power amp of an amp.

After eliminating 2-4, which are all redundant, we're left with 1 and 5.

#5, is an IR (a mic'd cab) played back through a FRFR monitor (which is vasty different than a guitar speaker). It does not matter that we used the power amp from an amp (presumably a tube amp?) with a passive FRFR. All we have done is substitute the powered portion of a powered FRFR with a different power amp.

#1 sounds like an amp sitting right next to me.

#5 sounds like I moved my amp into another room, mic'd it up, and I'm listening to my mic'd amp through a studio monitor.
 
I don't think there are vastly different opinions on that at all. In fact, I would say that is the one thing that is the most obvious.

Of course the guitar speaker does not have a tweeter. So the frequency response of a guitar speaker is rather limited compared to a full range monitor. The frequency range of a Celestion G-12M is 75 - 5000 Hz.

https://celestion.com/product/24/heritage_series_g12m/

The frequency range of the Atomic CLR is 70 - 18,000 Hz

https://atomicamps.com/clr-reference-frfr-monitors/

But that doesn't mean that there isn't content in a guitar speaker above 5k. There is, but it drops off severely.

Even if I set the High Cut in the cab block to 5000 Hz there's still a difference. Most if the IR's in the AxeFX have a microphone baked into the IR which changes the frequency response. An IR made with an SM57 changes the response compared to what our ears hear directly from the speaker. The SM57 colors the tone, in a way that I happen to not prefer, but it does emphasize frequencies that help the guitar cut through in the mix. I don't necessarily want to hear that when I'm playing by myself. So, choosing another IR with a different mic that I find more pleasing is always an option. There's also some phase cancellation in a lot of IR's. Some more obvious than others.

And I'm really not trying to convert you or convince you. But I do disagree with the notion that it's all a MacGuffin or that it's not real. There is a real difference - at least to my ears. But not everyone cares. And on the flip side some obsess about tying to make an IR/FRFR combination sound exactly like their "amp in the room". I gave up trying to do that a long time ago, but I still love amps and I still use them as the measuring stick to compare to my modeled/FRFR tones.
 
Last edited:
ethomas1013 said:
I would say that is the one thing that is the most obvious.

The frequency range of a Celestion G-12M is 75 - 5000 Hz.

The frequency range of the Atomic CLR is 70 - 18,000 Hz
Click to expand...

What happens here:

1. guitar > Mark V > G12M
2. guitar > Fractal Mark V > G12M IR > CLR
3. guitar > Mark V > IR loader G12M > CLR
4. guitar > Fractal Mark V > amp fx return > G12M

Which ones would give AITR.
 
Last edited:
Well my take is : amp/ cab/ modeler /bias on my iphone /300 mesa boogie stacks, /200 engl stacks,/ my behringer fake pod/--

I still cant sound or play like John Petrucci or Tony Macalpine-insert favs here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
symphx said:
Well my take is : amp/ cab/ modeler /bias on my iphone /300 mesa boogie stacks, /200 engl stacks,/ my behringer fake pod/--

I still cant sound or play like John Petrucci or Tony Macalpine-insert favs here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

Yup! I’m still waiting for a firmware update with a Talent Block!
 
Donnie B. said:
What happens here:

1. guitar > Mark V > G12M
2. guitar > Fractal Mark V > G12M IR > CLR
3. guitar > Mark V > IR loader G12M > CLR
4. guitar > Fractal Mark V > amp fx return > G12M

Which ones would give AITR.
Click to expand...

picard-riker-double-facepalm.jpg


Sigh.... More straw men for me to knock down?

Either you are totally clueless, or a troll.

I'm leaning towards clueless.

I'm out.
 
Donnie B. said:
What happens here:

1. guitar > Mark V > G12M
2. guitar > Fractal Mark V > G12M IR > CLR
3. guitar > Mark V > IR loader G12M > CLR
4. guitar > Fractal Mark V > amp fx return > G12M

Which ones would give AITR.
Click to expand...

You are confusing a definition with personal preference.

AITR, or Cab in the room, has always referred to the sound coming directly from a traditional guitar amplifier + speaker cab. There is consensus on that.

That’s the definition. There is no room for interpretation or discussion here. It’s not relevant what people personally use or prefer.

When a modeler is connected to a power amp, which is connected to a traditional speaker cab, and you’re listening to that speaker directly, then that’s also an Amp/Cab in the room, because the modeler is acting as the amp.

FRFR (CLR, studio monitors) etc. is never Amp/Cab in the room, because it amplifies the sound of a mic’d speaker cab. Even when using far-field IRs, it’s still not the same as Amp/Cab in the room for several reasons.

So, when listening to the speaker:
1 = AITR
2 = not AITR
3 = not AITR
4 = AITR

That’s not debatable.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom