Need your ears mates!

Which of these IR's pleased your ears the most?

  • Total voters
    87
Clark, RE the OH version of the cab, try (SM57 BM 1 @ -3 dB) + (R121 BM 1 @ -9 dB) for the OH Mesa V32 cab. It may suit you, it may not, but that's what I used to get the guitar tone in the first track in the mp3 player on my homepage "Kevin Rowe - KsE Cover". I don't entirely remember, but I don't think I did too much if any post EQ on the guitars, maybe a little tiny boost in the air band on the whole mix, and at that it was just thrown together rather quickly. In my personal opinion, things get really muddy really fast when too many mics are stacked in. Kind of like the Sneap way of thinking, except he stops at thinking any more than 1 mic is too much, IIRC. I'm preferable to 2-4 mics, with 2-3 usually finding me the results I want. Without saying too much, using the "Vintage" voicing is going to exacerbate this concept very quickly, and I'd HIGHLY recommend sticking to the Modern if your application is recording. I did what I did with Vintage more for live usage...
 
Yeah I was kind of wondering what exactly you were doing with the Mesa IRs because I would havee to make pretty poor choices on my high gain patches to get them to sound that muddy and gross.

A lesser person would think you were, perhaps, making mixes that favored your IRs... but you wouldn't stoop that low... would you now?
 
I had a listen before checking the answers, F is definitely my favourite as its nice and open sounding. My second choice would be A, as it sounds so uber processed that it really works for this kind of riff, and remains nicely separated from the bass guitar.
 
Speculum Speculorum said:
Yeah I was kind of wondering what exactly you were doing with the Mesa IRs because I would havee to make pretty poor choices on my high gain patches to get them to sound that muddy and gross.

A lesser person would think you were, perhaps, making mixes that favored your IRs... but you wouldn't stoop that low... would you now?
Click to expand...

he made the mixes before he made his IR
 
Here's are pictures of some of the spectrums:

Clark%20Kent%20Mixes.jpg


Now they "look" pretty similar but it's all the nuances here and there that make the world of difference. Just to make it clear once again. That even drop from 4kHz further makes these IR's pleasant on high volumes through all range of speakers/monitors. I don't mean that everything without this drop will sound terrible on high volumes. They just might sound terrible through certain speakers. There are two ways of avoiding this effect and one is high cutting all the information up there or finding this kind of IRs. I don't want to cut the highs and make it sound unnatural.
 
Thank you for this advice.
Have you mixed the two cabs in Lab Cab-for:" SM57@-3 db and R121-BM1 @-9db"?
I recently purchased your irs Mesa Boogie, they are very very good.
Thank you in advance;)
ownhammer said:
Clark, RE the OH version of the cab, try (SM57 BM 1 @ -3 dB) + (R121 BM 1 @ -9 dB) for the OH Mesa V32 cab. It may suit you, it may not, but that's what I used to get the guitar tone in the first track in the mp3 player on my homepage "Kevin Rowe - KsE Cover". I don't entirely remember, but I don't think I did too much if any post EQ on the guitars, maybe a little tiny boost in the air band on the whole mix, and at that it was just thrown together rather quickly. In my personal opinion, things get really muddy really fast when too many mics are stacked in. Kind of like the Sneap way of thinking, except he stops at thinking any more than 1 mic is too much, IIRC. I'm preferable to 2-4 mics, with 2-3 usually finding me the results I want. Without saying too much, using the "Vintage" voicing is going to exacerbate this concept very quickly, and I'd HIGHLY recommend sticking to the Modern if your application is recording. I did what I did with Vintage more for live usage...
Click to expand...
 
I voted A for this heavier style, it's ever so slightly more honky than C which would be my favourite for less heavy styles, along with F for alightly more bite. I would think some styles would even benefit from H being more nasal than the others.


C sounds the most neutral and pleasing to me.

It is now living in my Axe-FX. I will compare it later.

I do have this feeling that A, C, and F are so close that some EQ could make them identical. Just a feeling. Don't mind it.
 
I liked them all for different mix.

Thanks Clark

I liked A best because it blends AND cuts. Has to do both ;)

Have heard a lot of home demo`s that it just sounds like the guitar or vocal stays on top of the rest.
The keys is to make it stand out in the mix, as well as blend in.

All IMHO off course.
 
slashy said:
Thank you for this advice.
Have you mixed the two cabs in Lab Cab-for:" SM57@-3 db and R121-BM1 @-9db"?
I recently purchased your irs Mesa Boogie, they are very very good.
Thank you in advance;)
Click to expand...

You're very welcome! Thanks for the kind words and patronage! :)

RE: Cab Lab, I did that IR mix via parallel sends in the DAW as I used other gear solutions (tube preamp + OH Nebula power amp), however I suspect, theoretically, that those levels in Cab Lab or in the cab block should give the same result.

If that combo is too forward or upper mid dominant, I'd recommend first moving the SM57 to darker positions (2, 3, 4, etc), but leave the R121 where it is as well as the volume relationship between the two and voicing option.
 
Thank you very much Kevin !i'll try this tomorrow .I asked your advice because it is very difficult to choose a good IR in this jungle. ;)

After a moment the ear fatigue, and the next result is not good.
Then again, and so on .....
Thank you for your advice.
ownhammer said:
You're very welcome! Thanks for the kind words and patronage! :)

RE: Cab Lab, I did that IR mix via parallel sends in the DAW as I used other gear solutions (tube preamp + OH Nebula power amp), however I suspect, theoretically, that those levels in Cab Lab or in the cab block should give the same result.

If that combo is too forward or upper mid dominant, I'd recommend first moving the SM57 to darker positions (2, 3, 4, etc), but leave the R121 where it is as well as the volume relationship between the two and voicing option.
Click to expand...
 
Hi Kevin, how come you mix IRs starting at -3db al the time, whats the difference if you started at 0db for the sm57 and -6 for the R121
 
Short Version:
Mixing them at those levels gives me around the same general output level as a single file @ 0 dB.

Long Version:
I mix in the DAW via parallel sends to bus groups that hold the IR loaders. When mixing two files, having each at -6 dB will be about the same in combined output volume as a single file at 0 dB, as will having three files all at -9 dB. So when mixing two where I need them to be 6 dB apart for the tone I think is pleasing in this case, having them be +/- 3 dB from -6 dB (@-3 for one and @-9 for the other) will get me in the ballpark of 0 dB for a combined outcome, depending on the files being mixed. If there are provisions in an application/platform or file combiner for pan/power laws or mix normalization to below full scale to prevent clipping (as the SoX library has provided, for example), this is largely unnecessary, but that isn't the way I personally use the files with the platforms and workflows I frequent.

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom