thanks for these. I usually use the normal with another cab. awesome.
Series wouldn't make much sense to me. Parallel is the way to go. Funny how there is so much love for an IR of a direct signal (no speaker or mic).In series or parallel? I've heard comments of people using this IR to reduce coloration in other IR's and not sure how it's being used?
Sent from my iPhone
In series or parallel? I've heard comments of people using this IR to reduce coloration in other IR's and not sure how it's being used?
Sent from my iPhone
And I agree with Yek. I'm not sure how much the Palmer will benefit from UR, since it is free of complex amplitude irregularities in the low region.
I'm sure that the URIR follows the response more closely than the standard IR. But the Palmer has a fairly smooth amplitude response curve without sharp peaks and valleys (I've never graphed it myself, but others have). So the difference between UR and standard might not be as pronounced as it would be with other IRs with lots of variation in the low end. No reason not to use UR though. It will be more accurate to the actual Palmer response.I would guess that UR would not wreck that nice uniform response, so that would be a benefit for an IR like this.
Just downloading all of these free UR IR's...how exactly do I use this one? Do I use a stereo cab block and just pair it with another cab???
why stereo?
I'm sure that the URIR follows the response more closely than the standard IR. But the Palmer has a fairly smooth amplitude response curve without sharp peaks and valleys (I've never graphed it myself, but others have). So the difference between UR and standard might not be as pronounced as it would be with other IRs with lots of variation in the low end. No reason not to use UR though. It will be more accurate to the actual Palmer response.
I agree, the added resolution shouldn't be a real factor in the capture. It really shouldn't be any more accurate. Sice there is no room, reflections, or peaky resonances, a short IR should be plenty to accurately represent it. That being said, the UltraRes will use substantially less DSP.
So the non-UR IR's are only inaccurate if the low end response of the device is peaky?
I thought in general the low end response was not as accurate independent of the IR source such that even something uniform like the Palmer might have inaccuracies in the low-end as compared to the midrange and highs.
Higher resolution only matters if there is something more to resolve. The Palmer is a pretty simple filter.
Oh okay.
I thought it was mainly the frequency response, i.e. total bandwidth, that counted.
I didn't realize it was complexity of the frequency response that we were talking about.
So an SM57 off axis would benefit huge but the same mic on axis not so much. With everything else being equal. That's cool.
And I agree with Yek. I'm not sure how much the Palmer will benefit from UR, since it is free of complex amplitude irregularities in the low region. But I have yet to compare the normal and UR versions. In any event, it's good to have both, and thanks go out to the OP (who says the UR versions sound better than ever).