Red Wirez Cab Impulses

redwire said:
RTAS is slim pickin's. There's TL Space, Altiverb, McDSP Revolver and Waves IR1. Free is non existent, AFAIK. You may be better off purchasing the VST-RTAS adapter from FxPansion and using one of the free VSTs. It would be the cheapest option I know of. Compatibility may be an issue, though. I've only tried SIR II with the adapter, but I didn't have a problem with it.
Click to expand...
I believe I've found another option for those of us who use ProTools, and who would like to either preview or use the speaker IR's in that environment. There's still a cost involved, but it's much less than purchasing a native RTAS solution.

It turns out that Structure, a Digidesign sample player, has a convolution reverb. There is a way to load wave files into this convolution reverb, and to play the contents of a track through it. I assume this means I can take an AxeFX track, one recorded without a speaker sim, and run it through a Red Wire speaker IR loaded into Structure. I'm still a novice at this, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Here is a link to an excellent video which demonstrates something similar. The demo shows how to load a Lexicon PCM90 reverb IR (apparently there are a bunch of free ones available) into Structure, and play a track through the new reverb IR.

http://airvirtualinstruments.blogspot.c ... ricks.html

From what I can tell Structure LE should do the job (i.e. Structure Free will not). It retails for $149 US. For me it's a good fit, as I had contemplated picking it up anyway.

Terry.
 
I just wanted to add my support for the Fender Twin cab.
It's the one I use the most.
70's .... just because I never played anything else.

;)
 
Some very sane and logical advice from the Red Wirez site for those overwhelmed with what they have now:

Dial in your tone. Part of the reason we gave you so many options is because we wanted to make it feel like you're sitting in the control room with an assistant in the live room moving the mic around the cabinet. Part of the fun is becoming familiar with each mic's unique characteristics and then figuring out how to manipulate them to your advantage. So it's not only an IR library it's a learning tool... it slices, it dices... it will also do your taxes.

It may seem overwhelming at first, so we provide a few starting points below that you can tweak to find the tone that best suits your amp, your instrument, your playing style, and your genre.

Based on our experience, and yours may vary depending on the factors noted above, a good place to start with just about every cab is a Royer on the cap at 1-2". Then you can dial in what you want from there.

Or with the other mics you can start:

421 CapEdge 0", CapOffAxis 0", Cone 3"
C414 CapEdge 2-3"
i5 Cone 0"
M160 Cap 0-2", CapEdge 0-2"
RE20 CapEdge 0"
KM84 CapEdge 2-3"
M7 CapEdge 1-2"
M8 CapEdge 1"
R121 Cap 1-2"
SM57 Cap Edge 0-1", CapEdgeOffAxis 0"
TAB57 Cap Edge 0", CapEdgeOffAxis 0"
U87 Cap Edge 2-3"

If you need one general rule for all mics then you should probably start on the CapEdge at 1", then dial in from there.

These won't always work right off the bat, and you may find yourself surprised by what sounds good, so play around with the placement. Here are some tips:

* Move the mic closer for more proximity effect and thus more low-end. This will balance out the highs you get from being closer to the cap or overwhelm them in some cases and skew the balance.
* Move the mic farther away to thin it out. This works well for clean guitars & "bassy" amps.
* Move the mic towards the cap for more high end, or "definition" if it sounds too muddy
* Move the mic out towards the edge of the cone if you're getting too much high end or it sounds too harsh.
* If it sounds too bright, sometimes it'll work to leave the mic where it is and just flip it off axis. It will roll-off the highs and depending on the mic give it "grainy-er" sound.
* Try blending multiple close mics. The IRs are time-aligned so you can mix a 2" mic signal with a 0" mic signal and not have to worry about phase coherence. Try mixing an SM57 for some bite and an R121 for the beef. Or try a 421 with an R121 for the same effect with more cut and less midrange bite.
* Try blending in the room mics, the the back of cab mics, and the mics placed farther back for a more 3D sound

In short, if you use these guidelines and just start playing around you should quickly find many combinations that will work for you. No more applying dangerous amounts of EQ to try and get your IR'ed tracks to sit in the mix.
Click to expand...
 
Scott, thanks for the great tip on using the stereo room mic despite the "science". It really does add just enough air around the cab to make it sound more real. I previously used just a pinch of reverb on my dry sound for this, but I don't need it anymore with Cab#2 set on the stereo room IR.

Thanks again. :D
 
I downloaded and have been working with the Red Wirez IR's yesterday. Very nice IR's indeed.

All of this discussion, and my experience from testing yesterday has lead me to a question or 2. I think these may fall under Scott Peterson's YMMV category :lol: .

I was working with clean Fender Brownface tones only so this does not apply to gain tones (which I intend to spend ridiculous amounts of time on today).

How does the reverb of a patch play in with the IR scenario. IOW, I have reverb (not tons, but some) on all my patches. My best results for "in the room" sound for all testing I did ended up being a mono high res, fairly close (2"-3") IR. Any time I tried to drop a room IR into a stereo cab in tandem with a closer mic'd IR, I lost definition and everything just kind of went flat for lack of a better term. I'm wondering if the reverb from my patch is already sufficient to give the sound ambiance, and adding a "room" mic is just overkill. Or am I really just hearing the difference between high res vs. stereo low res?

All in all, I'm very impressed with the Red Wirez cabs so far.
 
I have reverb, like you just a touch, in all my presets as a default. Though, I am assuming, we do not have the same settings, just the same approach.

I did not notice any change when I was monkeying with the IR's in terms of my cleans going 'flat' tonally.

What I'd do, if you are having what you describe, is look at the predelay setting in your reverb and up the values and see what happens. I am a big believer in 20-30ms predelay's in reverb. Makes them sound 'more' focused, just as rich, but doesn't mess with your 'core' tone. If that makes any sense. (This is a very BIG key, IMHO, to making reverb work for higher gain tones too). Just my practice over the years, IMHO and - you guessed it - YMMV. ;) :D
 
Scott Peterson said:
I have reverb, like you just a touch, in all my presets as a default. Though, I am assuming, we do not have the same settings, just the same approach.

I did not notice any change when I was monkeying with the IR's in terms of my cleans going 'flat' tonally.

What I'd do, if you are having what you describe, is look at the predelay setting in your reverb and up the values and see what happens. I am a big believer in 20-30ms predelay's in reverb. Makes them sound 'more' focused, just as rich, but doesn't mess with your 'core' tone. If that makes any sense. (This is a very BIG key, IMHO, to making reverb work for higher gain tones too). Just my practice over the years, IMHO and - you guessed it - YMMV. ;) :D
Click to expand...

That's an excellent suggestion Scott, thanks :) . To be honest, the default settings for reverb sounded so good to me, I haven't really messed with any of the settings other than level (why fix it if it aint broke right :cool: ). But I'll see what effect that has on it when I'm messing with it today.

Not trying to be difficult (just hungry for knowledge), but I'm still not getting how reverb in the patch is different from reverb from a room IR. Is it possible to put into words what the IR is providing that the reverb block isn't? Just so I have an idea of what I'm listening for :cool:
 
InsideOut said:
Not trying to be difficult (just hungry for knowledge), but I'm still not getting how reverb in the patch is different from reverb from a room IR.
Click to expand...
First - and this is of critical importance - there no reverb possible in an IR in the Axe-Fx. The cab sim IRs are just too short. In order for a sound to be perceivable as reverberation - meaning distinguishable reflections and/or a decaying "tail" - it must be longer than 50 milliseconds at a minimum, longer than 100 ms in order to contain enough information to sound truly realistic for a small room, and several seconds in length in order to contain all audible information about a real-world acoustic environment.

Is it possible to put into words what the IR is providing that the reverb block isn't?
Click to expand...
In the case of the Axe-Fx, reverb begins about where the IR leaves off - about 20 ms after the first arrival.

Room reflections that are early enough to be included in a cab sim are undesirable- they are far too early to be perceived as separate sonic events from the initial sound, and they will add comb filtering, creating apparent colorations of the speaker's direct sound that are generally unwanted.
 
InsideOut said:
Scott Peterson said:
I have reverb, like you just a touch, in all my presets as a default. Though, I am assuming, we do not have the same settings, just the same approach.

I did not notice any change when I was monkeying with the IR's in terms of my cleans going 'flat' tonally.

What I'd do, if you are having what you describe, is look at the predelay setting in your reverb and up the values and see what happens. I am a big believer in 20-30ms predelay's in reverb. Makes them sound 'more' focused, just as rich, but doesn't mess with your 'core' tone. If that makes any sense. (This is a very BIG key, IMHO, to making reverb work for higher gain tones too). Just my practice over the years, IMHO and - you guessed it - YMMV. ;) :D
Click to expand...

That's an excellent suggestion Scott, thanks :) . To be honest, the default settings for reverb sounded so good to me, I haven't really messed with any of the settings other than level (why fix it if it aint broke right :cool: ). But I'll see what effect that has on it when I'm messing with it today.

Not trying to be difficult (just hungry for knowledge), but I'm still not getting how reverb in the patch is different from reverb from a room IR. Is it possible to put into words what the IR is providing that the reverb block isn't? Just so I have an idea of what I'm listening for :cool:
Click to expand...

Just adding a VERY low tech layman's take to Jay's information: IR's in the Axe-FX are not the same as IR's you get for reverb convolution. They are too short to be used that way.

So, in other words, stop using your brain to understand it and trust your ears.

Go ahead and put a room IR (like I did using the Red Wirez collection) and see if you hear a 'room'. I don't. I hear a cabinet. I don't care what it ACTUALLY is; I just want to get where I want. I want a certain 'roundness' to the cab tone signature and all the close mic'd ones I've ever used - even ones I liked and DID use - lacked that 'roundness' (which I cannot put into words).

I just KNOW what I want to hear, and my quest is/was to make the thing sound that way.

I stumbled unto something, quite by accident, and in the spirit of the Axe-FX ownership and company philosophy, wanted to share that 'discovery' for free with everyone.

I also freely admit that what I am doing and HOW I am doing it makes no sense, logically or scientifically. (or maybe it does).

But I really don't care. :D I am hearing right now, what I WANT to hear. And feeling it too. And that's a good thing.

IMHO, YMMV.
 
I would really, really like to have the option of using all the IR slots in the Axe for these IR's, or even add more user slots.
Using two mono cabs loading two different IR's eats those user slots up fast. With more of these to come, I need more IR slots so I don't have to keep loading the IR's in for different amps. How about a "special" version of firmware where we can load user cab IR's instead of mic models? ;)
I don't know if it's feasable for Cliff to do but I'll wish for it. :mrgreen:
 
Scott Peterson said:
Go ahead and put a room IR (like I did using the Red Wirez collection) and see if you hear a 'room'. I don't. I hear a cabinet. I don't care what it ACTUALLY is; I just want to get where I want. I want a certain 'roundness' to the cab tone signature and all the close mic'd ones I've ever used - even ones I liked and DID use - lacked that 'roundness' (which I cannot put into words).
Click to expand...
I have not worked with these yet in my AxeFX, but based on trying a few things using ConvolvoBot! processed tones and playing around in ProTools, I find that Scott's approach creates the same effect as combining a recording made using a direct PA feed and an ambient recording made in the room. For all intents and purposes it is, from what I can tell.

To put it another way. . . . I like to make a recording whenever I play out. It's a good way to learn, and evaluate my tones. If I get a direct feed from the FOH I get a very crisp and "immediate" sound in my recording. If I set up a mic in the room I get a recording that is less distinct / crisp, but more ambient. What sounds best to me is to take the FOH recording and the recording made in the room and combine them. The result is still crisp, but it has an added dimension which is the roundness or ambience that Scott describes. It becomes somewhat 3 dimensional. The sound is bigger.

Very nice.

Terry.
 
Tone Seeker said:
I have not worked with these yet in my AxeFX,
Click to expand...
Then you haven't heard the actual results you will get with the Axe-Fx.

but based on trying a few things using ConvolvoBot!
Click to expand...
Completely different animal from the Axe-Fx. There is no way to extrapolate from the results you get when you convolve a long room IR with a signal to the results you will get when you use a much-shortened version of the same IR in the Axe-Fx.

If I set up a mic in the room I get a recording that is less distinct / crisp, but more ambient.
Click to expand...
You will not get this effect - and you cannot possibly get it - from any IR you use in the Axe-Fx. A 1024-point IR is far too short to produce any room ambience.
 
Jay Mitchell said:
[quote="Tone Seeker":k0zkamsk]I have not worked with these yet in my AxeFX,
Click to expand...
Then you haven't heard the actual results you will get with the Axe-Fx.

but based on trying a few things using ConvolvoBot!
Click to expand...
Completely different animal from the Axe-Fx. There is no way to extrapolate from the results you get when you convolve a long room IR with a signal to the results you will get when you use a much-shortened version of the same IR in the Axe-Fx.

If I set up a mic in the room I get a recording that is less distinct / crisp, but more ambient.
Click to expand...
You will not get this effect - and you cannot possibly get it - from any IR you use in the Axe-Fx. A 1024-point IR is far too short to produce any room ambience.[/quote:k0zkamsk]

While that is true, the closer models to translate well from a PC plug in (using the full length) to the Axe-fx at least during my listens.
 
Jay Mitchell said:
[quote="Tone Seeker":601dug5h]If I set up a mic in the room I get a recording that is less distinct / crisp, but more ambient.
Click to expand...
You will not get this effect - and you cannot possibly get it - from any IR you use in the Axe-Fx. A 1024-point IR is far too short to produce any room ambience.[/quote:601dug5h]Agreed. . . . "ambient" was a poor wording choice.

Terry.
 
Got the Big Box set today. Used the Cliff AXFX converts.
IMHO its worth the money!
I love moving the different mics around on different cabs, its a winner.
They sound how i was hoping and would expect them to sound
Not to mention i havent tried them in my DAW yet.
Now i need more time,,,,


www.duaneramelot.com
 
I too took a chance on the BigBOX set and...umm....holy. Wow.

I've only played with the Mesa and Vox IRs so far (and that I had issues getting stuff to load into spots other than U1 and U2 via the Axe-Editor) but, issues aside, they sound gloriously good.

On my DD Tribute patches, where I've been using RECTO1 and 2 cabs, I'm using the Mesa V30 + Royer sims and they are much, much more like my old Recto 2x12 that I loved. It's the lovely, gooey, mid-thick Rectifier tone I love.

And on the "Dirty 30" global amp, a top boost that I've never been able to make sound quite right, this is the fix. Their AC-30 cab IR is perfect. Absolutely perfect. Chime, not peaky, nothing harsh -- just good old blues.

I've dropped a ton of EQ off my main patches switching to these. They just sound great straight up.

Best $60 I've spent in a while.
 
If new IRs are having such a massive improvement in tone then another rework of the internal IRs would help make the Axe-FX even better and to ensure it maintains its edge over the competition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom