RedWirez Big Box Far Fields: Game is ON!

I'm on it....

:D

Kids are sleeping so I can't push any volume but so far
as expected these are very good for that "amp in the room" type setups.
Try a simple amp and cab setup (no reverb or anything else) it sounds very convincing.

Not good for recording unless you mix them with closeup IR.

And... the best part (at least for me) is that they are great for practicing with headphones!!!

:)
 
I didn't see a download for any converted Axe-FX files. I assume they haven't been converted to syx or truncated to wav even?

Looking forward to trying these.
Thanks to Mike at Red Wirez for the update.
 
Umm.... maybe I don't understand...... :?:

But shouldn't the package include truncated WAV-files (again) for the Axe-Fx, to be able to mix IR's?
 
You can mix any wav files, then use Albert A's utility to convery to AxeFX sysex format.

AFAIK, the truncated files are really intended for DAW software to get the same results as AxeFX cab IRs.
 
GM Arts said:
You can mix any wav files, then use Albert A's utility to convery to AxeFX sysex format.
AFAIK, the truncated files are really intended for DAW software to get the same results as AxeFX cab IRs.
Click to expand...

Aha, thanks.

Just by themselves those ff's don't sound that great IMO. So I guess they need to be mixed.
I suck at mixing, so I'm patiently awaiting "recipes" from wise men around here. ;-)
 
Hi,

Could someone explain to this n00b what these new IR's are designed for, and why all the excitement? I understand they are used to get an 'amp in the room' sound, but what exactly is this? Would you use them in combination with close up IR's to negate the need for a reverb block? Or do they just soften the sound?

Thanks for any insights,

VidarAus
 
VidarAus said:
Hi,

Could someone explain to this n00b what these new IR's are designed for, and why all the excitement? I understand they are used to get an 'amp in the room' sound, but what exactly is this? Would you use them in combination with close up IR's to negate the need for a reverb block? Or do they just soften the sound?

Thanks for any insights,

VidarAus
Click to expand...

No reverb or ambiance is associated with the impulses in the axe-fx. The length of the IRs in the axe-fx are designed to capture the cab only, not reflections in the room.
 
VidarAus said:
Hi,

Could someone explain to this n00b what these new IR's are designed for, and why all the excitement? I understand they are used to get an 'amp in the room' sound, but what exactly is this? Would you use them in combination with close up IR's to negate the need for a reverb block? Or do they just soften the sound?

Thanks for any insights,

VidarAus
Click to expand...

The OnAxis and OffAxis positions were recorded with the intention of eliminating room reflections. The 5ft Up positions are supposed to simulate standing in front of your amp, so you will have reflections off the floor, but they won't have room reflections either, so they are not intended to be reverb even if the Axe-Fx cab block allowed for it.

I think people are excited about the far-fields because they represent a more accurate picture of what the cabinet sounds like from a listening position. I like them as a base for mixing with close-mic'ed IRs (not just the TC30 samples either).

The reference close mic'ed positions can be combined with the Axe-Fx mic sims, or used alone. They are very clean captures of the four close mic'ed speaker positions we use.

Basically, just more tools for the sonic toolbox.
 
yek said:
Umm.... maybe I don't understand...... :?:

But shouldn't the package include truncated WAV-files (again) for the Axe-Fx, to be able to mix IR's?
Click to expand...

I updated the "Axe-Fx Truncated" downloads with the new IRs for those auditioning IRs in a DAW. I didn't put them in "RefFarField" update because I didn't want them to be in two places.

I don't think these IRs will sound significantly different in the Axe-Fx vs. the DAW, however, because they don't have the room reflections that some of the other IRs have. But, it doesn't hurt to use the truncated versions when auditioning.
 
Looks like the detailed README didn't make it in to some of the packages. So, here's the scoop:

In addition to Cap, CapEdge, Cone, and ConeEdge close mic'ing, we sampled from the following positions:

5ft-2m: 5 feet up, 2 meters away, center of cabinet
5ftBack-2m: 5 feet up, 2 meters away, center of cabinet, cab facing away from mic
OnAxis-2m: 2m away, center of cab, cab tilted on axis, ground plane measurement
OffAxis-2m: 2m away, center of cab, cab untilted, ground plane measurement
OffAxisBack: 2m away, center of cab, cab untilted/facing away, ground plane measurement

The TC30 is an omni reference mic that has no noticeable proximity effect, so we took all the samples at 0", or on the grill cloth.
 
I've been using one of the TC30 Mesa IR's (cap edge 0in) you posted on the forum a while ago and I just compared it to the one in the actual update, and the new one sounds quite a bit different to the one I've been using. The new one sounds noticeably "fizzier." I also tried cap 0in with the same results. Do you have any idea why they sound so different?
 
Uhhhh, what's taking so long Scott? The far fields have been out since at least 8:30 PM last night, so I expected too see at least three new clips from you by now. ;)

Scott Peterson said:
I might not be around for a few days.... ;) :D
Click to expand...
 
I created these IR's (combination of far-field / close), somewhat based upon Scott's earlier recipes.
I like 'em, they add body and feel to the sound. Maybe a little heavy on the bass, gotta finetune them.

Marshall greenbacks (used with JCM800, Plexi, Brown):
Marshall1960A-G12Ms\Royer R121\Marshall1960A-G12Ms-R121-Cone-6in.wav,0.20
Marshall1960A-G12Ms\TC30-Ref-FarFields\Marshall1960A-G12Ms-TC30-Cone-0in.wav,0.20
Marshall1960A-G12Ms\TC30-Ref-FarFields\Marshall1960A-G12Ms-TC30-5ft-2m.wav,0.40
Marshall1960A-G12Ms\TC30-Ref-FarFields\Marshall1960A-G12Ms-TC30-OffAxis-2m.wav,0.15
Marshall1960A-G12Ms\TC30-Ref-FarFields\Marshall1960A-G12Ms-TC30-5ftBack-2m.wav,0.05

Hi-Gain (used with Euro1, Euro2, CAE Lead):
Orange4x12-V30s\Royer R121\Orange4x12-V30s-R121-Cone-6in.wav,0.20
Marshall1960B-V30s\TC30-Ref-FarFields\Marshall1960B-V30s-TC30-Cone-0in.wav,0.20
Marshall1960B-V30s\TC30-Ref-FarFields\Marshall1960B-V30s-TC30-5ft-2m.wav,0.40
Marshall1960B-V30s\TC30-Ref-FarFields\Marshall1960B-V30s-TC30-OffAxis-2m.wav,0.15
Marshall1960B-V30s\TC30-Ref-FarFields\Marshall1960B-V30s-TC30-5ftBack-2m.wav,0.05

Fender (used with Tweed and Blues):
TweedDeluxeBlue\Royer R121\TweedDeluxeBlue-R121-Cone-6in.wav,0.20
TweedDeluxeBlue\TC30-Ref-FarFields\TweedDeluxeBlue-TC30-Cone-0in.wav,0.20
TweedDeluxeBlue\TC30-Ref-FarFields\TweedDeluxeBlue-TC30-5ft-2m.wav,0.40
TweedDeluxeBlue\TC30-Ref-FarFields\TweedDeluxeBlue-TC30-OffAxis-2m.wav,0.15
TweedDeluxeBlue\TC30-Ref-FarFields\TweedDeluxeBlue-TC30-5ftBack-2m.wav,0.05

Vox: (used with Boutique 1)
VoxAC30Blues\Royer R121\VoxAC30Blues-R121-Cone-6in.wav,0.20
VoxAC30Blues\TC30-Ref-FarFields\VoxAC30Blues-TC30-Cone-0in.wav,0.20
VoxAC30Blues\TC30-Ref-FarFields\VoxAC30Blues-TC30-5ft-2m.wav,0.40
VoxAC30Blues\TC30-Ref-FarFields\VoxAC30Blues-TC30-OffAxis-2m.wav,0.15
VoxAC30Blues\TC30-Ref-FarFields\VoxAC30Blues-TC30-5ftBack-2m.wav,0.05

Mesa (used with USA Lead 2):
MesaRectifierV30s\Royer R121\MesaRectifierV30s-R121-Cone-6in.wav,0.20
MesaRectifierV30s\TC30-Ref-FarFields\MesaRectifier-V30s-TC30-Cone-0in.wav,0.20
MesaRectifierV30s\TC30-Ref-FarFields\MesaRectifier-V30s-TC30-5ft-2m.wav,0.40
MesaRectifierV30s\TC30-Ref-FarFields\MesaRectifier-V30s-TC30-OffAxis-2m.wav,0.15
MesaRectifierV30s\TC30-Ref-FarFields\MesaRectifier-V30s-TC30-5ftBack-2m.wav,0.05
 
Aleksi said:
I've been using one of the TC30 Mesa IR's (cap edge 0in) you posted on the forum a while ago and I just compared it to the one in the actual update, and the new one sounds quite a bit different to the one I've been using. The new one sounds noticeably "fizzier." I also tried cap 0in with the same results. Do you have any idea why they sound so different?
Click to expand...

Uh... Houston we have a problem. The length is a little different. But, biggest difference is the SRC. We switched to iZotope's SRC because it looks good on paper and in our testing the results were excellent and it's integrated in some nice batch processing tools. Anyway, that looks like the problem. It effects the high-end in the 48KHz sampling rate IRs only. Which of course are the ones everyone cares about. It's a pretty significant boost. The other's are true to the 96KHz source. It has to be the implementation in our batch tool because I can't imagine the izotope algorithm itself could munge it up so significantly.

So, I guess that's what I get for rushing it out the door with virtually no beta testing. I'm going to have to reprocess them all with a different SRC, just to be safe. I'm really sorry guys. Especially, all you guys who have cranked out mixes already. Maybe these "sparkly" IRs will become collectors items :)

I'm just trying to do too many things at once. Mea culpa :oops:
 
I've been having a ball with them; but alas the top end was killin' me... then I read this post above from Mike and laughed out loud... "So I'm not crazy!"

I've done like 60 cab mixes now using the new IR's.... so I'll stop, wait for the new processing and then simply have to run the IR Mixer and AlbertA's converter and commence auditioning again. I have like 15 Marshall cabs, 18 Bogner cabs, 12 Vox cabs and 12 Fender cabs. I stopped at 3 or 4 Mesa cabs; the high end was not working for me... so it is a relief that it's simply 'not me' here. Whew.

I've learned quite a bit from this exercise though. This continues to be the most educational experience with guitar tone (9.0 and now these IR's) I've ever gone through.

I'll say that even from what I have right now, the ability to 'hear' the cabinet when listening in stereo over studio monitors is incredible. It's coming from a cab; you can see it and hear it when you close your eyes. The soundsource with the stock cabs and all other close mic'd cabs is that the sound source sounds like a flat 'soundboard' with speakers; the FF really allows the character of the actual cabs and speakers to 'breathe'. The 3D aspect is immediately apparent and obvious. I laughed out loud when I heard it.

The different mixes as I am approaching them are to get the right balance of 'front' to 'back' IR's, mixed in with what sounds balanced and even across the sonic spectrum. It's interesting that if you base your cab IR on the FF stuff, you don't fight the bottom or mids anymore. They are just almost naturally 'even'. I don't know how to describe it.

Once these are 'reprocessed' I think the end result is going to really spin some heads. Axe-FX 9.0 coupled with these Red Wire FF IR's; it just staggers my brain.

It's also interesting to me that listening to these cabs the mixes 'create' vs. just dropping an IR in the Axe-FX just sounds more 'complete' for lack of a better term. What's good becomes great; what's great becomes superb. That other thing that is also a delightful surprise is that you can REALLY hear, the way we are USED to hearing the difference between the different speakers and cabs. Whereas before it was akin to shoving your ear right up to the speaker grille; this is just more 'natural' to listen to and compare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom