Maybe it would help to clarify some variables a bit here.
In terms of subjective impressions of different IR responses, the selection of the mic used for the capture, the distance of that mic to the sound source, and the angle of the mic relative to the sound source each introduce certain predictable characteristics.
What most of us are listening for, when it comes right down to it, is the relative tonal balance of the speaker + cab. Is it bassy or lean, are the mids recessed or forward, is there an upper-mid presence peak, and are the highs bright or subdued? We're also evaluating our like / dislike of specific IR's (and any output medium, for that matter) thru the "lens" of how the patch is set up. Since there is no "absolute standard", our final preferences are ultimately subjective.
But there are some constants, that affect IR's fairly consistently:
1. Virtually all mics suffer from proximity effect, to varying degrees. When the mic is close to the sound source, the lows are boosted or emphasized compared to hearing that sound source from a greater distance. It can be helpful if you're looking for "ooomph", but it's a coloration. (The polar pattern of a specific mic is a general indicator of how much it will tend to be affected by proximity effect - omni mics tend to have less, and cardiods tend to have more. Generalizing, omni's tend to have a more natural response, but bring in more ambient sound.)
2. To a lesser extent, close micing can also come across as having an elevated high frequency response. This is typically not as prominent as the increase in low frequencies, and in terms of listener perception, tends to come across more as a tendency toward "hardness" or piercing highs. This perception is tied in part to the fact that when we hear sounds naturally in a real space, at a distance from the sound source(s), and due to a bunch of factors to do with acoustics, we hear a high frequency response that gently rolls off, but not to the extent that it sounds dull, but natural.
3. Mic to source distance notwithstanding, the aim & angle of the mic to the driver produces radically different tonal characteristics. This is particularly true with guitar speakers, because of their narrow directivity at upper-mid & higher frequencies, and also because of their peaked response in the upper mids. Jay has constantly beaten the drum that unless you like listening to your guitar cab on axis (angled or raised and pointed directly at your ears), you're unlikely to prefer IR's captured on axis, and particularly if they're close-mic'ed.
Since these variables are predictable in a general way, you can use them to fine-tune in on what works for you.
Here's the deal though: you have to set up patches for the type of sound capture used in that specific IR. Patches balanced tonally for a close-mic'd, on-axis IR will sound very dull with some of Jay's off-axis IR's. I'll bet that Jay configures his patches for those IR's, and that if you audition his patches with on-axis captured IR's, they'll sound unbearably bright.
Likewise, if you play in a tight orchestra pit, and angle your cab at you to hear yourself well in a tight space, you'll tend to set up patches that are softer sounding.
Scott's patches sound great at performance levels; at low volumes, not so much. Not his objective. He tweaks his tones for stage level, not bedroom playing.
I find most of the stock 4 x 12's, and many of Red Wires close-mic'd IR's to be too "woofy" in the bottom, due to proximity effect. But sometimes it works for heavier lead tones. But understand you're using a predictable coloration to get to where you want to be. You can't use such an IR to evaluate your FRFR monitor and complain that the monitor sounds unnatural.
I'm really liking some of Red Wires IR's, and they've given us something that I haven't seen before - choices in mic positions and angles for the same speaker. (I also like some of the stock IR's and some of Jay's; some of the stock IR's very accurately capture mic proximity colorations, and you have to then EQ for those.)
I'd like it if Red Wires offered a few more off-axis captures, and probably more like 30 degrees rather than 45. Offering IR's captured with the Earthworks calibrated mic should be a step forward, IMO.
Choices are the stuff that progress is made of - bring 'em on.
