• We would like to remind our members that this is a privately owned, run and supported forum. You are here at the invitation and discretion of the owners. As such, rules and standards of conduct will be applied that help keep this forum functioning as the owners desire. These include, but are not limited to, removing content and even access to the forum.

    Please give yourself a refresher on the forum rules you agreed to follow when you signed up.

Something Cool I've Been Working On

NMG

Experienced
There is something that has been on my mind. You know more about this than me and im just a poor auto electrician. The speaker is not just a filter, its being pushed by the amps output stage. The impedance and inductance (and i think it also has a capacitance) of the coil will affect the amps response at different frequencies. Not to mention the voltage drop (although very small) suffered by the amp as a result of it outputting into 8 ohms. This cant be happening in the axe fx as they are separate blocks that dont interact in any way. There must be more to what happens to an amps voltage signal when induced into a speaker coil than just Impulse responses? Should the amp and cab block be merged into a single piece of software where they are one and dependant on one another for the sake of realism? albeit with all the adjustable advantages of them being separate. Discuss.
 

FractalAudio

Administrator
Fractal Audio Systems
Moderator
There is something that has been on my mind. You know more about this than me and im just a poor auto electrician. The speaker is not just a filter, its being pushed by the amps output stage. The impedance and inductance (and i think it also has a capacitance) of the coil will affect the amps response at different frequencies. Not to mention the voltage drop (although very small) suffered by the amp as a result of it outputting into 8 ohms. This cant be happening in the axe fx as they are separate blocks that dont interact in any way. There must be more to what happens to an amps voltage signal when induced into a speaker coil than just Impulse responses? Should the amp and cab block be merged into a single piece of software where they are one and dependant on one another for the sake of realism? albeit with all the adjustable advantages of them being separate. Discuss.
That is all modeled in the amp block. The SPKR tab allows you to alter the interaction.
 

PacoCasanovas

Fractal Fanatic
That is all modeled in the amp block. The SPKR tab allows you to alter the interaction.
...which could be even more accurate when it's based on real data instead of a theoretical value. As you know, two or more (different) speaker in a cabinet, serial wired can do very strange things (even more with older and used speakers)....etc. It would be great if the HiRes-Cab block features an additional "side-chaining" data-bus to the SPKR tab, switchable for those who don't want it. I'm just thinking loud......maybe my idea is stupid (then I keep my mouth shut.....which I can't sometimes.... :lol )
 

sam

Experienced
You can argue the semantics all day long. I've compared truncated and non-truncated and the difference is clearly audible. It is especially noticeable when chugging power chords. You can hear the resonance. It goes "bonggggggg" as opposed to "thuk". Most importantly it sounds "better" IMO.

8. UltraRes is an algorithm that markedly increases accuracy. It gives the frequency resolution of a 200ms IR without additional processing overhead and no added latency
This is very exciting. It's so cool to see the graph plots and hear your explanation of this new technology. I can't wait to hear the results! Thanks for sharing thes enew developments Cliff!
 

clarky

Axe-Master
Cliff - will a stereo ultra-res cab be a possibility??

right now I can't run a pair of mono-hires cabs cos the cpu hit..
that said, my ears are not really detecting much [if any] difference between mono-lores and mono-hires..
so the tonal gains I stand to make from a stereo cab make it worth while to take the the drop in resolution hit..

however.. if the new ultra-res is significantly better.. this would of course be an attractive option to shoe-horn into my presets..
especially if the increase is just a few %
that said, I just don't have enough CPU to drop in a pair of mono cabs of any resolution..
 

FractalAudio

Administrator
Fractal Audio Systems
Moderator
...which could be even more accurate when it's based on real data instead of a theoretical value. As you know, two or more (different) speaker in a cabinet, serial wired can do very strange things (even more with older and used speakers)....etc. It would be great if the HiRes-Cab block features an additional "side-chaining" data-bus to the SPKR tab, switchable for those who don't want it. I'm just thinking loud......maybe my idea is stupid (then I keep my mouth shut.....which I can't sometimes.... :lol )
Yes but the IR does not contain that information. The default values in the amp block are based on the measured impedance of the most commonly used speaker for the selected amp. If it is a combo amp then the values are derived from the speaker that was in the cabinet. Most people who capture IRs are unable to also capture impedance data.

I have actually been working on simulating series connected speakers with different resonant frequencies. Listening tests have not exhibited a significant difference but I haven't done enough tests to form any conclusions. Furthermore I have only measured one cabinet to date that has exhibited "erratic" impedance due to series-connected drivers. All the others measure as though it were a single driver with well-defined resonance.
 

nicolasrivera

Fractal Fanatic
Yes but the IR does not contain that information. The default values in the amp block are based on the measured impedance of the most commonly used speaker for the selected amp. If it is a combo amp then the values are derived from the speaker that was in the cabinet. Most people who capture IRs are unable to also capture impedance data.

I have actually been working on simulating series connected speakers with different resonant frequencies. Listening tests have not exhibited a significant difference but I haven't done enough tests to form any conclusions. Furthermore I have only measured one cabinet to date that has exhibited "erratic" impedance due to series-connected drivers. All the others measure as though it were a single driver with well-defined resonance.
Really Cliff, the world is very fortunate to have a mind like yours! and you love what we love which is even better!!!

Thank you for your constant efforts and endless curiosity!
 

steadystate

Fractal Fanatic
Keep advancing the cause and ignore JM. After hearing the II, there is no doubt in my mind concerning who has done more to advance the state of the art in guitar tech. The CLR is nice, but I'll go out on a limb and say that the II is slightly more significant.
 

Scott Peterson

Global Moderator
Moderator
My only comment about the 'debate' on TGP is simple and I stated it there: this isn't even out, it isn't in anyone's box except for Cliff's and yet you have pages of debate and so forth.

NO ONE OTHER THAN CLIFF HAS EVEN HEARD OR USED THIS YET.

Drives me batty. Cart before the horse and all that. There's a whole lot of assumption in some of the threads; like assuming Cliff is showing his whole hand. I don't know Cliff that well, but one thing I *DO* know about Cliff: he never shows his whole hand on proprietary technology.
 

electronpirate

Moderator
Moderator
If it's been asked:

-Is this difference significantly noticeable? (Audibly)

Not owning the proper education for reading much of this, a simple look at the graphs provided would lead me to believe that outside of the most extreme conditions this would not be a huge factor. Wrong there? Not a knock at all, and all improvements are greatly appreciated, but just curious to hear (natch) your opinion on sound improvements?

And out of curiosity, I made my yearly trek to TGP for the thread in question, and it just seems that Jay is so hell bent on disproving this before it makes it's debut that it's a bit fun to watch. (Methinks he doth protest too much...) Again, I don't attempt to begin to understand the science behind this, but from a purely logical standpoint, anyone who puts this much time and effort into telling everyone over there just how wrong Cliff is seems to have an agenda... IMO.

And yes, looking forward to playing with this new toy within our toy!

R
 

steadystate

Fractal Fanatic
If it sounds good, it sounds good. If Cliff can hear a difference for the better, why should he not implement it, as an option no less, in his own product? What does JM want? What does he want? What is his motivation? How does negating this method help Jay, or anyone else, in any way? Why does he care? Why continue to say Cliff is mistaken about his premise, when his premise clearly states that he is only concerned about what sounds best to his own ears? What purpose is served by writing again and again how this obviously reduces accuracy (which he assumes as fact), and therefore, is less desirable (his opinion).

So the added info may or may not be part of the speaker/cab depending on who you believe. So what? Who cares? If it is part of the room and it sounds good, use it. If it is part of the room, and you have some anal compulsion about eradicating any trace of room influence on an IR, then don't use it. Should Cliff apologize for his efforts here? Wow. The need to be right. Always.
 

clarky

Axe-Master
agenda?? or a fear of being left behind maybe?

one thing that looks clear from the graph is a thicker / beefier low end from 200Hz down..
the shorter samples have a gentler [smoothed out] outcome down there...
the low end is where your tonal 'size' lives
and everyone knows... size matters... lol..
 
Top Bottom