Speaker-Simulation Quiz: UltraRes Impulse Responses vs. PEQ-Block

Morphosis

Official G66 Support
So, beside the whole IR accuracy discussion (UltraRes, Reference IR, Speaker page,...) let`s have a fun part :)

9x the same reamping: DI through Friedman HBE (stock settings), followed by Cab-Block with several UltraRes IR`s OR just a simple PEQ-Block with different settings as "analog speaker emulation simulation" :)

So guys, which files are based on IR, which ones just have the simple PEQ-Block as Speaker Emulation? Secondly, which like you most? Which one is the worst?

Let`s start the QUIZ!
 
Last edited:
Brave man, guitardoc, to go first! LOL

Here's my guess, using my crappy work computer speaker setup (My aging, battle-worn ears are more likely the weak point, though.):

2, 3, 5, 8, 9 PEQ.

Regardless, I'd love to see what these PEQ settings/curves look like. Nice to know that there is a reasonable alternative to a cab block in a pinch when CPU processing power starts to become an issue. I could also see these being used for creative blends with cab IRs.

Morphosis, are any of these PEQs set to emulate existing IRs used in the AxeFx, or are you just ear-tweaking until you like the sound?

(oh, as for which one I liked best: tough call since there's no other context. #4 then #1, for different reasons. Funny, the more I listen back and forth between 1 and 4, the more I think 4 is also a PEQ.)
 
Morphosis, are any of these PEQs set to emulate existing IRs used in the AxeFx, or are you just ear-tweaking until you like the sound?

I looked into some plots from Analog Simulators to get a feeling, how filters could be set as a start point and tweeked from there by ear. Without any targets, more to get a feel, how Q,Gain, Center-frequency, the different filter types (peak, hi/lo-pass, shelv, shelv2) take influence.

I`m stunning, how well you can "design" your simulated speaker-sim just by tweaking 3 to 5 Bands from just one PEQ Block!
 
Thank you guys, let`s reveal:

Annulment:
The exported Cubase file:
public.php


Quiz results (including members from axefx.de):
public.php
 
Blending in a PEQ shaped to resemble a speaker waveform with a cab sim is my "go to" method of getting good sounds (YMMV, IMHO etc). It's adds some direct signal quality to the mix and boost the mids but also offers a little of that 3D quality back.
 
Too early with the results!! The third one was the hardest to guess since it's right after that horrendous 2nd clip. :D I got that one wrong but others were right.

Hubi72... aww man... :lol
 
So 9 of 12 people are way beyond the "random guess" treshold of 50% right. This tells me that using IRs is still to go-to for me ;)

Or the PEQ-curve was nowhere near a real cab... that's something not evaluated here.

Edit:
after listening to the samples again, I _think_ that all of the PEQ snippets have much more of this high fizz than the IRs...
 
Last edited:
So 9 of 12 people are way beyond the "random guess" treshold of 50% right. This tells me that using IRs is still to go-to for me ;)

Or the PEQ-curve was nowhere near a real cab... that's something not evaluated here.

The question is not, what`s be more "authentic" - that are IRs of course by design! The question is, if the PEQ solution could give "realistic, good sounding" results. No question is, that 5 EQ-Bands, fully parametric adjustable give endless "finetuning" and "speakersim customized design" possibilites compared to finite IRs to audition through...

At least combining both is done in every guitar track ever made, mixed down to CD i assume...
 
Last edited:
So 9 of 12 people are way beyond the "random guess" treshold of 50% right. This tells me that using IRs is still to go-to for me ;)

Preference was never the question in the poll. You could also say that since a number of people were fooled by some of the PEQ tones - at least enough to be significant - that there is something positive going on with these PEQs. Not that many entries to the poll to be very scientific, but IMHO it does demonstrate the possibility of PEQ as an option to, or along side, and IR. How well you like the PEQ is a different story.
 
Regardless, I'd love to see what these PEQ settings/curves look like

public.php

As you can see:

track2 = PEQ1
track5 = PEQ3
track8 = PEQ4

Here are the frecquency plots from those PEQs. Additional a plot 0f CK-CP7 (mixed both factory cabs 1:1 - so Clarks "TOP SECRET 4 Speaker / 4 mics paradigm" :D) and 2 plots from two different analog speaker simulators: Hughes Kettner RedBox & Mesa CabClone:

public.php


The correspondending PEQ settings are attached in THIS ZIP: 3 Axe-Fx II Presets -> three PEQ settings Number 1/3/5.

Note: Those settings are IMHO for nothing, i`ve just played around with the different filter bands...so you`ll better find your own settings!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom