The infamous "amp in the room" vs FRFR discussion

OP, I think we all go through this phase at one point or another - it suddenly occurs to us that all you'd need to do would be to 'erase' the microphone's characteristics; yet then we run into the problem of how exactly that would work. It's a fun thought experiment, like, what/who made god (if you believe in such a concept/being) or what's outside of time, or how can you be sure about anything other than your own 'beingness,' but in the end, you just gotta roll with it :)
 
I would be surprised and even a bit disappointed if Cliff wasn’t working on that in secrecy as we speak. I don’t know HOW to go about achieving that, but the first guy to crack that egg successfully will own the market for a long time coming.

Go on Cliff, - SOON!
 
Set your monitor in the same orientation as your cabinet. Turn the volume up as loud as your amp through the cabinet is and you will see that a MAJORITY of this ideal is contingent upon orientation and placement of the FRFR and sound levels.
 
Truth is, The mic in the signal path isn't the problem. What folks are wanting is a perception parameter. What are you wanting modeled goes on inside your head it's how you perceive the sound. A little test, put your amp behind you 6 to 8 feet, on the floor and enjoy the amp in the room, now put it on a stand directly in front of you 3 or 4 feet away pointed straight at your face. Same settings, the amp is still in the room, now enjoy it. No? What you're hearing is what it actually sounds like, what the mic hears as well, amp in the room is reflections from the room you are in. Another scenario is, Example, "my amp sounds like crap tonight! Last Gig it sounded awesome! it's set the same? What's the problem"? Well it's the cherished room, not the amp, not all of them are pleasing. In the working musicians market these days volume is an issue. You are told by the sound man to turn the amp toward you and turn it down, then you struggle all night because it sounds like crap. Plus the same room will sound totally different under different atmosphereic conditions. So training your brain seems like the logical choice, since it's doubtful we will ever be able to model the inside of our brain with a parameter that adjusts how we perceive the sound. Roll your eyes and call me crazy, but I've dealt with this for years as a working musician.
 
Truth is, The mic in the signal path isn't the problem. What folks are wanting is a perception parameter. What are you wanting modeled goes on inside your head it's how you perceive the sound. A little test, put your amp behind you 6 to 8 feet, on the floor and enjoy the amp in the room, now put it on a stand directly in front of you 3 or 4 feet away pointed straight at your face. Same settings, the amp is still in the room, now enjoy it. No? What you're hearing is what it actually sounds like, what the mic hears as well, amp in the room is reflections from the room you are in. Another scenario is, Example, "my amp sounds like crap tonight! Last Gig it sounded awesome! it's set the same? What's the problem"? Well it's the cherished room, not the amp, not all of them are pleasing. In the working musicians market these days volume is an issue. You are told by the sound man to turn the amp toward you and turn it down, then you struggle all night because it sounds like crap. Plus the same room will sound totally different under different atmosphereic conditions. So training your brain seems like the logical choice, since it's doubtful we will ever be able to model the inside of our brain with a parameter that adjusts how we perceive the sound. Roll your eyes and call me crazy, but I've dealt with this for years as a working musician.

Go direct with a good set of in-ear monitors and you won't worry about the room ever again.
 
wouldn't it be possible to model an IR of a speaker (-cab) without the microphone?
And would that not accomplish the amp in the room sound when used with an FRFR?
Or am I forgetting something?

(I don't have a use for that personally, but since it comes up all the time...)

There's at least one product already on the market that models 6 different (unmic'd) speakers; Line 6's PowerCab. Kemper is working on their own version, called the Kemper Kabinet, which will model more than a dozen.
 
Go direct with a good set of in-ear monitors and you won't worry about the room ever again.
I'm happiest I've ever been with my guitar tone using FR and IEM's. I use both for different situation's. the only issue with IEM's is I don't use a monitor or speaker on stage so feedback interaction etc isn't there. I've gotten use to it so it doesn't bother me. "Retrain your brain" is my solution.
 
There's at least one product already on the market that models 6 different (unmic'd) speakers; Line 6's PowerCab. Kemper is working on their own version, called the Kemper Kabinet, which will model more than a dozen.

I'm aware of the Powercab stuff,but not the others.That's very interesting thanks for sharing that info!
 
I'm happiest I've ever been with my guitar tone using FR and IEM's. I use both for different situation's. the only issue with IEM's is I don't use a monitor or speaker on stage so feedback interaction etc isn't there. I've gotten use to it so it doesn't bother me. "Retrain your brain" is my solution.

Tell your sound person when you put a foot up on a wedge to push some guitar through it.
 
My 68 Princeton and my CLR can be setup to sound near identical, in my room, at a given volume level. I'll use a A/B box and toggle between them and honestly can't tell which is which, provided I did a couple of things; adjust the overall EQ, high and low cut in the cab block etc to achieve a similar tonal response. Adjust the output levels using a SPL meter to make sure they have equal output, and most importantly, either tilt my Princeton back so its facing my ears, OR, put my CLR on its side, into a 'backline' position instead of a wedge, so its speaker is facing my legs, same as the Princeton when its flat on the ground.

Do all that and I can close my eyes and play them side by side, and at about 8 feet away, I can't tell which one its coming from they sound so close. Both sound exactly "in the room" as I'm used to hearing them in my room. Now if I changed the levels, cranked the Princeton to 6 or something, and dialed in the Axe tone to match the breakup, I no doubt would hear a difference. The way that 10" open back speaker behaves at different intensity levels isn't linear. The position of the amp to a rear wall will make a huge difference too.

A loud open back combo, with a rear wall behind it it going to throw sound around the room very differently than a wide front dispersion FRFR speaker, just like a 1x12 closed back vs open back will. That is just simply acoustics, nothing to do with real amps vs modelers.

Ever play an open back combo on an outdoor stage ? Heck, just take out outside onto your patio.... Without the nearby walls and ceiling to bounce off the sound is sure a lot less full and rich. You've still got a real amp, you've still got a real guitar cabinet, but suddenly its not the "amp in room" sound your used to.

Ever play your amp in an unfinished basement or garage ? Sounds awful in that highly reverent acoustic space doesn't it ?? Its still a real amp, and a real cabinet, in a real acoustic space, but you don't see people waxing nostalgic about that "amp in room" sound do you ?

People want the sound of an amp in a good sounding room. You want the less directional low freq to bounce around, with you want the boundary effect of the walls and ceiling right angles to enhance the bass response, making a 1x10 sound huge. You want the directional highs not facing your ears, and the carpet, rug, drapes etc to damped the frequency response, giving this really full and rich tone without too much highs. It sounds really good, it does. But, it can also sound really bad. Point your amp at your ears, in your basement... yuck.... ice pick city and yet really muddy... awful tone but its the prized "amp in room"
 
I'm happiest I've ever been with my guitar tone using FR and IEM's. I use both for different situation's. the only issue with IEM's is I don't use a monitor or speaker on stage so feedback interaction etc isn't there. I've gotten use to it so it doesn't bother me. "Retrain your brain" is my solution.


Digitech Freqout! pedal. Step on it, harmonic feedback comes it, with controls for how fast the effect comes in, the intensity level, and the frequency of the response. Its very convincing and very controllable, so you can have a chord turn into ringing feedback at any volume, anywhere on stage. I hate the term, but it is a "game changer" as far as using modelers and IEM's is concerned.
 
Wow.

When done right IR's get pretty damn close to 100% realism when compared to mics. Maybe you just don't like how mics sound? But that would mean that you don't like any of the guitar sounds ever recorded.

You do realize that your ears work much like mics and the sound changes based on your ear placement. Do we need a virtual walk-around-in-the-room parameter in the cab block? :D
I think you’re missing my point. They do sound like a mic’d cab already. But what the vast majority of people want is it to sound like A CAB. The next logical evolution will be making the Ir sound like a real cab. It would be a vast improvement and an actual innovation and improvement in guitar sound for all, and could even be applied to recording (a process which always takes something away from and alters the source material, which again is why we stack tracks etc.).
So the next generation of IR or even cab modeling (cause maybe IR is not even going to be what this is) will make your FR speaker sound like a champ 8”speaker in an open back cab, or a 8-10 ampeg etc. They can already do this sort of thing with various models of headphones with True-Fi by sonar works. I don’t want to hear it can’t be done. I already have a black magic box that blows minds with things that 15 years ago were said are impossible, all it takes is some coding audio nerd to make it happen.
 
I think you’re missing my point. They do sound like a mic’d cab already. But what the vast majority of people want is it to sound like A CAB. The next logical evolution will be making the Ir sound like a real cab. It would be a vast improvement and an actual innovation and improvement in guitar sound for all, and could even be applied to recording (a process which always takes something away from and alters the source material, which again is why we stack tracks etc.).
So the next generation of IR or even cab modeling (cause maybe IR is not even going to be what this is) will make your FR speaker sound like a champ 8”speaker in an open back cab, or a 8-10 ampeg etc. They can already do this sort of thing with various models of headphones with True-Fi by sonar works. I don’t want to hear it can’t be done. I already have a black magic box that blows minds with things that 15 years ago were said are impossible, all it takes is some coding audio nerd to make it happen.

Line 6's PowerCab can already do this, but as far as shooting an IR that'll make my Mackie studio monitors sound like an unmic'd 1x12, that's not going to happen. In terms of emulating an unmic'd 1x12 guitar cabinet through any old FRFR speaker using IR's, I'll believe it when I hear it.
 
I think you’re missing my point. They do sound like a mic’d cab already. But what the vast majority of people want is it to sound like A CAB. The next logical evolution will be making the Ir sound like a real cab. It would be a vast improvement and an actual innovation and improvement in guitar sound for all, and could even be applied to recording (a process which always takes something away from and alters the source material, which again is why we stack tracks etc.).
So the next generation of IR or even cab modeling (cause maybe IR is not even going to be what this is) will make your FR speaker sound like a champ 8”speaker in an open back cab, or a 8-10 ampeg etc. They can already do this sort of thing with various models of headphones with True-Fi by sonar works. I don’t want to hear it can’t be done. I already have a black magic box that blows minds with things that 15 years ago were said are impossible, all it takes is some coding audio nerd to make it happen.


What does a cab sound like though ?? Not the effect of the room, the dispersion pattern, etc, simply what does the sound coming out of a speaker sound like heard directly at a given distance ?

More to the point, how is that inherently different between a given guitar speaker type and another guitar speaker type, vs. adjusting the response of a more linear FRFR style speaker ?


A greenback sounds different than a V30 because that speaker has different frequency response, and we can both hear, and measure those differences. We can also adjust the freq response to enhance or minimize those differences. A speaker is basically a speaker at the end of the day, doesn't matter what its in, doesn't matter what label you give it, they all do essentially the same thing.

There is nothing significantly different between a 1x12 V30 in a closed enclosure and a 1x12 'FRFR' speaker other than the V30 wasn't designed to be as neutral as possible.


This stuff really isn't that hard.... I can't understand why the collective "we" has been going around and around in circles about this stuff for like a decade now...l.
 
...But what the vast majority of people want is it to sound like A CAB...
I highly doubt this. Like I said, all guitar tones that you've ever heard on any record have been miked. There have been many advancement to try and get that "in the room sound" and they probably do the job okay but the end result is a "sh*t sound". Not afraid to use that word because it's true. The IR smoothing or dephase in the Fractal cab block is one of them. With Kemper there's the "Pure Cabinet" which works in a similar way. They both aim to remove the "phase mic sound" out of the signal and they do get you in the ballpark. I strongly recommend no one to ever use either of these for recording purposes.

The next logical evolution will be making the Ir sound like a real cab.
IR is EQ and phase. A real guitar cabinet is physically a different size speaker cabinet with thousands of reflections that have everything to do with the physical design of a guitar cabinet and guitar speakers. You simply can't bend the laws of physics to make a 1x12 size cabinet do what a 4x12 cabinet does. So any EQ or phase based simulation of that will never "sound like a real cab".

It would be a vast improvement and an actual innovation and improvement in guitar sound for all, and could even be applied to recording (a process which always takes something away from and alters the source material, which again is why we stack tracks etc.).
How can you be sure that something that hasn't been tried, tested or implemented would be a vast improvement? What we have currently 100% replaces the way guitars are being recorded with real gear. Does miking up a cabinet sound like a real cab in the room? No but that's the only way 90% of people have ever heard guitar. Anything that's vastly different will most likely sound bad to at least those 90% of people.

They can already do this sort of thing with various models of headphones with True-Fi by sonar works.
No they can't. True-Fi is just EQ and I would highly question it's realism. Still it claims to make headphones sound like other headphones. They're almost the same size drivers so it "sort of may work". EQ is not enough to turn earbuds into headphones or either of them into studio monitors for the same physical restrictions. Different size physical objects with room reflections. I'm not even going to start discussing how different size rooms and wall materials will react with physics.

I don’t want to hear it can’t be done.
Oh it can be done. All you need is a box that changes size. Speaker that changes size. Speaker cones that change material. Speaker magnets that change weight. That would be a good start. Oh and speakers that change the amount of speakers.
 
The IR smoothing or dephase in the Fractal cab block is one of them. With Kemper there's the "Pure Cabinet" which works in a similar way. They both aim to remove the "phase mic sound" out of the signal and they do get you in the ballpark.
I've been experimenting with this in the last days and while smoothing makes the overall sound less phasey and more similar to a cab in the room, it introduces another issue, at least to my ears: since it basically destroys the information on the time domain, it cancels out the cab reflections and the IR loses its "thump" on the low frequencies.

The good news is I found a neat solution for this issue.
I just placed a crossover before the cab block and sent the high end to a "smoothed" IR and the low end to the same IR but unprocessed.
It worked as I expected with the crossover frequency set around 1KHz, it was the most ampintheroomish tone I've heard coming from my CLRs, especially when doing this with a far-field IR.

It would be nice if this could be done inside the cab block itself, for example by adding a high pass parameter for the smoothing algorithm. I'll post a wish about this.
 
Last edited:
I just placed a crossover before the cab block and sent the high end to a "smoothed" IR and the low end to the same IR but unprocessed. It worked as I expected with the crossover frequency set around 1KHz, it was the most ampintheroomish tone I've heard coming from my CLRs, especially when doing this with a far-field IR.

That's dang clever! Will have to try it.

Oh it can be done. All you need is a box that changes size. Speaker that changes size. Speaker cones that change material. Speaker magnets that change weight. That would be a good start. Oh and speakers that change the amount of speakers.

As @ML SOUND LAB points out, for absolute realism we would need a "cab transformer FRFR" system that can physically change configuration, essentially to the exact cab we want to hear.
Or more practically: some kind of speaker array that can simulate multiple points of sound transmission, including backwards for open-backed cabs.
Or for complete digital amp-in-the room simulation: an acoustic VR in which we can walk around a room with headphones and hear a virtual cab + room. Would require head tracking and modeling the physical cabinet, room, reflectance, furniture etc. Coupling this to visual VR would make the realism complete!

You can approximate the last one using binaural microphones. Play your amp in a room and record it while walking around. Then listen to it with ear buds. It is the closest you will get to "duplicating" what your ears are hearing in the room. It actually sounds pretty realistic. However, subjectively the room tends to seem more present than the direct sound, and I think this is because it isn't in real time as the brain can coordinate and correct for ambiance using many other cues in real time.
 
EHX Magnum 44 = 150 USD

1x12 cabinet of your choice approx. 250 USD on the lower end

1 speaker cable = ? negligible

This is the least anyone could do to supplement their multi-thousand dollars worth of guitars + Axe-Fx to instantly give you an actual amp in the room. Not to mention even at that bargain level it will completely suffice to give that nice satisfaction of practicing next to your amp like you did in the analog days

The whole discussion is the most confusing thing ever because every time someone says "amp in the room" they tend to mean something different. Some people want just a simple IR capture with a nice microphone just a couple feet back, which I think is totally justifiable to one's own subjectivity. Others want science fiction out of the Axe-Fx to give them a lifelike emulation of a full stack without actually having to go out and buy one. If it became possible to accurately emulate the natural response of many varied different speakers you'd still have to most likely have a real life cabinet in your standard sizes loaded with FRFR speakers outputting the emulated speaker profile to convey an amp in the room. It's just not going to happen on headphones

I'm sure someone out there has tried making an IR capture with one of those ear shaped binaural microphones sitting a meter away from a cabinet. Wonder what the consensus would be on those results. High doubt it would settle everyone's urge for that damned amp in the room they could have bought for as low as 400 bucks
 
  • Like
Reactions: RDH
Back
Top Bottom