User Cabs + Hires / Lores

[sprint]

If I'm using the "USER" Cabs, does the Hisres / Lores parameter have any meaning?

 

[Jay Mitchell]

If I'm using the "USER" Cabs, does the Hisres / Lores parameter have any meaning?

Yes.

 

[Sebastian]

To shed more light on the subject:
You can only load "hi-res" (1024-point) cab IRs into the Axe-Fx.
If you choose to use the cab block in stereo or lo-res mono, the data is still taken from the 1024-point IR,
but only in half the resolution (512-point).

 

[Scott Peterson]

To shed more light on the subject:
You can only load "hi-res" (1024-point) cab IRs into the Axe-Fx.
If you choose to use the cab block in stereo or lo-res mono, the data is still taken from the 1024-point IR,
but only in half the resolution (512-point).

Yes. Assuming your user cabs were 1024 point IR's originally.

 

[sprint]

Thanks!

 

[knoll]

To shed more light on the subject:
You can only load "hi-res" (1024-point) cab IRs into the Axe-Fx.
If you choose to use the cab block in stereo or lo-res mono, the data is still taken from the 1024-point IR,
but only in half the resolution (512-point).

Is it half the resolution or first 512 points?

 

[Sebastian]

To shed more light on the subject:
You can only load "hi-res" (1024-point) cab IRs into the Axe-Fx.
If you choose to use the cab block in stereo or lo-res mono, the data is still taken from the 1024-point IR,
but only in half the resolution (512-point).

Is it half the resolution or first 512 points?

I think it's half the resolution, but I'm not sure.
Either Cliff or Jay should know. I hope he doesn't say just "yes" again

 

[DieSchmalle]

Only first half of the IR data is used when set to LoRes.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

Is it half the resolution or first 512 points?

Yes. They are the same thing.

 

[knoll]

Is it half the resolution or first 512 points?

Yes. They are the same thing.

Yes, I agree But isn't "half the resolution" also if you take every second point from the 1024 points. That's the case I meant to ask but I should have been more specific.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

But isn't "half the resolution" also if you take every second point from the 1024 points.

No, that's half the sampling rate.

 

[levipeto]

But isn't "half the resolution" also if you take every second point from the 1024 points.

No, that's half the sampling rate.

Digital Audio is measured in two ways: Bit Rate Resolution and Sample Rate.

Sample Rate is the number of samples per second taken of the audio. 1Hz = 1 sample per second. RedBook CD (RBCD) is 44.1kHz = 44,100 samples per second.

Bit Rate Resolution is the digital word length of each sample. This determines how precise each sample is. Think of it this way. You can explain last night's concert more precise using 100 words rather than using 20 words. RBCD bit rate resolution is 16bit which gives a 65,535 word length. If a certain sample takes more than 65,535 words to describe than the sample will lose some information which results in distortion. The precision difference with bit rate is noticeable when you realize that most internet audio streams are at 8bit and digital telephones are at 4bit. Background noise is associated with lower bit rates.

http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=4214
------------------------------------------------------------

In AXE-FX:
So the resolution is 1024 for each sample for Hi-Res with 48Khz sampling rate.
Lo-Res is still 48Khz, but uses the first half of each sample.

Correct?

 

[knoll]

But isn't "half the resolution" also if you take every second point from the 1024 points.

No, that's half the sampling rate.

Thanks, I had my terms mixed.

 

[Tone_Freak]

Are Redwirez better?

does anyone know if the Redwirez ones have a more clear sound than the Stock Axe FX cabs? because on the Redwirez preview loader they sound pretty damn good. i hope those sample clips are not mastered through the craziest gear and plug-ins just to to fool people into buying them.

 

[Plankis]

They're different. It's up to you to decide if you like them or not.

 

[Tone_Freak]

Speaking of resolution, one thing i have noticed in this impulse world is the following - dynamic mics are great and accurately done IRs - but can anyone confirm if that airy sparkle of condenser mics can come across in an IR?

when using IRs in ,my axe fx. Sure the SM57s and MD421 and all the other dynamics sound proper..... but does anyone notice any missing airy and silky harmonics with with condenser-based IRs?

Is not the use of an IR with a Neumann U87 supposed to relay some kind of very top end harmonic sparkle?

Can IRs really accurately simulate the full higher order harmonics and overtones of the top condenser microphones as if they were placed in front of an amp in real life?

Because when I pull up a U87...uhh, i really dont know people. LOL. That mic is supposed to sound whey more clear and airy than an SM57 - yes even on guitar cabs. When some of these bands such as Static X use U87 on their cabs they sound really really silky. But on the axe the SM57 sounds more brilliant and has more harmonic range. Am I missing something?

 

[Jay Mitchell]

Speaking of resolution, one thing i have noticed in this impulse world is the following - dynamic mics are great and accurately done IRs - but can anyone confirm if that airy sparkle of condenser mics can come across in an IR?

Yes.

when using IRs in ,my axe fx. Sure the SM57s and MD421 and all the other dynamics sound proper..... but does anyone notice any missing airy and silky harmonics with with condenser-based IRs?

As compared to what? No mic at all? That's all I ever use myself.

Is not the use of an IR with a Neumann U87 supposed to relay some kind of very top end harmonic sparkle?

Have you ever used a Neumann U87? If not, how could you possibly tell whether the IR in the Axe-Fx is accurate?

Can IRs really accurately simulate

Not "simulate." Capture would be a more accurate descriptive term.

Because when I pull up a U87...uhh, i really dont know people.

I agree. With the conditional part of that statement, that is.

 

[Tone_Freak]

Have you ever used a Neumann U87? If not, how could you possibly tell whether the IR in the Axe-Fx is accurate?

Oh don't you worry at all about that, as I know what a U87 is supposed to sound like. Its supposed to have whey more harmonics and character in the higher frequencies as well as more overtones.... are these characteristics about the U87 missing in the axe?

Im just saying that this does not sound more airy than the dynamic mics when it is really supposed to.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

Oh don't you worry at all about that, as I know what a U87 is supposed to sound like. Its supposed to have whey more harmonics and character in the higher frequencies as well as more overtones....

Uhh, no. The "harmonics" must come from the instrument being mic'ed. To the extent the a mic adds harmonics, it is generating distortion. Trust me on this: that's the last thing you want from a microphone.

Im just saying that this does not sound more airy than the dynamic mics when it is really supposed to.

I'm just sayin' that, unless you have hands-on experience with the mics in question, you have no way of knowing what to expect. Methinks the car's in front of the horse here....