• 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.

V6 firmware: Time to Release the Monster - Speaker Resonance Page

xpenno

Power User
Oh hell yes I am still doing it. ;)

...and it is GOOD.


:D

In all seriousness, it just let's the mid's breath, IMHO, a bit more naturally at volume. IMHO, it "unhypes" the low and high end and the pick attack and string 'ring' with V7 is bad-ass. You can feel the pick on the strings and the transients you feel are immediate and direct. It's a 'more in touch' thing. Critics of the Fractal platform and MO will continue to scoff, "...if it was so good... how can it keep getting better?" and I just laugh because I have no freaking clue. It just does. Every time I doubt he can really surpass himself... he does it again and again. V7 is tasty fun. My Speaker Resonance thing works perfectly with it, just fun stuff. Everything feels so alive.
Love it! Can't wait :)
 

SeeD

Power User
If you take some time,in Axe Edit. You go thru the amps you like. Save the amp block in Axe Edit. Takes some time,but then you have easy axis to them.

I asked if FAS would,use some of this Scott,Jay. But no answer. So i guess it up to,you and me and others.
Sometimes i like it,and sometimes i like the defult
 

FractalAudio

Administrator
Fractal Audio Systems
Moderator
Just got around to reading this. Gonna have to respectfully disagree with the analysis. The LF stuff is okay. In general the Q is between 2 and 2.5 but that particular speaker is around 1.5. Q is fnot/bandwidth. Most speakers have a higher Q than the speaker shown in the OP.

The Hi Freq is usually between 1 and 1.5 kHz. Hi Freq sets the critical frequency (or corner frequency) of the inductive portion of the loudspeaker's response. The critical frequency is the frequency at which the reactive component of the impedance is equal to the resistive component. This is found by fc = R/(2*pi*L). For a typical speaker R is around 6 ohms and L is around 0.75 mH. Therefore fc = 1270. Jensens tend to have higher inductance so that would move this value down. Eminence speakers tend to have lower inductance so that would move this value up. Celestion does not publish their values so I used Eminence values when calculating the defaults. You'll notice the Marshally stuff has fc around 1500 which is consistent with a typical Eminence copy of a Greenback.
 

rsf1977

Fractal Fanatic
Just got around to reading this. Gonna have to respectfully disagree with the analysis. The LF stuff is okay. In general the Q is between 2 and 2.5 but that particular speaker is around 1.5. Q is fnot/bandwidth. Most speakers have a higher Q than the speaker shown in the OP.

The Hi Freq is usually between 1 and 1.5 kHz. Hi Freq sets the critical frequency (or corner frequency) of the inductive portion of the loudspeaker's response. The critical frequency is the frequency at which the reactive component of the impedance is equal to the resistive component. This is found by fc = R/(2*pi*L). For a typical speaker R is around 6 ohms and L is around 0.75 mH. Therefore fc = 1270. Jensens tend to have higher inductance so that would move this value down. Eminence speakers tend to have lower inductance so that would move this value up. Celestion does not publish their values so I used Eminence values when calculating the defaults. You'll notice the Marshally stuff has fc around 1500 which is consistent with a typical Eminence copy of a Greenback.
Just trying to understand how to assess this. So the Low Freq stuff is okay the high freq stuff there's a disagreement, what about the Mids?
 

Patzag

Fractal Fanatic
I have a question about all this:
(disclaimer: I know as much about amp building and topology as I know about non-eucledian geometry)

When I plug a "real" amp into a "real" cab, there are no adjustment needed to be made on the amp, save the 4-8-16 ohm settings on some amps.
The amp innards react to the electrical impedance of the cabinet in certain ways which affect tone in some way.

Would it not be possible to have, either as part of the IR shooting process, metadata collected and saved containing the necessary values that the amp block would read and then set the Speaker Impedance page to these values by default. Leaving them revealed for the tweakers, of course ;)
This would allow, if it could be implemented, for a very transparent and "correct" setting of that Speaker Impedance page.

The page could include a section for the metadata so user generated IRs or IRs imported from other sources could have their meta data updated.

Thoughts?
 

Scott Peterson

Global Moderator
Moderator
I have a question about all this:
(disclaimer: I know as much about amp building and topology as I know about non-eucledian geometry)

When I plug a "real" amp into a "real" cab, there are no adjustment needed to be made on the amp, save the 4-8-16 ohm settings on some amps.
The amp innards react to the electrical impedance of the cabinet in certain ways which affect tone in some way.

Would it not be possible to have, either as part of the IR shooting process, metadata collected and saved containing the necessary values that the amp block would read and then set the Speaker Impedance page to these values by default. Leaving them revealed for the tweakers, of course ;)
This would allow, if it could be implemented, for a very transparent and "correct" setting of that Speaker Impedance page.

The page could include a section for the metadata so user generated IRs or IRs imported from other sources could have their meta data updated.

Thoughts?
I know less than you do.

I do know that I have been told by many that *do* know, the only way to measure this accurately is to measure it when the cab is actually in your possession and can be.... measured. From what I've been told (by not just Jay, but others that build amps, build speakers, sell pro level IR's) the only way to do this is to actually measure it when you are there at the moment.

I stand by one credo and it has never failed me - trust your ears.
 

barhrecords

Axe-Master
I have a question about all this:
(disclaimer: I know as much about amp building and topology as I know about non-eucledian geometry)

When I plug a "real" amp into a "real" cab, there are no adjustment needed to be made on the amp, save the 4-8-16 ohm settings on some amps.
The amp innards react to the electrical impedance of the cabinet in certain ways which affect tone in some way.

Would it not be possible to have, either as part of the IR shooting process, metadata collected and saved containing the necessary values that the amp block would read and then set the Speaker Impedance page to these values by default. Leaving them revealed for the tweakers, of course ;)
This would allow, if it could be implemented, for a very transparent and "correct" setting of that Speaker Impedance page.

The page could include a section for the metadata so user generated IRs or IRs imported from other sources could have their meta data updated.

Thoughts?
+1

I had suggested the same thing, along with others, in the wish list a while back. Jay mentioned on TGP that the data was just not collected for the factory IR's that he knew of. That made me think it would require all new IR captures to get the data.

If the metadata was collected with the IR and stored somewhere with it. It would be a nice option to "link" the speaker page parameters to the data so that the paramaters could be set to "follow" the IR metadata.

Richard
 

Gamedojo

Power User
....I stand by one credo and it has never failed me - trust your ears.
One huge problem with this credo (which i've followed for over a decade myself) is that now in the world of the AxeFx, the sheer volume of parameters in so many different areas of control mean your ears may be trusted, but unless you set something a certain way, your ears may never even get the chance to HEAR something. Since 1000 settings all change how those 1000 settings sound, its good to have some non-ear using facts to help find the tones to compare.
 

Robboman

Fractal Fanatic
Thanks for your input Cliff!

Everyone has different tastes.

You just gotta use you own ears.

Richard
It's not that simple IMO. Ears constantly learn and evolve. Ears even change their mind sometimes. At least mine do. Even after all these years and so much different gear.

I love the straightforward honesty of the 'trust your ears' approach but I fully admit this; I often appreciate some scientific reassurance to help confirm what my ears think is going on. Especially in the post-analog world we're all making music in.

Much respect and thanks!
 

Scott Peterson

Global Moderator
Moderator
+1

I had suggested the same thing, along with others, in the wish list a while back. Jay mentioned on TGP that the data was just not collected for the factory IR's that he knew of. That made me think it would require all new IR captures to get the data.

If the metadata was collected with the IR and stored somewhere with it. It would be a nice option to "link" the speaker page parameters to the data so that the paramaters could be set to "follow" the IR metadata.

Richard
The reason it cannot work this way - third party and UserIR's. Impossible to expect normal guitarists to make accurate measurements and it assumes that all third parties subscribe to a standard; which isn't logistically possible.

One huge problem with this credo (which i've followed for over a decade myself) is that now in the world of the AxeFx, the sheer volume of parameters in so many different areas of control mean your ears may be trusted, but unless you set something a certain way, your ears may never even get the chance to HEAR something. Since 1000 settings all change how those 1000 settings sound, its good to have some non-ear using facts to help find the tones to compare.
I entirely and wholeheartedly agree. Tis the double edged sword of the Axe-FX; its greatest strength is its deepest weakness. The key to getting there is education your ears and then trusting them. That's why I try to emphasize more 'method' rather than sharing presets or cutting clips. To me, it's an individual journey and we are all very different individuals. I despise gear that takes that away. The Fractal gear allows each person to mold their own custom/crafted tone.
 

barhrecords

Axe-Master
Thanks for your input Cliff!



It's not that simple IMO. Ears constantly learn and evolve. Ears even change their mind sometimes. At least mine do. Even after all these years and so much different gear.

I love the straightforward honesty of the 'trust your ears' approach but I fully admit this; I often appreciate some scientific reassurance to help confirm what my ears think is going on. Especially in the post-analog world we're all making music in.

Much respect and thanks!
I get where you are coming from. I like to know some of the why so that I can learn to fish as they say :)

My response was more about, the "I don't know what to do now" comment. Should I change the parameters or not? In that context, try it and see if it sounds good to you.

Richard
 

barhrecords

Axe-Master
The reason it cannot work this way - third party and UserIR's. Impossible to expect normal guitarists to make accurate measurements and it assumes that all third parties subscribe to a standard; which isn't logistically possible.
Exactly why I would make it an option and not a requirement :)

Richard
 

FractalAudio

Administrator
Fractal Audio Systems
Moderator
I have a question about all this:
(disclaimer: I know as much about amp building and topology as I know about non-eucledian geometry)

When I plug a "real" amp into a "real" cab, there are no adjustment needed to be made on the amp, save the 4-8-16 ohm settings on some amps.
The amp innards react to the electrical impedance of the cabinet in certain ways which affect tone in some way.

Would it not be possible to have, either as part of the IR shooting process, metadata collected and saved containing the necessary values that the amp block would read and then set the Speaker Impedance page to these values by default. Leaving them revealed for the tweakers, of course ;)
This would allow, if it could be implemented, for a very transparent and "correct" setting of that Speaker Impedance page.

The page could include a section for the metadata so user generated IRs or IRs imported from other sources could have their meta data updated.

Thoughts?
You cannot obtain speaker impedance via audio stimulus and microphone measurement. Impedance is defined as voltage divided by current so you need to measure the current vs. applied voltage across the frequency range of interest.

I have the equipment to do it, and have measured many speakers, but the average person doesn't have the equipment nor the knowledge to use the data.

The influence of speaker impedance is generally not that great. The exception are amps with no negative feedback. In these cases the speaker impedance has a much more pronounced effect on the overall response. These amps include Vox, Matchless and most other "Class-A" designs. As soon as you add negative feedback the response flattens considerably. However... Presence and Depth reduce negative feedback so if you dial significant amounts of those in then the speaker impedance becomes a factor again.

All-in-all you only have to be in the ballpark. 1500 Hz is a good starting point for Hi Freq. Adjust up or down slightly by ear. I don't believe that 3000 Hz is accurate. I've never seen a speaker that would have the corner frequency that far out.
 

rsf1977

Fractal Fanatic
I get where you are coming from. I like to know some of the why so that I can learn to fish as they say :)

My response was more about, the "I don't know what to do now" comment. Should I change the parameters or not? In that context, try it and see if it sounds good to you.

Richard
It was more of a joke of a comment in general. The issue is for me is changing the resonance parameters, basic amp parameters, the advance parameters and the million other parameters in front and after the amp block is overwhelming to solve with experimentation alone. Even scott who gets this axefx stuff better then most needed Jay Mitchell to get answers and find his tone Nirvana. What I'm really trying to understand is what the ideas are behind the differing opinions about the 2 approaches. I don't think Jay Mitchell will chime in here, which would be amazing. It seems that all of this is based in science not taste, so for this specific topic i'd love to try to find a "best practice" setting and then leave it alone. These 2 sets of ideas produce very different results, both have there own goods and bads at least in my setup. I just want to learn from all the brilliant folks that seek out all this juicy little ideas. I guess I'll play with it a little bit and see how it goes. And see what shakes out on this thread. And then firmware 7 is gonna drop and then it should get even more interesting lol
 

rsf1977

Fractal Fanatic
You cannot obtain speaker impedance via audio stimulus and microphone measurement. Impedance is defined as voltage divided by current so you need to measure the current vs. applied voltage across the frequency range of interest.

I have the equipment to do it, and have measured many speakers, but the average person doesn't have the equipment nor the knowledge to use the data.

The influence of speaker impedance is generally not that great. The exception are amps with no negative feedback. In these cases the speaker impedance has a much more pronounced effect on the overall response. These amps include Vox, Matchless and most other "Class-A" designs. As soon as you add negative feedback the response flattens considerably. However... Presence and Depth reduce negative feedback so if you dial significant amounts of those in then the speaker impedance becomes a factor again.

All-in-all you only have to be in the ballpark. 1500 Hz is a good starting point for Hi Freq. Adjust up or down slightly by ear. I don't believe that 3000 Hz is accurate. I've never seen a speaker that would have the corner frequency that far out.
I'll give that a shot, thanks cliff
 
Top Bottom