Whats Cliff doing now?

Hmmm... I don't think he actually said that. You may be reading into his post about the IR being bigger to it being longer?

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/whats-cliff-doing-now.192448/post-2393957

It is quite possible it will require more CPU but we won't know until we know :)
Regarding IR length, it would only require more CPU if it indeed processed the entire longer IR, and perhaps not if the processing window was set to the shorter IR length currently used.
 
Son of a bitch is still responding to forum posts, the man gets no rest.

Yeah, I could see that coming when he said he was leaving for vacation. He knows the kind of maniacs who follow his developments. And then you have the people who like to try to antagonize everything good, and he'll have to counter all that nonsense too. No good deed goes unpunished.
 
Smoothing could be cool :)

I used to use smoothing all the time for all IRs, because I had these harsh frequencies that took too much EQing to dial out otherwise. But I ended up discovering that the cause was my guitar itself, and I was able to mitigate it by lowering the height of the resonant peak of my pickups (by installing trimpots in parallel to my volume pots and dialing the trimpots to mitigate my guitar's obnoxious pick attack). I now find my tones to be easy and quick to dial in, with both static IRs and Dyna Cabs. I find that the guitar is just sweeter and more pleasing overall.

I used to get great tones with smoothing, but they always were so much less natural (although not harsh), the extreme amount of work I had needed to do with EQ without smoothing I traded for extreme work to make the tone sound more natural with smoothing! But ever since making the pickups sit better with my overly bright guitar, I'm finding it not to be necessary, and I'm getting way better results. Just a thought, and of course my situation may not translate to yours or to the reasons others may use smoothing.
 
I used to use smoothing all the time for all IRs, because I had these harsh frequencies that took too much EQing to dial out otherwise. But I ended up discovering that the cause was my guitar itself, and I was able to mitigate it by lowering the height of the resonant peak of my pickups (by installing trimpots in parallel to my volume pots and dialing the trimpots to mitigate my guitar's obnoxious pick attack). I now find my tones to be easy and quick to dial in, with both static IRs and Dyna Cabs. I find that the guitar is just sweeter and more pleasing overall.

I used to get great tones with smoothing, but they always were so much less natural (although not harsh), the extreme amount of work I had needed to do with EQ without smoothing I traded for extreme work to make the tone sound more natural with smoothing! But ever since making the pickups sit better with my overly bright guitar, I'm finding it not to be necessary, and I'm getting way better results. Just a thought, and of course my situation may not translate to yours or to the reasons others may use smoothing.
Yes, a switched parallel trimpot is also a good way for Humbucker to single coil splitts, because mostly the 500K Pot has not enough load to damp the resonance in SC mode!
 
Yes, a switched parallel trimpot is also a good way for Humbucker to single coil splitts, because mostly the 500K Pot has not enough load to damp the resonance in SC mode!

Oh yeah, that way you can get closer to 500k on the parallel resistor, to bring the 500k volume pot to 250k. You just connect the outer lugs of the volume pot to the outer lugs of the trimpot, bypassing the wiper altogether. More accurate than using a 470k resistor. Of course you'll have a tolerance on the volume and trimpots, but you're closer to your desired values there. And Hell, you could use a 1M trimpot with the wiper to dial a volume pot with an actual value pretty far off from its intended 500k, whether it's higher or lower, to be exactly 250k on the switch.
 
Oh yeah, that way you can get closer to 500k on the parallel resistor, to bring the 500k volume pot to 250k. You just connect the outer lugs of the volume pot to the outer lugs of the trimpot, bypassing the wiper altogether. More accurate than using a 470k resistor. Of course you'll have a tolerance on the volume and trimpots, but you're closer to your desired values there. And Hell, you could use a 1M trimpot with the wiper to dial a volume pot with an actual value pretty far off from its intended 500k, whether it's higher or lower, to be exactly 250k on the switch.
The problem with this approach is that a resistor in parallel with pot alters the taper of the pot.
To give an example: a 250k linear pot set at noon would have a resistance of about 125k. In the case of a 500k pot at noon (250k) in parallel with a 500k resistor instead, the resulsting resistance would be 166k.

Imho, to have a pot that's 250k for split coils and 500 for humbuckers, it would be better to use a stereo 250k pot and a switch wired so that the two sides of the pot are in series when using humbuckers (500k total resistance) and one is bypassed when using split coils.
 
The problem with this approach is that a resistor in parallel with pot alters the taper of the pot.
To give an example: a 250k linear pot set at noon would have a resistance of about 125k. In the case of a 500k pot at noon (250k) in parallel with a 500k resistor instead, the resulsting resistance would be 166k.

Imho, to have a pot that's 250k for split coils and 500 for humbuckers, it would be better to use a stereo 250k pot and a switch wired so that the two sides of the pot are in series when using humbuckers (500k total resistance) and one is bypassed when using split coils.

Yeah, the one real hesitance I had in trying this was the change in pot taper. Maybe because I'm using log pots, or maybe because I'm using dual concentrics with knobs that do not have numbers showing where your settings are, I was surprised to find that I didn't notice a difference at all. I'm always just turning the knobs without really looking anyway, just letting my ears tell me where to land. But yeah, I saw the charts about this, and it's absolutely something to consider, but I don't think it's a deal breaker. Pot behavior, from what I've read, also is different between brands, where Bourns has been listed by a few people as having their own behavior they prefer. So I think it's worth experimenting some with this.
 
Back
Top Bottom