Why can't 'amp in the room' feel be modelled?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I found that shooting many IR's from my favorite Cab and Speaker, and then mixing them until I get the exact response when using this mix with a pair of CLR's is better than buying all the cab packs in the world and hoping for one that works for you. I used a few different standard mics and also a cheap RTA mic. In the end, I shot 8 different positions of each speaker in my 412 cab, including the back, sides, and also from where my ears are when using the real thing. My thinking is I want to hear the cab in the room to reproduce the cab in the room, not just the on-speaker or far field, but still in the speaker beam with FRFR.

I use these IR's in all my presets since, and it really is like just plugging a diff amp head into my real cab.

After trying hundreds of IR's from others and cab packs, what I realized is the mic positions are not right for what I want to hear, and usually they all are single shoots of diff positions and well I spent hours mixing with cab lab with less than satisfactory results. I wanted a single shoot of 8 diff positions so I decided to make my own, using my X32 producer and mix them live, not post in cab lab.

It was a long journey and it took a lot of shoots, trial and error on positions, phase, and experimentation, but in the end I got it where there is little to no difference in the critical high end, no exaggerated mid scooping, and no exaggerated bass flub.

IMO all it takes it spending the time, and by time I mean it took me a couple weeks as its important to take many breaks to reset your ears, do many recordings and always have a reference to compare back to.

Anyways, I'm happy with the results and to me, using a pair of CLR's feels and sounds the same to me as using my old '78 JMP 2203 into a '81 JCM800 412 with G12-65 celestions.
 
You might not feel that way after you've spent some time A/B'ing your Matrix with a true reference amp like a Bryston 2B.



To me, that's the best case to be made for the Matrix amps.
IMO The ART SLA amps sound more musical than the Matrix amps too.

I've never tried one of those power amps, so in all honesty I have no idea..
my principle needs are:
- lots of power.. as in, way more than I need cos I like the headroom you get from not needing to push things overly hard in any situation..
- transparency.. the Axe makes the noise, the power amp makes it loud
- light weight.. I need my rack to stay below the weight limits where airlines start charging by the kilo for being over their limit.. it can get costly..

I used to use the Marshall Valvestate 8008.. was great with the Digitech 2120.. real loud too.. but I realised that this was because the 2120 is only a preamp, so the 8008 in Valvestate model injected a sort of EL34 tone / vibe.. it was a great combination..
this didn't work with the Axe so well.. especially with later FW versions where the Axe power amp modelling got better and better.. I guess it was like putting a power amp through a power amp.. so I switched it to linear mode.. it was ok but a little sterile..
then in came the GT1000FX and for my personal needs it covered all bases..
more transparent than the 8008, lighter, and even more powerful…

so… my preamp and power amp tones come from the AXE, the Matrix just makes it loud without tonally getting in the way.. and helps me better stay below the weight limits so I can avoid / lessen $$ being handed over to the weight limit NAZI's at check-in.. and of course Marshall 4x12 cabs just do what they do and I adore it..

my live tone is nice and fat, makes me a happy bunny, and so it places me in the frame of mind to deliver the best possible performance that I can..
I'd certainly be interested to hear the power amps you're talking about…
that said… it's not like I'm unhappy with my rig..
to the contrary, I think the Fractal / Matrix / Marshall combination is stunning..
just a taste thing though..
 
I'm guessing that that is a joke.

The directionality of a guitar cab is not the thing that's missing from the way that FRFR system approximate the cab-in-the-room.
It's the very last thing we'd like to replicate.
When we play with guitar cabs we find a spot that sounds good and we usually don't move from there.
And that spot is not usually with our ears right in front of and on-axis to the driver.
It's the duplication of that sweet spot along with the greater dispersion and *lack* of directivity of an FRFR system that I'm after.

In my experience, the things that I've never been able to get out of an FRFR speaker that I do get out of a guitar cab are:

1. The attack transients of guitar cabs are less peaky and sharp and are, to me, more musical sounding.

2. The top end never seems just right from an FRFR speaker.
Most IRs have too much top end, especially for mid or hi gain tones, and when you EQ it out it ends up sounding flat and uninteresting.
And EQ'ing a dull IR never seems to work either.
And even if you do get the top end tapered in a musical way it's just a different type of top end than you hear coming out of a guitar cab.
I notice this the most when using my EMG-SA loaded Strat and going back and forth between my EV cabs and my CLRs when using a hyper clean and bright tone.
The CLRs just seem to be incapable of reproducing the same type of musical sounding top end that the EVs do.
The same is true for any other FRFR speaker I've used.
This probably has more to do with the way that horns and tweeters reproduce top end than it does with the way the IRs were recorded.
I.e. The way a 12" woofer reproduces these frequencies is just different than the way that a horn or a tweeter does it.
I thought the concentric drivers of the CLR might mitigate this issue for me but they don't.

3. The mids often seem quite scooped as well as cold sounding in most of the IRs I've tried.
There's just more mid girth from a guitar cab.
This probably has more to do with the way a guitar cab vibrates and resonates in a room than it does with the way the IRs are recorded.

4. Bass boominess from an FRFR system is more of an issue as the SPL increases than it is with a guitar cab.
A guitar cab seems to work better at both bedroom levels and gigging levels whereas an FRFR system seems to exaggerate the Fletcher-Munson effects.

5. When I play live with a power amp + cabs rig I have several amp sim types (hyper clean and bright, hyper-clean and dark, bluesy breakup, hi-gain 1, hi-gain 2) that I run into that system and they all sound good through that one speaker.
When I find an IR that works satisfactorily with one of my amp sim types it invariably sounds unsatisfactory with the other amp sim types.
I've never understood why this should be.
Even a mic'd cab signal will work with several different and contrasting amp tones.

BTW
I know I'm peeing into the wind on all of this.
I'm just thinking out loud here.

some really interesting observations here that upon reflection seem to get close to describing some if the things I think I experienced with FRFR systems
 
IMO, I couldn't possibly disagree more. I had both, the Matrix (gt1000fx) won by a mile. Sold off the ART SLA2.

I realize that yours is the majority opinion.

I'm not saying that the SLA amps sound great mind you, just that I think they give a more honest reproduction of the signal that the Axe presents to them than the Matrix amps do.
But if you really want to reproduce that signal as purely as possible, there's nothing like a Bryston (that I'm aware of).
When you hear the Axe through a Bryston you KNOW what those amp models are supposed to sound like.

The Axe is flexible enough that virtually any power amp's issues can be compensated for.
But if you don't want to deal with those sorts of workarounds then using the power amp with the very best specs is the way to go.
IMO.

Have you tried playing audio CDs (preferably of well recorded acoustic instruments) through your GT1000 into good or even average studio monitors?
NS10s are hardly either but they are a known quantity.
And when I A/B/C'd my Bryston, my SLA1 and my GT1000 into my NS10s the latter amp clearly was the odd man out.
(As I recall I also rented a couple of passive Elite full-range monitors to test as well.)
The GT1000 sounded hollow and unnatural.
Obviously the Bryston was the best.
But the SLA1 held its own quite nicely.
The top end on the SLA1 is just a bit over-hyped.

I actually bought a GT800 (later returned) in the hopes that it would have a less colored tone than the GT1000 and it kind of does in that it's less scooped.
But it's also not as musical sounding as the GT1000 and just didn't sound good to me.
In my opinion and in my experience there's some funny coloring going on in the GT1000 that's responsible for the reaction from people here that it seems to sound more "tube-like" than other ss power amps.
But in my opinion sounding more "tube-like" is a detriment in a power amp that's driving an Axe-FX because the Axe-FX is more than capable of sounding "tube-like" all on its own.
[I'm probably going to try a Carvin DCM2000L sometime soon too in the hopes that it sounds a bit more like the Bryston.
The Bryston, although also 1u, is quite heavy and it's only 60 watts a side in stereo (200 watts bridged mono) into 8 ohms so it's a bit underpowered for some of my needs.
The Carvin is only 100 watts a side (200 watts bridged) so it's also a bit underpowered.
But if I like it I'll pick up a 2nd one to use on my loud stereo gigs, or I'll use the Bryston on one side and the Carvin on the other.
I don't have many of these types of gigs anymore so having both amps in my rack at the same time is not really an issue.]

I was just preparing for a little recording session on which I was going to be using my Axe + cabs rig.
Whenever I was tweaking things and the GT1000 was powering my cabs there was always something I didn't like about my tones and couldn't get rid of.
As soon as I plugged the Bryston back in those issue were gone and the illusion that I really was playing a Twin or a IIC+ into an EV was real strong again.
I love the weight, headroom and 1u aspect of the GT1000 but i don't think I'm going to be using it ever again.

If anybody in Toronto wants a GT1000 you might want to contact me.
(I don't do shipping. Just cash and carry.)
I'm not quite ready to sell it yet, but probably will be real soon.
 
Maybe we are expecting something that is technically impossible, I don't know. When I'm plugged into my computer via USB and the sound is coming out of my cheap Bose computer speakers, it sounds unbelievable and envelops me with awesome tone. I feel like I'm on stage playing and can feel the thump in my chest and inspiring sound. When I've played thru a power amp and speakers, it is hard to feel that sound enveloping you. Thru the computer, the sound surrounds me. With guitar, etc. speakers, it points at me and comes from one direction. I know that doesn't make much sense. Sounds great but doesn't fill the air around me.
 
I realize that yours is the majority opinion.

I'm not saying that the SLA amps sound great mind you, just that I think they give a more honest reproduction of the signal that the Axe presents to them than the Matrix amps do.
But if you really want to reproduce that signal as purely as possible, there's nothing like a Bryston (that I'm aware of).
When you hear the Axe through a Bryston you KNOW what those amp models are supposed to sound like.

The Axe is flexible enough that virtually any power amp's issues can be compensated for.
But if you don't want to deal with those sorts of workarounds then using the power amp with the very best specs is the way to go.
IMO.

Have you tried playing audio CDs (preferably of well recorded acoustic instruments) through your GT1000 into good or even average studio monitors?
NS10s are hardly either but they are a known quantity.
And when I A/B/C'd my Bryston, my SLA1 and my GT1000 into my NS10s the latter amp clearly was the odd man out.
(As I recall I also rented a couple of passive Elite full-range monitors to test as well.)
The GT1000 sounded hollow and unnatural.
Obviously the Bryston was the best.
But the SLA1 held its own quite nicely.
The top end on the SLA1 is just a bit over-hyped.

I actually bought a GT800 (later returned) in the hopes that it would have a less colored tone than the GT1000 and it kind of does in that it's less scooped.
But it's also not as musical sounding as the GT1000 and just didn't sound good to me.
In my opinion and in my experience there's some funny coloring going on in the GT1000 that's responsible for the reaction from people here that it seems to sound more "tube-like" than other ss power amps.
But in my opinion sounding more "tube-like" is a detriment in a power amp that's driving an Axe-FX because the Axe-FX is more than capable of sounding "tube-like" all on its own.
[I'm probably going to try a Carvin DCM2000L sometime soon too in the hopes that it sounds a bit more like the Bryston.
The Bryston, although also 1u, is quite heavy and it's only 60 watts a side in stereo (200 watts bridged mono) into 8 ohms so it's a bit underpowered for some of my needs.
The Carvin is only 100 watts a side (200 watts bridged) so it's also a bit underpowered.
But if I like it I'll pick up a 2nd one to use on my loud stereo gigs, or I'll use the Bryston on one side and the Carvin on the other.
I don't have many of these types of gigs anymore so having both amps in my rack at the same time is not really an issue.]

I was just preparing for a little recording session on which I was going to be using my Axe + cabs rig.
Whenever I was tweaking things and the GT1000 was powering my cabs there was always something I didn't like about my tones and couldn't get rid of.
As soon as I plugged the Bryston back in those issue were gone and the illusion that I really was playing a Twin or a IIC+ into an EV was real strong again.
I love the weight, headroom and 1u aspect of the GT1000 but i don't think I'm going to be using it ever again.

If anybody in Toronto wants a GT1000 you might want to contact me.
(I don't do shipping. Just cash and carry.)
I'm not quite ready to sell it yet, but probably will be real soon.

I use FRFR using a D&B amp and monitor. As this particular rig does not move much, I don't have the weight problem others might.
I also have tested a number of other systems, including amps like Bryston 3B and 4B, the cream of the crop, and L'Acoustic monitors. When money is not an issue, the L'Acoustics were the best and provided an amazing tone.
As far as lightweight amps, you might want to try the recent offerings from Labgruppen. Their amps are, IMO, on par with D&B and Bryston and their IPD series 1RU are "affordable" in a sense. I have not heard their latest offerings, but the old Labgruppens were amazing amps.
 
My way of thinking is that if I want the "guitar cabinet in a room" sound.... get a guitar cabinet..... place it in a room..... profit?

Its all about options right?
 
I think joegold may have a valid point. Doesn't Matrix Amplification confirm that their amps provide "Colour" similar to a valve amp in an appeal to us guitar players?

FYI - I play through a GT1000FX into a pair of 2x12 Friedman cabs, and have that amp in the room sound. I suppose if I were to go the FRFR route with my AXEFX2, then a transparent amp would be more important.
 
I think joegold may have a valid point. Doesn't Matrix Amplification confirm that their amps provide "Colour" similar to a valve amp in an appeal to us guitar players?

FYI - I play through a GT1000FX into a pair of 2x12 Friedman cabs, and have that amp in the room sound. I suppose if I were to go the FRFR route with my AXEFX2, then a transparent amp would be more important.
Matrix amps don't colour your sound at all. They're very transparent. What they do is provide a slightly slowed response so they aren't immediate like PA amps, so you get the 'feel' of power amp sag. So it's more of a feel thing than tonal change. This slowed response is more pronounced on the 1000 model than it I still on the 800. That's the difference the OP was experiencing, but it certainly wasn't an audio difference.
 
In The Room (ITR) feel has practically nothing to do with amps or modeling whatsoever. At any given output level, there are really only two things that affect ITR feel: physical speaker/cabinet choice and the room itself. That's pretty much it. You can change a signal going into a speaker all you want with different digital models or different power amps, but it will not change the dispersion characteristics of the physical speaker/cab used at all. FRFR cabinets will always sound different from real guitar cabinets because they are exactly that: physically different cabinets. FRFR + IR's allows you to recreate the frequency response of a given speaker/cab, but it does absolutely nothing to recreate the way a given guitar cab projects sound into a room. That physical interaction has everything to do with the way it sounds and feels in the room. To put it into a visual context, it's like comparing a bare light bulb to a spot light. Even if they both emit the exact same amount of light in the exact same colors (i.e. output level and frequency response), they way the light gets spread into a dark room is very different (dispersion). The end result in the room will likely be quite different between the two. Until someone creates a T-1000 style liquid metal FRFR cab that can physically mimic the speaker cone size, shape, texture, movement, resonance, etc. of any given guitar cab, there will always be a difference "in the room". If you absolutely must have the feel of a big blasting 4x12 cabinet in the room with you, use a real 4x12 cabinet. There is just no physical way a small 1x12 box with a horn tweeter is going to feel exactly the same. That doesn't mean that the small box can't still sound good or even better in some ways. For recording purposes, the room vibe can be recreated with reverb as it has been for decades.
 
Maybe because I'm getting more pragmatic in my old age, but In-The-Room is irrelevant and useless to all but someone standing a few feet from a guitar cab. It never makes it to a recording or to front of house. In fact, the characteristics that make ITR so enjoyable for guitarists are counterproductive for an arrangement. The engineer's just going to dial all that out, anyway. It's the last way you should want to design a patch in the AFX2.
 
...the characteristics that make ITR so enjoyable for guitarists are counterproductive for an arrangement. The engineer's just going to dial all that out, anyway. It's the last way you should want to design a patch in the AFX2.
This.
 
This thread is about Bawlz. I play my XL+ thru a tube power amp then into a guitar cab. When Im banging out a nice chunky rhythm my pants shake. I like that. You can feel what you are playing. FRFART or whatever doesn't do that. Displacing air = Bawlz.
 
i feel like the real question is:
is it possible to build a DSP contolled frfr speaker which would be able to emulate speakers and cabinets? sort of axe fx just for cabs&speakers.
 
No. Different sized and shaped speakers and cabinets move air in different ways. That's just the rules of physics. No amount of DSP will change that. You can recreate the same frequency response with IR's, but the dispersion pattern will always depend on the physical characteristics of the speakers and cab used. For the same reason, you can't make a 1x12 open back cab sound and feel exactly like an oversized sealed 4x12 cab and vice versa, even if they are loaded with the exact same speakers.
 
Last edited:
Maybe because I'm getting more pragmatic in my old age, but In-The-Room is irrelevant and useless to all but someone standing a few feet from a guitar cab. It never makes it to a recording or to front of house. In fact, the characteristics that make ITR so enjoyable for guitarists are counterproductive for an arrangement. The engineer's just going to dial all that out, anyway. It's the last way you should want to design a patch in the AFX2.

While I absolutely agree with you, it doesn't mean that it's an invalid use-case for all us guys who do just stand in front of a cab that and just enjoy jamming. There are many types of guitarist on this forum and not everyone gigs, nor does everyone record.

As I mentioned before, you are spot on correct that that kind of mix would never sit well in the other contexts that you mention; but that's not how everyone on uses this product. We see a litany of use cases posted on this forum every single day.

Fortunately there's enough room inside the product to build presets for all conditions (including two global EQs).
 
No. Different sized and shaped speakers and cabinets move air in different ways. That's just the rules of physics. No amount of DSP will change that. You can recreate the same frequency response with IR's, but the dispersion pattern will always depend on the physical characteristics of the speakers and cab used. For the same reason, you can't make a 1x12 open back cab sound and feel exactly like an oversized sealed 4x12 cab and vice versa, even if they are loaded with the exact same speakers.

you can do everything, you cant do it just right now...someday someone will figure it out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom