For Those Who Don't Embrace New Tech (iR vs Mic'd Speakers)

[LLL]

Can you hear the difference?

[Bogner]

If I had to guess (and I listened on laptop with the laptop speakers) I would say the cabinet started the clip. I hear a slight change around 8 seconds and again around 15 as well as a few seconds before the end. Very minimal changes and could be something as simple as attack. Virtually impossible to tell with a proper mic set up and a quality IR.

[Demanic]

I like micing stuff. I've also realized that I really like the 80's sound of the Alesis Quadraverb run in stereo. Here's a clip with a Super Strat with Jazz/JB combo. https://youtu.be/weGzFniAsEc

Sent from my SM-A115A using Tapatalk

[beaubrummels]

I really couldn't hear a difference. I think it certainly helps that the IR was created through the exact same mic/cab setup the 'live' take was done with. Proves IRs can sound exactly like the source.

Now it's just a question of: is there an IR out there that you like, that sounds like you want?

It would have been more interesting to me to have the mic backed off the cab to get more of the room sound, and make an IR with that, to see if the room 'air' was also being correctly captured, not just the cab itself.

[jeremy]

for me, it has nothing to do with anything other than i have good amps and when i gig, they are used to putting a mic on a speaker. the other guitar player in one band is full digi with either a helix or headrush so is running di to the board. its fine, but i dont care for the tones he gets overall

[devastone]

I can't tell any difference thorugh my monitors.

[Ewizard]

It USED to be that impulse responses were the weak link in a digital signal chain. I do not believe that is the case anymore. We have enough bits to crunch in a short enough period of time to make an IR that sounds exactly like the signal chain that created it. That is not the problem anymore. Now it is making an amp sim that sounds, feels, and responds like a real amp. I also feel that we can expose the digital aspect of even the best IRs by comparing them at different SPL levels. A speaker at bedroom level, vs one that is on the edge of burning up from being turnt to 11, is going to produce different results when compared with the same amp at polar opposite settings to the IR.

I LOVE my Two Notes Torpedo Captor X. It is the best thing since sliced bread for me. I have amazing speakers at my disposal to monitor with and or use as my direct sound, and it sure beats the hell out of having to crank my amp to get " that " sound. I only have a few cabs and I myself don't have 50 different speaker options to play with. So again having the Captor X to have nearly an unlimited amount of speaker options at my disposal is the bee's knees. BUT it doesn't win in the visceral feeling department. Given the option of playing on a big stage and having either the Captor X or my real cab, I will take the real cab. But 99% of us don't get to play on big stages, most of us play at bars or medium-sized venues that have rules and require respect. This is where the Captor X rules and gives options that we often can't take advantage of.

For recording, I have found that without an A - B reference, it doesn't matter what the IR sounds like. If I play to you through my least liked IR, to you it will just sound like I am playing through whatever your interpretation of my amp rig is. Without a reference, it sounds like dog poop or amazeballs to you. Out of 10 people, there will be 7 that think one way, and 3 that feel the other way about it. IR's fulfill an objective solution to a subjective problem. The Human is the weak link.

[Aceman]

If it sounds good, it is good.

But use what you want. Time and a place, or preference for everything.

[Top-L]

I really couldn't hear a difference. I think it certainly helps that the IR was created through the exact same mic/cab setup the 'live' take was done with. Proves IRs can sound exactly like the source.

Now it's just a question of: is there an IR out there that you like, that sounds like you want?

It would have been more interesting to me to have the mic backed off the cab to get more of the room sound, and make an IR with that, to see if the room 'air' was also being correctly captured, not just the cab itself.

I agree with all this.

Tone and response of an amp/speaker changes alot when cranked. An IR captured using his mic/cab/amp/eq settings, will sound identical when applied to the same mic/amp/eq settings, but is it worth anything when other people apply it to their setup with different amp/eq settings?

The analogy that I can think of is that an IR is like a custom tailored suit. You go to the tailor and he takes your measurements and he makes a suit from raw cloth. It looks great on you. The suit jacket matches perfectly the pants and fits your build perfectly.

But you can't just give the suit jacket to someone else to wear. Will it match the color/cloth of their pants? No. Will it have the same perfect fit? No.

[Top-L]

For recording, I have found that without an A - B reference, it doesn't matter what the IR sounds like. If I play to you through my least liked IR, to you it will just sound like I am playing through whatever your interpretation of my amp rig is. Without a reference, it sounds like dog poop or amazeballs to you. Out of 10 people, there will be 7 that think one way, and 3 that feel the other way about it. IR's fulfill an objective solution to a subjective problem. The Human is the weak link.

For the past few years, a late night hobby of mine has been imitating some of the "revered" Fractal FX3 tones that are demod on youtube and sold as preset/IR packs, with my more modest Boss and Zoom FX processors. Its possible to use your cab sim controls + EQ, or use an IR + EQ to get something that sounds virtually identical. Can also do it to match real amps/cabs.

I've gotten really good at isolating certain frequencies and being able to tune "by ear" to make one thing sound like another.

I honestly don't care any more. At a certain point knowledge trumps any stack of gear. The important question: is this good music? Even the fakest of fake tones don't bother me if they are used well in a song.

[GuitarStv]

IRs make a great (indistinguishable?) copy of the real thing.

I suspect that the main reason to go with a tube amp these days is repairability. I've happily used tube amps that were 60 years old and still doing their thing perfectly. It's unusual for me to use software that is even just twenty years old, and modern hardware to run the IRs certainly doesn't seem to be built to last.

[NegativeEase]

Can you hear the difference?

I'll do this when I get home tomorrow and can put them on my reference monitors.

I will be surprised if I cant tell, as I know a few things to listen for that are giveaways generally.

[Ewizard]

Where I think this particular test could be manipulated is if he were to take the IR snapshot of the exact mic position as he did the real recording. If the IR software did its job, it should no doubt sound identical, nothing has been changed. Now if he were to move the mic and reset all of the HA gains etc., then I would be surprised if he could get the mic to sound the same as the IR again.

[Masta' C]

Here are my time-stamp lottery numbers for the cab/IR swapping before the big reveal:

2 seconds
5 seconds
10 seconds
14 seconds
18 seconds
22 seconds
28 seconds

I'm most curious about the 5 and 18 second marks, so it'll be interesting to see if those are spots where a swap actually occurred

As for which is which? No clue!

[nexion218]

I'll do this when I get home tomorrow and can put them on my reference monitors.

I will be surprised if I cant tell, as I know a few things to listen for that are giveaways generally.

Looking forward to it, seriously!