Another Axe/Kemper Comparison Clip

[m~Dan]

Originally Posted by Jay Mitchell

You could not be more wrong. IRs have huge, untapped potential. The technology is not the limitation, the people using the technology (IOW, the people who are acquiring IRs) are.

I see the limitation in IRs that they are static. Is there a possibility to get dynamic IRs?
I don't see how one can do that except layering many IR and "chose" the right one, relative to the amplitude - but I don't know

[Jay Mitchell]

Originally Posted by m~Dan

I see the limitation in IRs that they are static.

Precisely what do you mean by "static?" That is a widely-abused, but not widely-understood, term. Its use here implies a lack of understanding of what speakers actually contribute to the sound of a guitar amp.

[m~Dan]

With static I mean that the impulse response is independant from the amplitude of the inputsignal - which just isn't true in reality. I know that the Kemper uses a dynamic technique in the cab sims.

[Jay Mitchell]

Originally Posted by m~Dan

With static I mean that the impulse response is independant from the amplitude of the inputsignal

The correct term is "linear," then.

which just isn't true in reality.

Actually it is "true in reality" for speakers.

[Gasp100]

Originally Posted by m~Dan

With static I mean that the impulse response is independant from the amplitude of the inputsignal - which just isn't true in reality. I know that the Kemper uses a dynamic technique in the cab sims.

How does Kemper have cab "sims"? Isn't the cab actually part of the profile itself?

[m~Dan]

@Jay: Thanks for the clarification, I didn't know that it is true with speakers. I often read "the cab needs to be driven with volume xy to sound good" - is that only munson-fletcher then, or is it the combination of the cab with the speakers?

@Gasp: The cab is part of the profile. But you can always store the cab from profile X and add exchange it with profile Y (see my video on the page before)

[jerryratpack]

Dan , I understand you received the latest update on the Kemper today ? Can you tell us what was added or was it just fixes and things like that ?
Thanks Edit: If you covered this on another thread, just point me to it.

Originally Posted by m~Dan

@Jay: Thanks for the clarification, I didn't know that it is true with speakers. I often read "the cab needs to be driven with volume xy to sound good" - is that only munson-fletcher then, or is it the combination of the cab with the speakers?

@Gasp: The cab is part of the profile. But you can always store the cab from profile X and add exchange it with profile Y (see my video on the page before)

[Jay Mitchell]

Originally Posted by m~Dan

@Jay: Thanks for the clarification, I didn't know that it is true with speakers. I often read "the cab needs to be driven with volume xy to sound good" - is that only munson-fletcher then, or is it the combination of the cab with the speakers?

It is due to two factors: 1) When you increase the volume with a tube amp, you increase the distortion it produces, and 2)the change in hearing response with level (sometimes called "Fletcher-Munson," although their data is somewhat outdated).

[OverHTheHill]

For any single 4x12 Marshall cab miced with sm57, there are thousands of IRs outhere, if it was more scientfic than personal why do we need that many.

I'm glad your laughing as it's clear you're joking and obviously couldn't say it with a straight face.

Unless,...You're missing the fact that my physical 4x12 has tens of thousands of "IRs" that the makers are claiming they can capture a single snapshop of its sounds yet the debate rages on because many aren't convinced because they don't hear it, it's not the science behind it. Once a manufacturer decides on the type of speaker and Cab, not much changing goes on, because it has been established that 4x12 Celesions of various wattage will give a sound than mostly everyone can recognize as well as they would agree on the suitability of other speakers brand. Sure you can change speakers, but the need to change that can never be compared with the need to audition IRs.

Originally Posted by Jay Mitchell

So lemme get this straight: you think it's more cumbersome to go through "a lot" of IRs than similar number of physical cabs/mics/mic positions?

[OverHTheHill]

Why do you say that?

Originally Posted by Jay Mitchell

No. You would not understand a complete, accurate explanation of this matter, but that does not invalidate such an answer.
.

[Jay Mitchell]

Originally Posted by OverHTheHill

For any single 4x12 Marshall cab miced with sm57, there are thousands of IRs outhere, if it was more scientfic than personal why do we need that many.

For "any single 4x12 Marshall cab miced with sm57" there are thousands of sounds you can get just by moving the mic.

Unless,...You're missing the fact that my physical 4x12 has tens of thousands of "IRs"

Nope. You are missing the fact the stuffing a mic into the grille of a 4x12 completely fails to capture the sound of the cab you would hear when you are playing it.

Sure you can change speakers, but the need to change that can never be compared with the need to audition IRs.

Never did a recording session, huh?

[Jay Mitchell]

Originally Posted by OverHTheHill

Why do you say that?

Because it is true. If you understood the issue, you would not be making the spurious arguments you put forth. Gaining an understanding of something as complex as this requires years of formal study and more years of experience in the field. I hope you would agree that you can't become an attorney or a physician by reading online forums. In many ways, the field of acoustics is more complex than either law or medicine, ergo you're not going to gain the requisite understanding by reading posts on TGP.

[OverHTheHill]

Originally Posted by Jay Mitchell

For "any single 4x12 Marshall cab miced with sm57" there are thousands of sounds you can get just by moving the mic.

Sure, I think IRs are great for recording.

Originally Posted by Jay Mitchell

Nope. You are missing the fact the stuffing a mic into the grille of a 4x12 completely fails to capture the sound of the cab you would hear when you are playing it.

last time I looked, almost all relevant guitarists and guitar music is still successfully being produced and played using Real AMPS and Real Cabinets, not that you can't produce great records using modeling. A knowledgable studio engineer can mic an amp and get things that most would struggle for years to get anywhere near it using modeling.

Originally Posted by Jay Mitchell

Never did a recording session, huh? Thank God there's internet for you

How often do you speak with real people if you ever do, huh?

[Scott Peterson]

Originally Posted by OverHTheHill

last time I looked, almost all relevant guitarists and guitar music is still successfully being produced and played using Real AMPS and Real Cabinets, not that you can't produce great records using modeling. A knowledgable studio engineer can mic an amp and get things that most would struggle for years to get anywhere near it using modeling.

Umm, not to jump in the flaming pot here, but you had better fact check that statement.

You are not accurate in this assessment.

[mmcm4]

First of all can we avoid the personal attacks guys?

Secondly, the point (i believe) Jay Mitchell is trying to make is that what you hear coming from a guitar cab and what you hear when you listen to a mic'd guitar cab are two different things due to your proximity to the cab and the mic's EQ properties.

Third, I've been around these forums for several years as well as the AxeFX forums. Jay Mitchell isn't known for being courteous and pleasant, but he has an incredible understanding of IRs and the like. He even contributed several of the Farfield IRs in the AxeFX-II.