Axe-fx 2 : Tma , cab sim, eq ?

[Stef_herbuel]

Can someone explain me the difference between an EQ , a "tone match" , and a "cab sim" ?

i mean is a "tone match" and a cab sim just a "eq" ? (if i forget the "room reverb" and "motor drive" in the cab block) ? or is there another thing "dynamic " in a cab block (eq who change if i play hard or other thing ?)
i just try to understand how it works : is cab block just a big eq ?
thanks

 

[Groovenut]

Stef,
As far as I am aware you are correct. Taking away the things you mentioned, it is a 2048 point EQ (Mono High Res) (1024 point Stereo or Mono Low Res). The TMA in High Res is a 1024 point EQ (512 point Low Res). To my knowledge there isn't anything dynamic going on there.

 

[Stef_herbuel]

Stef,
As far as I am aware you are correct. Taking away the things you mentioned, it is a 2048 point EQ (Mono High Res) (1024 point Stereo or Mono Low Res). The TMA in High Res is a 1024 point EQ (512 point Low Res). To my knowledge there isn't anything dynamic going on there.

ok thanks , that's interesting !

 

[meambobbo]

don't have an axe ii but...

while a tone-match is EQ, it is a high resolution automated EQ - and I'm not so sure it's even possible to dial in the same frequency response using a bunch of manual EQ tweaking - you could certainly get close, but it'd be like trying to dial in a 1,000 band graphic EQ - you'd never get it 100% there.

a cab/mic sim (IR) is not simply EQ. IR's involve phase inaccuracy, cabinet resonance, and other features of actual cabs that are not represented simply by EQ. Yes, they do change the frequency response, but that's not all they do. if you tone matched a patch using one IR to a signal using a different IR, there would still be differences in tone.

 

[Scott Peterson]

don't have an axe ii but...

while a tone-match is EQ, it is a high resolution automated EQ - and I'm not so sure it's even possible to dial in the same frequency response using a bunch of manual EQ tweaking - you could certainly get close, but it'd be like trying to dial in a 1,000 band graphic EQ - you'd never get it 100% there.

a cab/mic sim (IR) is not simply EQ. IR's involve phase inaccuracy, cabinet resonance, and other features of actual cabs that are not represented simply by EQ. Yes, they do change the frequency response, but that's not all they do. if you tone matched a patch using one IR to a signal using a different IR, there would still be differences in tone.

 

[Stef_herbuel]

don't have an axe ii but...

while a tone-match is EQ, it is a high resolution automated EQ - and I'm not so sure it's even possible to dial in the same frequency response using a bunch of manual EQ tweaking - you could certainly get close, but it'd be like trying to dial in a 1,000 band graphic EQ - you'd never get it 100% there.

a cab/mic sim (IR) is not simply EQ. IR's involve phase inaccuracy, cabinet resonance, and other features of actual cabs that are not represented simply by EQ. Yes, they do change the frequency response, but that's not all they do. if you tone matched a patch using one IR to a signal using a different IR, there would still be differences in tone.

thanks again, it's really interesting.

something is curious : i have read interesting review from rcf RCF NX-12SMA user (can't find the post) who gave a tip to have a more "amp" sound : he didn't used cab block but "peq" and he blocked freq more than 5 or 6 khz ...

i tried this afternoon.i agree with him it sound really more "amp like" and "in your face" , it's really curious, but at the same time a bit more "sterile" or "less complex" .that's why i asked about what is really a IR cab , and what i "lose" if i use a "simple" eq.

did someone tried ?

 

[Scott Peterson]

thanks again, it's really interesting.

something is curious : i have read interesting review from rcf RCF NX-12SMA user (can't find the post) who gave a tip to have a more "amp" sound : he didn't used cab block but "peq" and he blocked freq more than 5 or 6 khz ...

i tried this afternoon.i agree with him it sound really more "amp like" and "in your face" , it's really curious, but at the same time a bit more "sterile" or "less complex" .that's why i asked about what is really a IR cab , and what i "lose" if i use a "simple" eq.

did someone tried ?

Stef,

If you are going to run direct-to-FOH, then it is really quite simple, yet incredibly complex. It's ALL about the IR. You can use a TM block as an IR, you can use a EQ as cab IR. But keep in mind that when running Direct-To-FOH... it is truly all about the IR.

My suggestion at this juncture is to try the public beta (*which are FREE for right now... so grab them quick) that OwnHammer is putting out; this is a new generation of IR that IMHO supersedes the current offerings out there. Even if you don't like the V30 speaker in general, you'll get a true glimpse into what all this *can* be.

The struggle IMHO isn't about amp modeling any more, if it ever was. There are different modelers out there from different companies that have their collective s*** down on that end. For the guys attempting to make FRFR systems (or what I preferably call direct-to-FOH, which I feel is a apt description) is getting the cab end of it accurate, musical, and *right*.

In other words it's not about this modeler vs. that modeler vs. this profiler; it's about allowing guys using *whatever* box they use to get accurate cabs for their accurately modeled amps. It's been the elephant in the room for a long time.

IMHO, YMMV.

 

[djd100]

Not exactly...

While everything you state does influence the IR's freq curve, in the end the IR is just a very complex EQ curve, and nothing non-linear regarding time-domain, dynamics, or distortion is reproduced aside from any freq colorization caused by such things (dynamic convolution or Volterra Kernel models excepted, which do include the source's dynamic's effect on the freq response).

Some cab sims incorporate some time-domain/dynamics/distortion DSP, but it's not the actual IR doing it, rather it's the DSP.

I haven't read up on dynamic convolution or Volterra Kernel models, but I assume they're switching between various IR's in response to input dynamics, and possibly extrapolating between them via DSP, not sure?

a cab/mic sim (IR) is not simply EQ. IR's involve phase inaccuracy, cabinet resonance, and other features of actual cabs that are not represented simply by EQ. Yes, they do change the frequency response, but that's not all they do.

 

[Stef_herbuel]

thanks for your answers ! scott i will try OwnHammer's IR tomorrow , i have downloaded them , thanks !