IR's and CAB's

  • As it becomes more and more clear to me that the biggest potential for improvement in a rig is the right CAB.
    I'm going to go into more detail about IR's and CAB's now.
    I'm still very much hoping that there will be soon be a way to manage them on the PC for the KPA.


    In addition to the some vendors here in the forum, I have found a Vendor in my country who also provides his IR's also for the KPA.
    Easy to convert with the CAB maker.
    A number of free IR's as examples are available on http://valhallir.at/shop/valhallir-at-teaserbox/

  • no links to shops outside the commercial subforums

    This Forum is called "commercial rigs and profiles".
    I did not make a link refering commercial rigs and profiles.


    The next time I'de also not allowed to send a link to "thomann" for e.g. a netcable??
    Strange :(

  • you posted a link to a commercial seller of impulse responses

    Yes and this are RIGs or Profiles?
    I respect rules, but an arbitrary reinterpretation of rules is irritating for me.


    Quote from your Commercial section rules:
    Please note that both sub forums in this commercial profile section have rules. Those are lined out in the sticky posts within the sub forum in question. We want to make sure that both advertisers and potential buyers of their rigs have their space. So, read the instructions before you participate in the discussion, please.
    Unquote:


    Peace ;)

  • It's really not that hard to grasp, really - users outside the commercial subforums do not wish to be led to a shop.


    also:


    We purposely created a tool to convert impulse responses into Profiler cabinets. I'm sure you can see the close connection between an IR and Profiles in the sense that they are both patches/presets call it what you want to give a user more tonal options.

  • It's really not that hard to grasp

    The intention is not so hard to understand and you don't need to imply that I could be stupid. At least I've been able to read with meaning understanding for about 60 years.


    There's nothing wrong with extending the rules, but then with using a logical explanation.
    Rules should not be a place for interpretations based on an event.


    BTW: The site does not offer only free IR's specific for Kemper but rather for AXE and Helix.
    So it was more suitable for me in the forum "other gear." As well as cables and other software or accessories that are needed or usefull to operate the Kemper.


    Parts of the pack are suitable for Kemper (24Bit 44,1 kHz) per Cabmaker.

  • Severel Celestion IR threads (with commercial links) are under "Other gear" too ... ?(
    But thanks @Sharry for the info anyways :thumbup:

  • There's nothing wrong with extending the rules, but then with using a logical explanation.

    nothing has changed.
    from the very beginning of the existence of the commercial subforums, the mods tried to keep any commercial offerings there.
    a sample offer that takes you to a shop where other items are sold isn't no-strings-attached-free, instead it is a way to increase traffic to the website and might lead to a purchase - it's marketing.


    I've been moving posts like this into the commercial section for a long time, and it's not an issue for the vendors at all.
    Not quite sure why you insist of further propagating this rather pointless discussion.

  • To get back to the topic of Impulse responses or IR, having tried almost all Kinds of IRS and did find great sounds as a result, speaker IRs have major shortcomings.


    One of the most crucial advantage that the Kemper Cabinet has included in them that's practically missing from other modelers and if it's there it's based on algorithms, is Speaker Breakup.
    When the Kemper profiles the AMP and CAB at the same time, speaker breakup is included. and so is amp response to speaker load or type of speaker including resonance frequency.


    Based on my humble opinion these two factors, Speaker Breakup and amp reaction to speaker load and resonance frequency are crucial to the reason whey the Kemper Profiles sound very realistic and authentic.


    Going back to using plain IRs not knowing or including these two factors is taking a step backwards in the quest for authentic guitar amp tones.


    Sure there are great sounds to be had, but for me I moved forward and don't use or even consider using IRs. Too many profiles to be had that include speaker breakup and amp - speaker response to be bothered with incomplete technology.


    Thank you Sharry for posting this, but keep what I said in mind as even though it's true that the Speaker is responsible for a higher percentage of the tone than even the amp itself, IRs are truly incomplete technology and don't include the two major factors I mentioned above. I bet that was one of the main reasons why Kemper decided to go with the Profiling approach of the the whole package amp, speaker, including speaker breakup and amp response to speaker.

  • Considering how many studio professionals use IR’s in place of cabs (especially with real amps) and are almost universally impressed with the results, the idea that IR’s are “missing something” seems rather subjective and relatively unsubstantiated.


    One blind test where the results have really stumped me has been comparing mic’ed cabs and an amp to an amp and IR of that exact impulse. Conversely, I have a much easier time picking out profile vs amp at the same setting. If you “lose” anything, you’re probably losing the Kemper effect.

  • Considering how many studio professionals use IR’s in place of cabs (especially with real amps) and are almost universally impressed with the results, the idea that IR’s are “missing something” seems rather subjective and relatively unsubstantiated.
    ...

    As a matter of fact it's not subjective at all. Before I bought the Kemper as I was doing my research, the AXE FX II manual state very clearly about the Speaker resonance and how the AXE FXII has no way of knowing what that number is and the user must manually enter that number, so before a seller sells Impulse responses, he might want to measure the resonance frequency, but they don't and even if they did, many modelers don't factor that and if they do it's universal.


    As a matter of fact I read the exact quote from the Maker of the AXE FX stating ""There are certain aspects that simply can't be modeled and require user intervention." That later was deleted from the AXE WIKI after I pointed it out where he specifically was referring to Speaker resonance and the crucial importance of its interaction with the power amp section of the tube amp.to ultimately shape the final sound!!


    Regarding speaker breakup, do you think that all speakers break up the same? Other modelers if they include that parameter is universal cross the board!! How accurate is that?


    The point about professionals using IRs is what keep many going back and thinking that IRs are the answer, but the facts are they're don't tell the whole picture. Sure you can get good results, but the results aren't accurate.


    This has been substantiated by the Kemper release by proving that to capture the most accurate results, the speaker and amp need to be captured at the same time. I even read in the gearpage where the maker of the AXE FX specifically said that when he decided to use the algorithm approach , he knew that the Convolution approach using audio would be more accurate.


    If you still don't think that this has been substantiated yet, just ask a few of the AXE FX users what they use for Resonance frequency parameter in the "speaker block" when they switch to a different IR and whether they're aware of how crucial to the sound and tone the resulting impedance curve will be. I doubt that many even know what to do with these parameters except guessing.


    But yes, I hear you, if pros don't care and they use IRs, then IRs can't be missing anything and if they are, it can't be that important :D . I don't think so :)

  • I’m simply using the same logic I get from people here all the time about professional users and endorsers. The response tickles me.


    If the impulse sounds nearly indiscernible from the real speaker when compared and if the profile sounds different from the original signal chain when compared, that’s about the start and the end of it for me. So in the end I guess it depends which type of inaccurate you prefer. IR’s have limitations, but not any more than the KPA based on what I’ve discovered.

  • I’m simply using the same logic I get from people here all the time about professional users and endorsers. The response tickles me.

    Why would you do that and use someone else's logic that you don't agree with? Or are you saying the same thing my young daughter says to me "but my sister does it, I can do it too" :D



    If the impulse sounds nearly indiscernible from the real speaker when compared...

    That only happens for those who use real tube amps into a Direct Box then use an impulse of the same speaker they own and use, once they change the Impulse response, there's no accuracy whatsoever because the speaker load and resonance can be completely different. and their own amp;s will respond differently had it been connected to that actual speaker instead of the impulse response of it. And that's talking about using IRs with real tube amps, not a modeler.


    Edit: When using Impulse responses in this manner with real tube amps, keep in mind that you still have to keep the real speaker connected also, which means unless you're in a studio or have an ISO cabinet at home, or even a closet with sound absorption wall material or maybe an attenuator. There is no way around that, except if you try the Kemper and realize that you/re getting identical sound after profiling that setup (which I did personally) and the difference was virtually negligible with all the conveniences that you/'re already aware of when using the Kemper. Tube amp with IR is far from the same thing as Modeler with IR as I explained above.

    Edited once, last by Dean_R ().

  • Why would I use the same logic? I guess in part for entertainment to see how you contradict yourself. You write off IRs as inaccurate but have no problem with Kemper inaccuracies. Despite both shortcomings, both are very useful.


    Well, goal posts have been moved per usual. First it’s they aren’t accurate, next it’s that it’s accurate so long as the IR isn’t changed. Regardless, IRs are very useful and devices like the Torpedo are widely adopted in studios for that reasoning. You might actually be the first out of all the studio guys & gear creators I know to suggest different IR’s give you less than favorable or accurate results. Truth be told, most of them prefer tube heads with IR’s.


    IR’s are still valuable to have in the KPA because convolution or not, if the mic’ing on a profile blows, nothing can really help that. A good IR can help you salvage a sound or find something new and inspiring.

  • Why would I use the same logic? I guess in part for entertainment to see how you contradict yourself. ....

    Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. :) . You seem very board and looking for entertainment by trolling this forum ( or is it spelled bored) LOL I'm not sure now). Seriously though Have a wonderful day :) I hope you found my response entertaining. As much as I like to stick around, that will be my last post for the day ;( I gotta go and do more fun stuff than wrestling in the mud.