Making profiles via speaker emulator

  • Yes it will work.


    The amp will behave slightly differently to using a real speaker because of the way a speakers impedance curve varies with frequency, cabinet etc so even a reactive load isn’t necessarily the same as the speaker you would normally use. Whether this is a good or bad thing is just a matter of taste. The profiling process will still work.

  • Has anyone tried to make a profiler with a speaker emulator, (UA OX

    I am actually going to try this today. I have used a static speaker emulator before and found it less dynamic. Not horrible. Since the Ox says the emulation is dynamic I plan to try it against a cabinet and a DI profile.

    "More Guitar in the Monitors" :thumbup:

  • I am actually going to try this today. I have used a static speaker emulator before and found it less dynamic. Not horrible. Since the Ox says the emulation is dynamic I plan to try it against a cabinet and a DI profile.

    Would you mind posting you result using the OX please?

  • Here are some samples.


    Using a 3rd Power Dual Citizen with Tweed Twin HP and Matchless Settings blended. Volume about 2:00 on both.


    1.) Using Ox Alnico 50 421 Off Axis/160 On Axis

    2.) Same with R121 Room Mic added

    3.) DI no cabinet

    4.) DI with Kemper 112 Alnico Blu added


    Let me know what you think.

  • I've just tried them briefly, PRS 513 in both Single Coil and Humbucker modes. KPA into Adam A7x.


    The first 2 sound very similar but there is definitely a little more depth and fullness to the second one. Having said that I think personally I prefer the 1st.

    I haven't tried the DI version.


    My favourite is definitely the final profile though. It sounded nicer to my ears in all pickup positions for both single coil and HB.

    I made up my mind before I checked which was which to try and avoid being lead by my preconceptions.


    I don't think the OX is worse or better than theKemper DI just a little different. They all sound good to me.

  • Tone Junkie have usedan Oxboxto great effect I believe ...I have a mate who has one along with a Toneking Imperial which I’m going to have a go at sometime over the summer will post results if they prove decent :)

  • I've always wondered since the point they started making "pay-per-view" profiles which ones really used actual mics and cabinets versus IR's and other digital stuff to get there. Since there was never any policing it's always been "on your honor". The biggest part of the profile is the cabinet/mic.

    "More Guitar in the Monitors" :thumbup:

  • I don't have any inside info, but I'd be willing to bet a fair number of profiles are made incorporating IR's, using reactive loads and the such. This technology is becoming more and more prevalent now and it would be hard not to use it considering the options this can offer, not to mention it can make getting good sounds easier and quicker.

    IMO the grey area is using 3rd party IRs from company "X" in paid profiles and not divulging that info. All the EULAs I've seen state that the purchase of IR's is a single license to you the buyer, and you can't sell them again. On the flip side, if you create your own IRs and use them to profile, on paper, it is not a conflict since you created the original IRs.

    I agree that more than 1/2 the overall contributing factor to a profile is the cab/mic/recording environment. Assuming that is true, and knowing the controlled environment and all the options IRs provide, I would not be surprised if it became common practice.

  • I don't have any inside info, but I'd be willing to bet a fair number of profiles are made incorporating IR's, using reactive loads and the such.

    This is a shame if it is not specifically noted. People assume they are buying the "art" of micing up a cabinet with stuff they don't have or can't get and paying for it. Making profiles with an IR will not produce the same result as a dynamic mic and cabinet. The Ox is pretty close since it is supposed to be dynamic, but an IR is a static representation and that is contingent upon the load put into the speaker (by the power amp) at the moment the IR is taken.

    "More Guitar in the Monitors" :thumbup:

  • This is a shame if it is not specifically noted. People assume they are buying the "art" of micing up a cabinet with stuff they don't have or can't get and paying for it. Making profiles with an IR will not produce the same result as a dynamic mic and cabinet. The Ox is pretty close since it is supposed to be dynamic, but an IR is a static representation and that is contingent upon the load put into the speaker (by the power amp) at the moment the IR is taken.

    I just think the commercial profile sellers should be up front up about it if they are using these methods. Again, I have no proof that anyone in particular is doing this, I just would imagine it is happening based on the fact that the tech is there and it offers a lot of options for profiling with less cost and possibly effort.

    I kinda disagree though about the IR not sounding as dynamic. True, an IR is a static eq curve, but If a good reactive load (Ox, Waza TAE, Suhr, etc.) and a good IR is used there should be little to no perceived difference in the finished sound. All of the dynamic interaction occurs between the amp and the load, not in the IR. Since the reactive load is acting as the speaker, the IR is only applying the inherent eq curve of the speaker/mic/preamp/environment used when it was captured. In theory, it's no different that what the profile would capture in a traditional amp/mic/cab profile.....A momentary snapshot of the amp reacting with the speaker coil and the inherent eq that speaker/cab/mic applies.

    That being said, everyone's ears are different and some may be able to hear a difference. I think that if a person profiling via load box and IRs were to have the proper knowledge, they could make a profile that is indistinguishable from a profile made the traditional way. Just my opinion though.


    One more thing to consider. Wouldn't the "art" of micing up a cabinet also apply to shooting IRs?

  • One more thing to consider. Wouldn't the "art" of micing up a cabinet also apply to shooting IRs?

    Yes, which is why all IR's are not created equal.


    The profiling world will be very muddy very quickly. It starts by substituting the IR for a real mic and cabinet then profiling a Helix...then an Axe and because people can produce good tones from them they become indistinguishable. Then you have no idea what you are getting unless you do your own profiles.


    Some people will do crazy stuff to make a buck.

    "More Guitar in the Monitors" :thumbup:

  • Yes, which is why all IR's are not created equal.


    The profiling world will be very muddy very quickly. It starts by substituting the IR for a real mic and cabinet then profiling a Helix...then an Axe and because people can produce good tones from them they become indistinguishable. Then you have no idea what you are getting unless you do your own profiles.


    Some people will do crazy stuff to make a buck.

    Couldn't agree more. I think the profiling world already is a little muddy..8o

  • We've probably all tried shitty profiles and great profiles made with cabs and mics. I guess there will be a similar shit-great ratio in profiles made with speaker/mic sims like the Ox Box.

    Personally I don't give a shit how something has been done. The result is key. If it sounds great then it is great, simple as that. :)

  • How do you really feel though??

    I feel that I own an Ox Box and that I have already profiled a few amps (from modern to vintage) with this device. Within the limits of the current cab (and mic) choice in the Ox Box, it sounds absolutely fantastic. Sound is very subjective of course and I certainly do mic/cab profiling as well (with great success). I haven't shared any profiles publicly, I don't sell profiles. But if I did, nobody would be able to tell if the profiles have been made "traditionally" or using the Ox Box. First of all because nobody apart from myself could A/B them, second because very few people will own the amps I own and last but not least, nobody would know how I setup the amp, which mics (combinations) I have used, how I placed them and how I have mixed and EQ'd them.


    Bottomline:

    I know that no commercial profiler out there will please everybody. Every commercial profiler first and foremost follows his own taste and feel … and then hopes that his taste will match with as many customers as possible.

    On the other hand, if you do custom profiles for musicians or for yourself, you get to tailor the profiles exactly to a specific musician, playing style, musical genre, guitar. Studio clients who want me to make custom profiles sometimes ask me to use a specific amp, sometimes they let me choose. Most important to them is to try the profiles, hear how they sound and feel. The ones they like, they might ask me which amp/channel it is and what type of cab/speakers have been used. But that's pretty much all they want to know.

    That's why I wrote that the result is key, not how exactly it has been done.