Anyone else using Cab-Lab 4??

[laxu]

I'm always in favor of reducing complications for the user. If I don't have to think about phase and volumes, then that makes my life easier.

We live in a bit of a weird space where much of the digital solutions are replicas of actual gear, which may not make any sense to people who are not familiar with that piece of gear. As an example I was using the UA Pulteq EQ plugins the other day and I have no idea how to work with separate boost/attenuation knobs without looking through some tutorial video.

The flip side is that those who know the hardware will easily get along with the digital version.

 

[laxu]

Also on this... the software ones... you get vintage and modern SM57 and Sennheiser 421 options, which you don't get with the hardware ones. In fact I think Cliff opted for the SM7b instead of the 421, which isn't really the choice I would make.

Yeah we can always argue what the mic options should be. IMO the choices on offer are versatile enough. I would probably swap Dynamic 1 from SM57 -> SM7B and have the 421 as Dynamic 2 as well.

I don't really care for vintage vs modern SM57 type options. I'd rather the developer picks whichever they think sounds best. It's basically the "I don't need separate models of every Marshall Superlead ever made, I just need one really good one" argument.

 

[2dor]

I just grabbed the Friedman pack too!

That 4x12 Recto pack is awesome!

How do you like the Friedman?

..there's a very easy way to export IRs to WAV format from a DAW even from CabLab if you really want them in other platforms.

 

[Orvillain]

I don't really care for vintage vs modern SM57 type options. I'd rather the developer picks whichever they think sounds best. It's basically the "I don't need separate models of every Marshall Superlead ever made, I just need one really good one" argument.

But it isn't the developers job to decide which sounds the best. It is their job to provide the option in the most intuitive way possible, so that I can decide for myself which sounds best.

(hint: the answer is, both the vintage ones sound best!!!)

 

[Orvillain]

How do you like the Friedman?

It is pretty awesome actually. I got some great cleans out of it yesterday with a few of the ribbons!

 

[MirrorProfiles]

But it isn't the developers job to decide which sounds the best. It is their job to provide the option in the most intuitive way possible, so that I can decide for myself which sounds best.

(hint: the answer is, both the vintage ones sound best!!!)

100%. Technology has a huge advantage in being able to offer more things like this than would be practical in the real world, I don’t want some DSP engineer or software developers single idea of good.

There is never an objectively “better”, it all depends what you like. I have over 10+ sm57’s and I couldn’t say any of them are better than another, they’re just a bit different.

Another benefit of having a wider choice on modellers is if you only have one, literally thousands upon thousands of users are all using the same cab/speaker/mic and things get more samey. Even when it’s the same person making IR’s, if they use the exact same mic on every cab you get that same character across everything.

 

[laxu]

But it isn't the developers job to decide which sounds the best. It is their job to provide the option in the most intuitive way possible, so that I can decide for myself which sounds best.

(hint: the answer is, both the vintage ones sound best!!!)

We put the tone of our gear in the hands of their developers all the time. I'm not buying say a Strymon pedal to get just any delay, I'm buying to get their take on a delay.

I feel that some curation can help reduce clutter and make it easier to get to the thing that you care about instead of trying to figure out which option sounds best. There are sweet spots between too few and too many options.

 

[Orvillain]

We put the tone of our gear in the hands of their developers all the time. I'm not buying say a Strymon pedal to get just any delay, I'm buying to get their take on a delay.

I feel that some curation can help reduce clutter and make it easier to get to the thing that you care about instead of trying to figure out which option sounds best. There are sweet spots between too few and too many options.

Well I made that comment in response to you saying you don't care about modern versus vintage 57's. My response to that would be, that effectively, I do care. I also care about having a Sennheiser 421, which the hardware dyna cabs don't have. Cliff opted for the SM7b instead, because it was more to his tastes. But I don't want his tastes. I want my tastes.

The curation in Cab Lab 4 is definitely there. But it is part of the user experience. Being able to sweep 4 microphones around the surface of a speaker is pretty damn great, and what might sound too boomy and muffled by itself, can often blend very well with another mic that is in a more fizzy position. Being able to bake that down into a single IR and then put into the HW, it is cool too.

I know what I'm doing with a cab and a pair of mics. So the sweet spot argument for me isn't too relevant. The thing I care about is being empowered to use my ears to make the unique decisions for myself, from project to project or from song to song.

This song at 1:40 for example:


That guitar tone - mic positioning, roominess, etc - isn't a "main" guitar tone. But it is a cool moment in the song. A limited set of possibilities would probably filter out such tones, and make it more difficult to get to them - IMHO.

When I buy a Strymon Volante or El Cap, I'm not buying it because I want the Strymon take on tape delay. I'm buying it because it is a full featured digital pedal with the most accurate emulations, so that I'm able to get the tone that I want without having to lug around a real space echo, or real tape machine.

That's just my take on it anyway.