Axe-FX III Dyna-Cabs

jay mitchell said:
I hadn't been paying attention to this thread, seeing as how I don't own (nor do I anticipate owning) an AFXIII. It was clear that the FW introduced two elements: 1) a UI that facilitates navigation among several presumably related IRs, and 2) an interpolation algorithm that morphs IRs to "in-between" spots not represented by an actual IR.

All the above is fine - it essentially adds to user-accessible IR parameters - but, in five pages so far, not one person has mentioned what is arguably the biggest development. I quote Cliff:

"The Amp block now features “Auto Dyna-Cab Impedance”. When set to ON the speaker impedance curve of the Amp block will follow the Cabinet Type in the first mixer slot of the associated Cabinet block."

Discuss....
Click to expand...

I have not gone back and done the search… But I’m pretty sure people have used the acronym SIC

I would imagine that most Frackle users understand that the SIC is being matched between the cabinet and amp.

There is a discussion going on about how the beeta handles the auto SIC for a two amp set up or multiple cabinets.

To me, there are three clear improvements:
  1. Greatly enhanced IR selection process
  2. Improved factory IRs newly acquired for DC
  3. Matched SIC (speaker impedance curves)
I took a fender twin last night and DynaCabed it up with a few Fender cabs … Had a ton of fun doing it. Fender bite annd thump all night.
 
LET US DISCUSS!

girl fail GIF
 
I think there’s a fourth benefit that also could be tossed into the pot…

That is opening this up to third-party vendors to offer different cabinets and microphone selections to fit within the FAS DynaCab framework
 
Cab matching wasn't anything new. It just made it easier with auto match. I really viewed it as a quality of life improvement more so than a new feature. Unless I'm misunderstanding
 
fretworn said:
I think there’s a fourth benefit that also could be tossed into the pot…

That is opening this up to third-party vendors to offer different cabinets and microphone selections to fit within the FAS DynaCab framework
Click to expand...
One thing I am wondering...

If it is a robot moving the mic around for the IR capture and it is the user that is selecting the mics and placement. Aside from the room and cabinet/speakers what variation would one expect?

I.e. Should users expect huge differences between the same specced cab shot by two different sources? i.e. do I need five or six 'packs' with a 1960TV with Greenbacks (and the usual suspects for mics)? How would Justin shooting that cab make it different than Cliff and Co?

My ears are not golden enough to distinguish between my two 4x12s that are the same spec, for example.

For IRs, I've kind of moved to a model where I favor maybe four or five cabs one mix of each rather than searching like crazy through thousands of IRs. I pick the cab based on the amp and style of tone and the IR is set, after that it is one less thing to hunt and peck for.
 
Last edited:
I think the inclusion of impedance curves with IRs is a big development as Jay highlights.

I also think people are missing the whole process that goes behind DynaCab, including the robot software, and all the other code incl. IR interpolation/extrapolating that was developed to make this process work. Cliff hinted at these details in an earlier post.

I’m sure there’s been a lot of learning by @FractalAudio over the years on how to acquire an IR and represent/process optimally within his code base.

Bottom line… Better tones faster for me!
 
Elric said:
One thing I am wondering...

If it is a robot moving the mic around for the IR capture and it is the user that is selecting the mics and placement. Aside from the room and cabinet/speakers what variation would one expect?

I.e. Should users expect huge differences between the same specced cab shot by two different sources? i.e. do I need five or six 'packs' with a 1960TV with Greenbacks (and the usual suspects for mics)? How would Justin shooting that cab make it different than Cliff and Co?

My ears are not golden enough to distinguish between my two 4x12s that are the same spec, for example.

For IRs, I've kind of moved to a model where I favor maybe four or five cabs one mix of each rather than searching like crazy through thousands of IRs. I pick the cab based on the amp and style of tone and the IR is set, after that it is one less thing to hunt and peck for.
Click to expand...

Do you ever have the same meal made the exact same way twice?

I’m not talking about Mickey D’s either …

J/k

I think the value lies in all the cabs that Cliff and FAS will not capture.

Who’s to say that FAS is gonna go through more than 35 examples x three microphones?

But a third-party vendor can say: “I got this boutique microphone with this boutique cab with bootik speaker along with the corresponding speaker impedance curve.”
 
fretworn said:
That’s not a discussion brother…


That’s an existential metaphysical universal question about finding …

hope GIF
Click to expand...
i forgot the farley around speaker because I am assuming the "impulse response" is a simple af static eq plot they ported over from the GT-3 :bag
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Deadpan
Testing the Axe FX III Matchless D30 Model Legacy vs Dyna vs IR
Replies
3
Views
461
timbuck3
timbuck3
F
Cab block : Axe-Fx III vs Helix vs Quad Cortex vs...
Replies
0
Views
686
Fremen
F
hippietim
Triple Axe-Fx III rack (now with demo)
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Thermionic Aether
T
Back
Top