Fractal Audio Systems mystery product speculation

[Orvillain]

Axe-Fx supports them and AFAIK nobody uses them.

Ultra-Res, no???

 

[jellodog]

Ultra-Res, no???

It supports both FullRes and UltraRes.

 

[Orvillain]

I don't even know what I've been using tbh!! I took my captures with my Axe3, so I'm guessing it'll be UltraRes. As long as they're not as short as Kemper, which I think are 256 and if your IR is longer it gets truncated and you lose definition and the frequency response is not as accurate.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Axe-Fx supports them and AFAIK nobody uses them.

I'm talking about IRs suitable for reverbs. I don't think the Axe FX supports them (or rather: I know it doesn't).

 

[yek]

I'm talking about IRs suitable for reverbs. I don't think the Axe FX supports them.

Short ones:

"Version 17 introduces FullResTM Impulse Response processing. FullRes processes IRs up to 64K points with zero latency using a novel technique. This provides up to 1.37 seconds of response time. Seasoned producers and engineers often mix in “Room Mics” during recording to increase the depth and liveliness of recordings. However, the typical live room has a reverb time of 500-700 milliseconds, well beyond the 20-40 ms afforded by typical IR processing. FullRes allows capturing the full response of a typical live room and even the response of small-to-medium halls and clubs. FullRes can also be used for convolution reverb applications for reverb times less than 1.37 seconds."

 

[Orvillain]

Right, gotcha.

Personally, I don't give a single solitary toss about IR's for reverbs. They sound cack. Algorithms are the bestestsestests.

 

[Sascha Franck]

"Version 17 introduces FullResTM Impulse Response processing. FullRes processes IRs up to 64K points with zero latency using a novel technique. This provides up to 1.37 seconds of response time. Seasoned producers and engineers often mix in “Room Mics” during recording to increase the depth and liveliness of recordings. However, the typical live room has a reverb time of 500-700 milliseconds, well beyond the 20-40 ms afforded by typical IR processing. FullRes allows capturing the full response of a typical live room and even the response of small-to-medium halls and clubs. FullRes can also be used for convolution reverb applications for reverb times less than 1.37 seconds."

That's all fine - but not sufficient for most reverb needs, let alone anything adventurous.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Personally, I don't give a single solitary toss about IR's for reverbs. They sound cack.

You seem to have very little of an idea about what's possible with IRs.

 

[jellodog]

You seem to have very little of an idea about what's possible with IRs.

Plenty of us do. Convolution reverb via IR doesn't necessairly make a sound that's instantly "better" or superior; sometimes they do and sure, many of them are "interesting".

However, they are often not as musical to the ear.

Artifical algorithmic reverb can be tuned such that it has musical qualities, regardless of real world accuracy. I think that's what @Orvillain is probably getting at here (?).

 

[Sascha Franck]

Plenty of us do. Convolution reverb via IR doesn't make a sound that's instantly "better"; sometimes they do and sure often they are "interesting".

However, they are often not as "musical" to the ear.

Thing is, you can do things you can't do with algorithmic reverbs.

The reverb in this is a crumbled liquorice bag, recorded with a mobile phone:

(you could possibly get close with an algorithmic reverb, though)

This is a big ass empty oil tank someone recorded on a YT video, so I snagged the audio:

(again, you could possibly get close with an algorithmic reverb)

The reverb in this is a "frog orchestra", again recorded with a mobile phone:

(you'll likely have a hard time recreating this with an algorithmic reverb)

You can as well do tonal IRs. Yes, they're limited in terms of keys they can be used in, but in case you organize them properly, they could surely be impressive (I could happily record an example).

 

[Orvillain]

You seem to have very little of an idea about what's possible with IRs.

We already had this conversation. Half of my ambient albums from the early to mid 2000's made massive use of IR's. Stop being a chode.

 

[Sascha Franck]

We already had this conversation. Half of my ambient albums from the early to mid 2000's made massive use of IR's. Stop being a chode.

I don't give a single solitary toss about IR's for reverbs. They sound cack.

So I gather half of your ambient albums sound like cack then? Ok, fine.

 

[likitlikeyoulikeit]

 

[FuzzyAce]

Thing is, you can do things you can't do with algorithmic reverbs.

The reverb in this is a crumbled liquorice bag, recorded with a mobile phone:

(you could possibly get close with an algorithmic reverb, though)

This is a big ass empty oil tank someone recorded on a YT video, so I snagged the audio:

(again, you could possibly get close with an algorithmic reverb)

The reverb in this is a "frog orchestra", again recorded with a mobile phone:

(you'll likely have a hard time recreating this with an algorithmic reverb)

You can as well do tonal IRs. Yes, they're limited in terms of keys they can be used in, but in case you organize them properly, they could surely be impressive (I could happily record an example).

I would say context matters with IR reverbs. With more instruments, drums, a lot of the subtlety can get lost within a mix or band situation.
But with a solo instrument, or other minimalist approach, they could be perfect. Although I could see a nice room IR being used on a mix to give a sense of place for the instruments as a whole.

 

[Orvillain]

Thing is, you can do things you can't do with algorithmic reverbs.

The reverb in this is a crumbled liquorice bag, recorded with a mobile phone:

(you could possibly get close with an algorithmic reverb, though)

This is a big ass empty oil tank someone recorded on a YT video, so I snagged the audio:

(again, you could possibly get close with an algorithmic reverb)

The reverb in this is a "frog orchestra", again recorded with a mobile phone:

(you'll likely have a hard time recreating this with an algorithmic reverb)

You can as well do tonal IRs. Yes, they're limited in terms of keys they can be used in, but in case you organize them properly, they could surely be impressive (I could happily record an example).

1st and 2nd clips sound you could get on the MercuryX without too much trouble. There'd be differences, but largely flavour differences rather than outright the IR sounding better or whatever.

The 3rd clip sounds quite similar to the Source Audio Offspring algorithm on the Ventris pedal.

They sound good. But not hearing anything unachievable.

I've got some IR libraries from back in the day, by John Ingram of Intelligent Machinery fame; early 2000's online record label that I released an album through. He was a regular on KvR. Not sure if he is still kicking around. But he had all of these really crazy mad IR's that I used a LOT - strange metallic noises labelled as things like "Dragging Feet Through The Sanitarium" and weird shit like that. Those libraries are great!! Haven't touched them for a while, but they can completely transform a sound.

That part of using IR's I love doing. But using an IR to replicate a Lexicon?? Nah... give me the algorithm and make it proper.

 

[deepskyone]

chode

Now, that's a word I've not heard in a long time.

 

[Sascha Franck]

But not hearing anything unachievable.

I'm not even saying myself that they're unachievable. But with IRs it's easy.
Money spent: 0.
Programming efforts: 0.
Surprising factor (as you never exactly know how your recordings will sound as an IR): Level 9000. Which I like.

Those libraries are great!! Haven't touched them for a while, but they can completely transform a sound.

See? And why not have them in your modeler or MFX device?

Seriously, recording pretty much any weird stuff and just slapping it into your IR loader of choice can be incredibly inspiring because of the surprising factor. Check a mixture of tweaked shepard tones as an IR, wicked sounds as the resonances flow all through the frequency spectrum.

But using an IR to replicate a Lexicon??

I'm also doing that in my DAW (as I'm a cheap skater and have pretty much any free reverb IR to ever exist, back to the days of Noisevault), but I absolutely agree that for what I'd call "mixing reverbs" you're way better off with algorithmic reverbs.

 

[Orvillain]

See? And why not have them in your modeler or MFX device?

Not THAT interested in having those sounds on my guitar. I've found my sound, basically. I sound the same through whatever I play, it turns out! Even if @Ed DeGenaro thinks I sound like arse biscuits!

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

If this is your first rodeo: be advised to just go ahead and skip ahead four pages to avoid this sidebar.

 

[Sascha Franck]

With more instruments, drums, a lot of the subtlety can get lost within a mix or band situation.
But with a solo instrument, or other minimalist approach, they could be perfect.

Sure, in a dense mix pretty much every reverb detail (along with plenty of other details) is getting lost.
But I've already been using these kinda reverbs when I was doing some solo background gig with just a nylon string guitar for a vernissage. Been using a Zoom G3 (which doubles as an audio interface) and mixed some IRs in through a cheesy plastic Macbook. Worked a treat and quite some people wondered about the strange sounds.