Friedman IR-J (Jake E Lee?)
- Thread starter Jarick
- Start date
KingsXJJ
Roadie
- Messages
- 989
Genius. I need this!
KingsXJJ
Roadie
- Messages
- 989
Love to hear them! Pretty please.I can name probably 8 module equivalents right now I would be happy to have
KingsXJJ
Roadie
- Messages
- 989
Crap. $600 I do not want to spend but likely will.
Shredder777
Roadie
- Messages
- 286
Is the effect loop analog? Is the whole chain, TS, preamp, loop, pre conversion?
Seems like it might support a parallel operation: use send into fx chain into amp. The fx chain would need to feed back to the return so it could pick up the digital IR processing. The balanced out has an IR?
Edit: Yep, it does that. Just need a way to split the FX into the return, that way you can use it as your preamp but also get the back end tube simulation and IR to PA.
Seems like it might support a parallel operation: use send into fx chain into amp. The fx chain would need to feed back to the return so it could pick up the digital IR processing. The balanced out has an IR?
Edit: Yep, it does that. Just need a way to split the FX into the return, that way you can use it as your preamp but also get the back end tube simulation and IR to PA.
Last edited:
Shredder777
Roadie
- Messages
- 286
I know! Its got that focused mid that lead guitar players are listening for. It doesn't have the clang of the IR-X, but a one trick pony maybe all you need if you want to be out front.
I think what it comes down to, for me, is you know its going to respond to boost and pickups like you expect it to, and the front of the chain (up to the send) is all analog, so you can set up an entirely analog path to your live amp. No tone suck, no latency.
It sounds like voiced for 75watt speakers.
texhex
Roadie
- Messages
- 856
jellodog
Rock Star
- Messages
- 4,498
No. The send signal is post-conversion.
All 3 IR-* devices are built this way right now.
Shredder777
Roadie
- Messages
- 286
I was so excited for this. Thanks for letting me know!
It doesn't make any sense. If the conversion was post loop, it would be an unadultered tube preamp. I can't see any reason for the conversion to be any sooner in the chain. Unless they are using it to modify the sound of the preamp with EQ or other nonsense.
Maybe that is their objective. They have this modular design, where they can alter the signal leading into the preamp. Would allow them to crank out more variations.
jellodog
Rock Star
- Messages
- 4,498
I was so excited for this. Thanks for letting me know!
It doesn't make any sense. If the conversion was post loop, it would be an unadultered tube preamp. I can't see any reason for the conversion to be any sooner in the chain. Unless they are using it to modify the sound of the preamp with EQ or other nonsense.
Maybe that is their objective. They have this modular design, where they can alter the signal leading into the preamp. Would allow them to crank out more variations.
Yeah, a lot of people find it an odd choice.
Dave Friedman justified it on the FaceBook IR-X & IR-D Users Group page here:
But it still doesn't really make sense to me; no matter how much I think about it... and believe me, I keep thinking about!
Time will tell when they release the "cool feature" I suppose.
KingsXJJ
Roadie
- Messages
- 989
The latency reduction is always welcome.
KingsXJJ
Roadie
- Messages
- 989
PM me with a deal of the century!
Shredder777
Roadie
- Messages
- 286
I'm glad everyone else has the same reaction to this. I'm not crazy.
I saw the friedman boxes as a friendlier version of the Synergy modules, but as soon as they are going through conversion, it opens the door for alternatives like digital AIAB like Ampworx pedals.
He will probably add something like EQ curves, maybe delay or simple effects.
Also, you can get a DSL100hr for $850. Charging $600 for this is a little nuts. I'm now looking at a DSL as a way to get analog marshall tones into my recording chain.
jellodog
Rock Star
- Messages
- 4,498
Oh for sure. I'd still like an IR-D some day. I'd like to stuff a Benson germanium fuzz in front of it and have at it
Last edited:
Shredder777
Roadie
- Messages
- 286
If the conversion is before the send loop, that means there are two rounds of conversion if you use the loop.
Unknown what total latency will be. 4-1 is still 3ms. I don't want to put anything like that in the loop of my FX processor.
jellodog
Rock Star
- Messages
- 4,498
The latency is actually pretty low following the recent firmware update.
Dave recently stated, "The latency was reduced to basically 2ms ( inc the loop) 1 ms without loop and or 1 ms if just using the loop.."
texhex
Roadie
- Messages
- 856
I can tell you that the DSL100H makes a hell of a power amp for this pedal. The Resonance and Presence on the DSL add more tonal options.
Shredder777
Roadie
- Messages
- 286
I really like the idea of the pedal. In the official demo that guys tone is great, except that it sounds like it has a parametric boost in the 1.2K(?) range. It is really peaky but is also smooth. It sounds like that is "built in".
If it was all analog signal path, I'd trust that was coming from the circuit, but it may well be digital EQ added somewhere in there to give that signature tone. It sounds produced. I feel like I could cop the same sound with the dsl and an eq pedal.
GuitarBilly74
Roadie
- Messages
- 223
Don't let that keep you from buying it. I use the IR-D Send to run it as a tube preamp into my Fryette Power Station or the loop of my heads and it works perfectly. You don't hear/feel any digital artifact at all using it that way.
I was so excited for this. Thanks for letting me know!
It doesn't make any sense. If the conversion was post loop, it would be an unadultered tube preamp.
And to be fair, what do we usually put in an effects loop anyway? Digital delays, reverbs etc so it's going to convert anyway.
Similar threads
