New Friedman IR-X preamp

[GuitarBilly74]

Unknown why no one else has complained.

I didn't complain because it's not an issue to me. No dead harmonics or anything.

The pedal is just not what you're looking for.
Doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it. Works for me and many others I wouldn't replace it with any modeler I've tried so far, especially live.

 

[mk5]

Ok, I understood about 35% of what the heck y’all are talking about, but thank you. This generally is the reason I gave up on the Egnater Mod Stuff even though it was so great—I think he and Friedman have a common signature trait of rolling off the highs; for lack of a better phrase, missing the bite. The tapered high end seems to be a recurring criticism of the Friedman BE line; either you like it or you don’t.

I didn’t hear that as much in the IR-D either. Would love a comparison. I did not like the demos of the X or J at all. X for the missing high end and generic tone (my ears) and what I perceive as a too-thinned-out, modded X as the IR-J.

 

[Jarick]

I agree. I am assuming that Fractal wouldn't have let their model out the door if it didn't match the original preamp, so that suggests that the extreme cut is something unique to the pedal.

It also hints at why they are using digital conversion before the send; because they are using digital filters to complete the sound of the preamp. If the preamp was a 100% legit be100 preamp, it would have the same eq curve as the fractal.

What is probably going on is that they have a generic preamp design and are using digital control and filters to get them to sound the way they want. That is why the IRJ has that nasally mid hump and the IRX has the chopped top. Probably all from digital filters applied after the preamp.

I'd have to go back through the marketing materials, but I get the sense this truly was designed as a standalone direct pedal and not necessarily something designed to be a preamp replacement. So I wouldn't fault them if they did some additional processing that wouldn't be in say a Synergy BE module.

Assuming Dave was involved in the design and testing, they probably used their ears. Maybe they found that an aggressive high cut was more pleasing when running direct. Or maybe this wasn't in the original design, was added in the firmware, but they hadn't fully tested to ensure it doesn't apply on direct outs. I would have thought it was in the power amp section alongside the presence and thump controls so the send doesn't include it.

I haven't used the IR-X much since the update anyways...I did like to run the pedal in the loop of my Axe FX 3 quite a bit. I didn't notice that it was overly dark either. I would tend to run the clean channel on the lower bright setting which was plenty bright to me, and the gain channel with the tight switch on and with treble/bass up and mids back.

 

[KingsXJJ]

The differences between the IRX boost and IRJ lead me to believe these are not generic preamps in totality but I bet the tube circuits are similar or identical. I wonder what Dave would say about all of this…

 

[Jarick]

My understanding is the preamp is analog primarily. I would be shocked if there’s much digital modeling happening outside the IR and power amp.

 

[laxu]

I mean most Friedman amps are variations of a Plexi or JCM800 circuit with various mods. So it's no wonder that many of them have a huge ton of overlap and it's more like "pick a flavor you like" thing.

I think one of you owners would be best off just shooting Friedman an email and asking what's going on that it's so much darker.

For the record the real Friedman BE amp doesn't have the kind of sizzle and bite that many Marshalls do.

 

[JiveTurkey]

 

[Jarick]

According to Jarick's frequency response tests, and my ears, the IR-X doesn't sound the same as a real be100 preamp. Based on the curves shown, there is no chance of it.

The preamp also seems to be affected by the low pass filter. Whether this is a bug or by design, unknown. But I am pretty sure it is in the digital domain. Which suggests that the sound of the preamp is run through digital eq to get its sound. That IRJ mid spike is probably just a digital PEQ spike, I've never heard a real amp like that either.

I believe the pedal was designed to be like a hyper idealized/recorded BE100, which itself is like an idealized Marshall. They just chopped off the high frequency content and called it a day.

To be clear I didn't measure a BE-100 preamp Also the modelers had power amp modeling as well, but I doubt that would change the high end slopes (or at least wouldn't make them brighter).

I'll email Friedman and let you know what I hear back if anything. Last time I emailed was asking if there were Midi CC codes for the IR-X and I didn't get any response, but several months later they did add them which was cool.

 

[Jarick]

Alright, Dave e-mailed back and said there wasn't a low pass previously, but they added because people complained it was too bright. I'm not going to pester him anymore but sounds like it's something they could change again with another firmware update.

 

[KingsXJJ]

After messing with the IRX for hours (well a dang long time for my ADD butt) to get it tuned up via control panel and app, I made some headway but still wasn’t completely satisfied. I grabbed one of my Ampli-Firebox MkII’s and loaded a HBE patch and bam. There was what I was missing. I know a lot of folks have issues with the brand but that little box just smokes. Makes wonder if I should even try the IR-J or
IR-D looking for my sweet spot on these.

 

[KingsXJJ]

Alright, Dave e-mailed back and said there wasn't a low pass previously, but they added because people complained it was too bright. I'm not going to pester him anymore but sounds like it's something they could change again with another firmware update.

Just add a fourth position that disables it or revamp it to be continuously variable with “off” on one side.

Done.

 

[Los-D]

After messing with the IRX for hours (well a dang long time for my ADD butt) to get it tuned up via control panel and app, I made some headway but still wasn’t completely satisfied. I grabbed one of my Ampli-Firebox MkII’s and loaded a HBE patch and bam. There was what I was missing. I know a lot of folks have issues with the brand but that little box just smokes. Makes wonder if I should even try the IR-J or
IR-D looking for my sweet spot on these.

Yeah, the AFB with a Line 6 M9 was all I needed for a brief time. Kinda makes you think how much GAS gets in the way at times.

 

[KingsXJJ]

All right. Here we go. After giving this some thought, all low pass intrigue aside… I think I may go for an IR-J. While the guitarist kid in me might want to think I am hip with all the latest high gain tones… maybe I’m not. I am more a product of the 80’s and 90’s. Plexis and 800’s hot-rodded are what turn me on if done right. I might take a bit to allow some gear to sell and then jump jump on the butt ugly red samurai
IR-J. We’ll see how that goes…

 

[KingsXJJ]

I did some experimenting with EQ and it totally fixes the IR-X. I used a graphic eq and tried a smooth to drastic increase from 5K to 20K to try to counteract the chopped top shown in Jarick's curve. It became alive and playable. It still has a smooth top, you can just hear all the articulations now. Nothing strange happened with the noise floor, it is still a smooth and natural sounding amp, its just you can hear it now, and harmonics everywhere are very tube like and alive.

What interesting to me is that the EQ becomes more functional this way. If you want it to be dark and sit back in the mix, all you have to do is lower the treble/mids and it ducks out. But if you raise them up it becomes articulate and up front. This is 100% tube amp tone.

Most of the tone adjustment comes from the boost pedal you are using. The 3band eq is broad and is more for presentation, not tone shaping.

I am 80% keeping this now. Still need to figure out if/how I can get the fixed sound direct to my amp without having to run a shaping IR after it.

I’m not going to add squat as far as EQ to get the IR-X to sound right. That’s what Dave and Synergy are for. If you have some complainers about brightness accommodate them with a low-pass software patch… don’t F others in the process. Allow others to hear and dial in what was first created. Make it adjustable zero cut to wherever other ears like. I’m out. I’ll check out an IR-J when I can afford it after selling the IR-X at a loss. So disappointing.

 

[KingsXJJ]

I agree with you. I wouldn't try the IRJ either.

But don't let my opinion on it affect you. If you like the way it sounds then just enjoy it.

It is what it is.

I think I was misunderstood.

 

[KingsXJJ]

The Ampli-Firebox MKII smokes this IR-X Dave. Sorry sir and TGF but it’s so true IMO.

Not even F’ing close. Gonna be a collector’s item someday. I just don’t understand why it isn’t already.

 

[KingsXJJ]

I have money… make me spend it!

 

[KingsXJJ]

I honestly can’t understand why the lowly Ampli-Firebox MKII didn’t bury these kind of products. It’s like they reached some sort of pinnacle and self imploded. Might be just me. But I am a happy me.

 

[Diary Of An Axeman]

Oh. For a second there it sounded like you were truly happy.

I am ..... but when she nags, my ears have a Defense Mechanism from the brain .... she starts to sound like ....

 

[KingsXJJ]

Maybe I missed it and for that I apologize but can someone who has tried/own(ed) both the IR-X and IR-J relay their experiences? I know is IR-J is voiced a bit more in a vintage vein (Plexi/800) with a classic SD-1 boost. That really appeals to me… I know some have mentioned a bit more forward midrange voice which I expect but I wonder how it all comes together. I have a SC20H and love how it pairs with similar OD’s and I love the open Plexi sound especially when boosted too.

My real question I guess is how does it “feel” and respond under the fingers compared to the IR-X? I prefer a more squished yet dynamic tone. Something that gives and takes on how I dig in. The IR-X felt a bit stiff to me even when sounding good. I gather the IR-D has these qualities but does the IR-J bridge that gap? Can someone please share how they feel/felt when using it regarding this?

Thank you and I apologize if I’m beating a dead horse but I have a chance to get one discounted at the cost of not getting a replacement PRS NF3 guitar. Sorry for rambling but any input would certainly help.

J