" New IR Tech that sounds like an Amp " ...... what's the thinking on this ?

[jay mitchell]

I'd say it works decently enough

"Works decently enough" is doing more work than you realize. If, by "works decently enough," you mean that you like the result, then you're really only saying that you like the IR.

The only legitimate reason to try to "bake in" a cab's impedance vs. frequency with an IR is to create a more realistic simulation of the electrical interaction between the impedance of the cab with the impedance of an amp. Both pieces of information are required for that to stand a chance of working. There are two reasons this will always fail:
1. Much of the effect of the interaction is on the nonlinear part of the amp's behavior. An impulse response cannot contain nonlinear behavior.
2. The source impedance of the amp that will be used with the IR - or the virtual impedance of the amp model that will be used - is unknown. There is no way to account for that.

 

[ejecta]

"Works decently enough" is doing more work than you realize. If, by "works decently enough," you mean that you like the result, then you're really only saying that you like the IR.

The only legitimate reason to try to "bake in" a cab's impedance vs. frequency with an IR is to create a more realistic simulation of the electrical interaction between the impedance of the cab with the impedance of an amp. Both pieces of information are required for that to stand a chance of working. There are two reasons this will always fail:
1. Much of the effect of the interaction is on the nonlinear part of the amp's behavior. An impulse response cannot contain nonlinear behavior.
2. The source impedance of the amp that will be used with the IR - or the virtual impedance of the amp model that will be used - is unknown. There is no way to account for that.

In your experience how much does the nonlinear behavior effect the experience of playing guitar which the two biggest ones for me personally being sound and feel? Is there now or would there ever be “virtual tech” that can or could replicate the nonlinear behavior?

 

[laxu]

"Works decently enough" is doing more work than you realize. If, by "works decently enough," you mean that you like the result, then you're really only saying that you like the IR.

The only legitimate reason to try to "bake in" a cab's impedance vs. frequency with an IR is to create a more realistic simulation of the electrical interaction between the impedance of the cab with the impedance of an amp. Both pieces of information are required for that to stand a chance of working. There are two reasons this will always fail:
1. Much of the effect of the interaction is on the nonlinear part of the amp's behavior. An impulse response cannot contain nonlinear behavior.
2. The source impedance of the amp that will be used with the IR - or the virtual impedance of the amp model that will be used - is unknown. There is no way to account for that.

Yes, I fully understand that. And I expect ML Sound Lab do too which is why it's an optional, adjustable feature. Maybe it helps with a modeler that doesn't model impedance relationships, or tube amp with a resistive load etc.

 

[jay mitchell]

Yes, I fully understand that. And I expect ML Sound Lab do too

We're in disagreement on the second part. I've got experience with Mikko going back more than a decade. He has never hesitated to claim he knows things that he obviously does not.

 

[jay mitchell]

In your experience how much does the nonlinear behavior effect the experience of playing guitar

It's huge.

Is there now or would there ever be “virtual tech” that can or could replicate the nonlinear behavior?

There has been for a really long time. It's called an "amp sim."

 

[ejecta]

There has been for a really long time. It's called an "amp sim."

Referring to amp sim modeling on previous and current products? I thought since they use IR’s there wouldn’t be the nonlinear activity? I don’t understand obviously.

 

[fretworn]

Referring to amp sim modeling on previous and current products? I thought since they use IR’s there wouldn’t be the nonlinear activity? I don’t understand obviously.

The distortion characteristics of the tubes in an amp simulator are examples of modeling nonlinear behavior.

 

[DrewJD82]

What’s really cool is if you speed/pitch this song up, it turns into a Die Antwoord song.

 

[jay mitchell]

Referring to amp sim modeling on previous and current products?

Yes.

I thought since they use IR’s there wouldn’t be the nonlinear activity? I don’t understand obviously.

Here's the statement you responded to:

"1. Much of the effect of the interaction is on the nonlinear part of the amp's behavior."

All the "nonlinear activity" of any perceptual consequence occurs upstream of the cab, i.e., in the amp, drive, compressor, etc. There is no need to model "nonlinear activity" in the cab sim, because the speaker(s) makes a negligible contribution to that. I demonstrated that fact years ago in a recorded comparison of a physical cab to an IR of the same cab (IR Demos: Convolver Content).

 

[Orvillain]

IR's are wank.

 

[paisleywookiee]

 

[jay mitchell]

IR's are wank.

Apostrophes are used to designate possessive, not plural. And wank is a verb, not a noun.

 

[Hapless]

Apostrophes are used to designate possessive, not plural. And wank is a verb, not a noun.

Incorrect. Apostrophes may be used to designate plural numbers or letters. IR fits the bill as it's an acronym.

 

[Orvillain]

Ahhh, sorry. I'm feeling pissy and I don't want to derail. Comments removed. Except my wank comment. Because it is true.

 

[jay mitchell]

Incorrect. Apostrophes may be used to designate plural numbers or letters.

While that may have become common practice, it remains incorrect. From Misuse of the Apostrophe:

"The basic rule is quite simple: use the apostrophe to indicate possession, not a plural."

 

[Hapless]

While that may have become common practice, it remains incorrect. From Misuse of the Apostrophe:

"The basic rule is quite simple: use the apostrophe to indicate possession, not a plural."

Grammar is always evolving and rules change over time. I'd venture to guess that over time this rule, like split infinitives and others, will change or fall by the wayside with "common practice".

 

[paisleywookiee]

Grammar is always evolving and rules change over time. I'd venture to guess that over time this rule, like split infinitives and others, will change or fall by the wayside with "common practice".

Wake me up when "irregardless" is a word, and not just something cool to use to annoy my grammar Nazi boss with.

 

[Hapless]

Wake me up when "irregardless" is a word, and not just something cool to use to annoy my grammar Nazi boss with.

Wit ealle usen þæt oregandlice Ænȝlisc sprografies.

 

[Gearzilla]

Grammar is always evolving

Did you mean recently devolving?

 

[Hapless]

Did you mean recently devolving?

It depends on your point of view. Latin "devolved" into Italian, Spanish, French, etc. English, in a few more centuries, will likely sound very different than it does today. If we haven't blown ourselves up in the meantime.