Stuff

[bikescene]

When working with IRs, I’ve gotten use to scrolling through a list over many years. With a moveable mic system, I sometimes get bogged down on comparing the smallest steps and seeing if I can hear the difference. I do like the moveable mic systems when I am in the mood.

When making my own IRs, I settled on increments of 0.5”. At one point, I went down to 0.25” resolution, but I preferred moving in 0.5” steps to hear a more dramatic difference.

When moving mics back from the grill, I mostly prefer increments of 1”, otherwise I keep second guessing myself if the fractional change is really making a difference. Although sometimes I do like 0.5” increments to fine tune the proximity effect.

 

[KingsXJJ]

I like having both options and can work with either.

 

[MadMaxG79]

Why would he? No IR joy on a Tonelab.

Man, now I really miss my old Tonelab SE. That was such a beast of a board. But the cabinet modelling was definitely it's weak link. But it sounded glorious through the effects return of a tube amp.

I tried hooking it up to my first IR loader, the EPSi. But it just introduced so much digital noise that it wasn't worth it.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Man, now I really miss my old Tonelab SE. That was such a beast of a board. But the cabinet modelling was definitely it's weak link. But it sounded glorious through the effects return of a tube amp.

I played an incredible amount of shows through one of their Valvetronix amps (provided by the production of a sort of large-ish tribute show), which, I believe, share the same DNA, and apart from the very rudimentary editing and utility options, it's been a great amp (for anything non-metal at least). Extremely good dynamic response, neat cleans and a pretty good classic rock sound, too. Even sometimes plugged one InEar bud out, so I could listen to the amp itself, because it was quite enjoyable.