Why does everyone seem to blend IR’s?

[MirrorProfiles]

For me, blending mics is something I only really do in the studio when I’m struggling to get what I need and it’s a bit of a “plan B” at capturing what I’m hearing in the room that a single mic isn’t picking up. It’s also rarely about being better rather than different. I’d still try and get as much as I can from one mic before I even think about blending anything.

9/10 I can get everything I want just through using the right mic in the right position on the right speaker. It feels like with digital, so many IR loaders default to 2 (or more) IR spaces and people just instinctively start adding things together. Pretty sure STL, Mercuriall, Softube, Amplitube and Neural default to at least 2 mics, Fractal has 4 slots, HX 2 slots.

With Dynacabs and HX’s new cab engine, are you typically blending mics as much?

My gut feeling is always if one IR isn’t doing it for you, then I’d swap that rather than blending something else.

 

[James Freeman]

I’d still try and get as much as I can from one mic before I even think about blending anything.
9/10 I can get everything I want just through using the right mic in the right position on the right speaker.

Same.
One SM57 on a good sounding cab/speaker often does the job.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Same.
One SM57 on a good sounding cab/speaker often does the job.

IMO being able to move the mic to the right spot for the particular tone not only does the job but sounds significantly better - you don’t need to introduce other mics or use as much EQ.

Sometimes EQing a single mic gives a nice result, you aren’t having the phase interaction of 2 mics. And sometimes blending mics does something cool with the phase (57 and 421 is a particular sound which is great, that no single mic will quite do).

Blending the wrong IR’s AND EQing is the worst of everything IMO, if there is that element of doubt or feeling like something isn’t wrong I would suggest stripping things right back to one single IR (one mic) and get that as close as you can before introducing anything else.

Digital makes it so easy to add more and more, and also makes it easy to feel insecure about things. I feel like so many people over complicate things more than is necessary. Less is more.

 

[Orvillain]

I blend an SM57 and a 421 at times, but not always. Very often it is just 57 on the right speaker in the right place.

 

[Jarick]

I’m guessing a big part of this is because that’s how things are done in the studio, and our default mode as guitarist is to try and recreate that. In the studio it’s a good way to be able to change the tonality of the cab after recording without EQ.

Good placement on a single mic will likely meet the needs for just about anything though. Depending on the mic that may take some time to figure out.

This week I shot my own impulse responses for the first time, just using gear I had sitting around (an old SM57, an audio interface as a preamp, my Axe FX 3, and my Boss Katana Artist). I was surprised that I got a really great tone on about my 3rd or 4th try that went up against great IR’s I’ve used over the years or Dyna Cab. Then I shot about 30 more IR’s and couldn’t quite recreate what I did early on.

I was reminded how picky the SM57 is about placement and angle. When it’s done properly it can either cut like a knife or be smooth. But it’s so easy to get it wrong. I’m thinking about picking up a Sennheiser e906 when I get back into town and playing around with that. I think that will give me a little smoother and clearer sound than the SM57 and be less picky about placement.

 

[HotRats]

On stage 1 mic in the right spot is more than enough, I agree, and with real mics and cabs is much easier to deal with a single mic and bleeding source.
Inside a digital box bleeding and phase issues are usually non existent therefore mixing different mics can give you really nice results without side effects and this is one of the reasons is so popular. The main reason is that people like to replicate what sound engineers do in the studio.

Using different mics (and different distances/positions) can give you results you'll never achive with a single mic and an eq, that's why in the studio we do that a lot.
All that said, with modellers when preparing a preset for live use, I much prefer to mix different speakers rather than different mics.

 

[ragingplatypi]

Something that has happened to me in the studio with a real amp and also with IR/cab simulators is that I got really excited about the unique sound of 2 mics. However, once I was mixing with the full band (or playing live with IRs) it became apparent that one mic (usually a 57) just sat better with everything else. These days I use the Helix cabs with a ribbon or condenser setting, mostly to appease my ego.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

I’m guessing a big part of this is because that’s how things are done in the studio, and our default mode as guitarist is to try and recreate that. In the studio it’s a good way to be able to change the tonality of the cab after recording without EQ.

My experience of studio micing has often been spending a lot of time getting mics in the right position. More often than not it’s one mic. I think sometimes, when time is precious in a studio, engineers might throw a few up and try and figure it out afterwards but that’s more derived from being compromised on time than a preferred method.

I see so much from guitarists blending IR’s and I wonder if there is an actual reason for doing it, or whether it’s just something that they feel like they SHOULD do.

 

[yeky83]

I’m a one mic man… one mic about 2m away that is

 

[EOengineer]

Like all things audio engineering - it just depends on the source, context, and desired results.

In the physical world - Sometimes a 57 in a particular position on a particular cab is magic. Sometimes I want to reinforce that with a 121 barely blended in to add some body. Or maybe a 414 or 67 back in the room crushed through a distressor and panned to the opposite side and barely mixed in to give a sense of how the room is reacting to the amp.

In modeling land - I tend to just use YA mixes but not mindlessly - I find them very well balanced in my mixes where it takes a lot of the lengthy comparative work out of the equation.

HX cabs are great though - I’ve entertained myself for hours just dragging their mics around on various cabs to search for new sounds and you can get interesting results.

 

[JiveTurkey]

My experience of studio micing has often been spending a lot of time getting mics in the right position. More often than not it’s one mic. I think sometimes, when time is precious in a studio, engineers might throw a few up and try and figure it out afterwards but that’s more derived from being compromised on time than a preferred method.

I see so much from guitarists blending IR’s and I wonder if there is an actual reason for doing it, or whether it’s just something that they feel like they SHOULD do.

Everyone Is An EngineerTM

 

[Enchilada Jones]

Because if you have 1000 IR's and decide that's not enough rabbit holes to explore then blending means you now have millions without having to buy any more to get them.
I have about ten regular IR's that I tend to gravitate to that cover cab sizes 1x12, 2x12, 4x10, 4x12. The rest are just reminders of time wasted.

 

[Cirrus]

This is probably going to inflame hatred and rage, and I accept that.

IRs aren't actually amazing. They're static snapshots of a non-linear device - you get no speaker compression or distortion through them. I think people might use multiple IRs to increase the complexity of the sound they're hearing, and to even out the frequency response spikes that IRs (at least in my experience of using/ mixing them) seem to over-emphasise.

The nice thing about them is that it's easy to very quickly A/B choices and find complimentary ones. On the other hand quite often you've got a folder of like 500 files to plod through.

 

[yek]

A dynamic for bite and a ribbon for body.

 

[fretworn]

A dynamic for bite and a ribbon for body.

That’s how I think and do.

 

[paisleywookiee]

I'll use a York 57+121 mix. But I have NEVER in my life actually mixed them myself. Too much trouble.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

They're static snapshots of a non-linear device - you get no speaker compression or distortion through them. I think people might use multiple IRs to increase the complexity of the sound they're hearing, and to even out the frequency response spikes that IRs (at least in my experience of using/ mixing them) seem to over-emphasise.

I was of this opinion but honestly I don’t buy it any more, especially after doing lots of A/ab’s and blind tests.

Poweramp->cabinet interaction is huge for me though and much easier to notice a difference with.

Are you typically driving speakers to their absolute limit? would you feel confident identifying a speaker vs IR in a blind test?

I try to approach IR’s as I would micing a cab and the results seem to work well for me like that.

 

[fretworn]

I'll use a York 57+121 mix. But I have NEVER in my life actually mixed them myself. Too much trouble.

DynaCab

 

[Achilles]

I think it's mainly because some of the software packages make it so damn easy to do. I had one years back where you could use up to 8 separate IRs and then adjust the mix of each one. Ridiculous in hindsight.

 

[metropolis_4]

I love adding a ribbon at a distance to dial in the amount of body I want to add to the 57