Best real amp + impulses clip?

Number 2 is indeed the Mic'd Cab. If the guitars weren't so prominant in the mix it may have been a little bit more difficult to choose.

Ermin, you are correct regarding the volume matching. The Impulsed guitar tracks had larger peaks on some of the muted stuff so they clipped quite a bit more when I tried to level match the two clips, so the Impulsed sample guitars ended up being lower than the Mic'd sample guitars. I should have lowered them in the Mic'd sample but this was initially only a test for myself so near enough was good enough. I agree on some of the tone getting lost also, kinda like it's less saturated. It is missing that magical "pushed air".

Regarding Nebula, I am not interested enough to spend any money and buy the software since I don't use Impulses personally (selfish I know :lol:). The only reason these samples came about is that I wanted to try creating impulses with the "recorded pre and mic'd riff" method rather than the "sweeping test-tone" method. I was trying to get a mic position that was a bit "thrashy" (less definition, scooped and with a little more fizz). The result was the "Gutted" Impulse in the Equipment forum in a thread called "Gutted".

"Average Joe" wouldn't have a clue.
 
By the way 'Hack, you don't need an apostrophe when pluralizing (amps, rather than amp's, in your sig ;))
 
Metaltastic said:
Hahaha, touche :)
Click to expand...

"touché" possibly and not "touche"? Let's put the Grammar Police Badge away shall we, before someone says pwned? I hate that word.

The sig originally had a copyrighted word in it created by combining "re" and "amp" so it was changed late one night whilst tired. That was the result.

Back on topic?
 
n00bzor.

Re Nebula: No probs. I'm trying to push anyone at all into trying it. I want to see whether we can cover that last bit of ground that impulses can't. I'm literally running up the walls here because I want to track guitars at home, but not take the obvious quality hit from impulses.

So from what I gather there are 3 generally accepted ways of doing cabinet impulses:

1) Sweeping sine tone
2) Pink noise
3) Play riff, match to original

... which out of these works best?
 
I have tried all 3 of those methods. I had a bit of trouble with the "pink noise" method in relation of how long to leave the tail which I gave up on. I also had an issue with the "Play riff, match to original" method with tail length. "Too short" and not all the tone was there. "Too long" and then it would ring out. I think the key is getting the length of the recorded tone correct. It might help with that missing last "5%". 99% of mine are the sweep method.
 
I did the sweeping sine thing.

I believe I got the impulses sounding almost indentical to micing the cab.

Which reminds me now I have an interface I can make some more.
 
If the opportunity presents itself at any point, I might try to do some at the new Pony studios, in a fully treated/damped environment, with fantastic preamps and conversion. Some of that last 5% might come down to that.
 
I don't see how the enviroment would make too much of a difference to how close an Impulse sounds compared to the mic'd sound. The Real mic'd clip may sound different in different rooms I agree (too what degree when close-micing I am not sure), but I don't think the Impulse made from it will sound any closer to the Mic'd clip. The resulting Impulse from the Good room may indeed sound better than the Poor room Impulse, but not closer to the actual mic'd sample. Equipment (converters, etc...) would make more of a difference than enviroment I think. I still think a major factor is getting the tail length correct. Different lengths definitely give different tones. You still will not capture the "pushed air" effect. That's the last 4% maybe. :lol:
 
I understand what you're saying, and I probably should've stated my intentions a bit clearer.

Rather than trying to get the impulse to sound closer to the mic'ed cab (which in a sense, is a given), I just want the impulses themselves to be of a higher quality, and as such, a viable substitute for a real mic'ed cab.

I'll see how possible it is to get NAT3 in there. I might experiment with modeling a GSSL compressor here at home first when I get the Multiface. Kind of put it through its paces first before going all out on cabs.
 
GuitarHack said:
"touché" possibly and not "touche"? Let's put the Grammar Police Badge away shall we, before someone says pwned? I hate that word.

The sig originally had a copyrighted word in it created by combining "re" and "amp" so it was changed late one night whilst tired. That was the result.

Back on topic?
Click to expand...

Touchy touchy dude, I was just kidding! :wave: You're reputation for proficiency at the English language is secure :)

And I was too lazy to copy/paste an accented "e" in there, btw :D
 
And Moony, when I get an amp with an FX return again, I'd definitely consider trying out the Nebula route. Now, to be clear, you make the "impulses" (or whatever their term for them is) with NAT3, and can only load them into Nebula 3, right?
 
From what I understand that's correct. The great thing about NAT3 is that you can create 'steps' and take snapshots at different settings. So you can essentially emulate the 'presence' and 'resonance' controls of your power amp, and also the master volume. Fantastic idea, innit? From what I gather of seeing the creator's posts on Gearslutz, the process is largely automated and taken care of by the software. You simply create all the steps, to give yourself a number of 'virtual pots' to change some fairly crucial settings.

Really glad to hear that you'd be up for giving it a try. I'm still very very curious as to how that'd stack up to the real deal and impulses. Nobody seems to have done a direct comparison yet! Can fancy yourself the explorer of a brand new frontier... or whichever pretty notion motivates you!
 
How much does the Nebula and NAT3 cost?

I, like you Ermin, would really like a viable alternative to mic'ing up a cab. While I love impulses and what they can offer, including the fact that some of the ones out there are so damn close that in a mix it's near perfect, but I feel as though they have a certain something about them that doesn't quite stack up to the real deal. If somebody could figure out that small difference I would be extremely happy. I think GH is on to something about getting the sample to the right length. He is right about the tone being very different depending on how long or short the tail is.

I don't necessarily want something that perfectly recreates the exact cab/mic that is being used to make the impulse...but something that isn't lacking that small difference, as you have said as well.

I'm curious to know if there is something that can/should be done to the amp when you record it's direct signal to apply impulses to it. Maybe some kind of...I dunno... haha. Kinda like how you can add the effect of a TS by just adding certain EQ to a DI track before reamping it. Something like that, not EQ necessarily...just something that could recreate whatever it is that is missing when you record an amp's output.

Then again, Shane's Recabinet will be out early next month, and from the conversations I have had with him he seems really confident in his product. Saying things like "people have been using the wrong methods" and such has me really curious to hear what his impulses have in store for me. He won't reveal the process he uses, he said it's actually like a trade secret...which makes it more interesting :) Maybe he has figured out that 5%?

~006
 
006 said:
How much does the Nebula and NAT3 cost?

I, like you Ermin, would really like a viable alternative to mic'ing up a cab. While I love impulses and what they can offer, including the fact that some of the ones out there are so damn close that in a mix it's near perfect, but I feel as though they have a certain something about them that doesn't quite stack up to the real deal. If somebody could figure out that small difference I would be extremely happy. I think GH is on to something about getting the sample to the right length. He is right about the tone being very different depending on how long or short the tail is.

I don't necessarily want something that perfectly recreates the exact cab/mic that is being used to make the impulse...but something that isn't lacking that small difference, as you have said as well.

I'm curious to know if there is something that can/should be done to the amp when you record it's direct signal to apply impulses to it. Maybe some kind of...I dunno... haha. Kinda like how you can add the effect of a TS by just adding certain EQ to a DI track before reamping it. Something like that, not EQ necessarily...just something that could recreate whatever it is that is missing when you record an amp's output.

Then again, Shane's Recabinet will be out early next month, and from the conversations I have had with him he seems really confident in his product. Saying things like "people have been using the wrong methods" and such has me really curious to hear what his impulses have in store for me. He won't reveal the process he uses, he said it's actually like a trade secret...which makes it more interesting :) Maybe he has figured out that 5%?

~006
Click to expand...

Check this out (release date : Christmas 2008 i believe) :

http://www.two-notes.com/en/Produits-Two-Notes/Torpedo-VB101.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MetalMiller
My first impulses... framus cobra cab. Need feedback.
Replies
21
Views
2K
Andy Sneap
Mutant
M
Rex Rocker
Would anyone happen to have an impulse like this... ?
Replies
6
Views
725
Andy Sneap
Rex Rocker
R
reneisgod
Cradle Of Filth tone using impulses
Replies
3
Views
802
Andy Sneap
cobhc
C
Ermz
ENGL Powerball settings
Replies
29
Views
19K
Andy Sneap
Nebulous
N
Lowberg
Input Level of DI/Pre-amp Before Impulses
Replies
3
Views
632
F.O.H.
beyond dead
B
Top Bottom
Back