Do different impulse loaders yield different results?

[ApolloSpeed]

been using Kefir a few weeks....i like it but, i wish the gain would not change everytime I switch impulses.

 

[cyril_v]

Maybe it's a placebo effect, but I think I'm going to have to say I like Kefir the best. I hate the hell out of the interface, it's pretty barebones and I wish it opened up folders like SIR, but besides that I "think" it sounds a little bit better.

I haven't tried SIR2, but my friend told me it sounds the same as the first one with the main difference being a prettier interface and the HD:IR things that he referred to as more of a pure reverb than anything.

been using Kefir a few weeks....i like it but, i wish the gain would not change everytime I switch impulses.

SIR is the same way with the auto-gain feature... i'm guessing the reason is because all IR's are not made equal and don't all have the same output. I prefer this over when I was testing Boogex and ever other IR needed the output adjusted to get the same volume I had before.

 

[Internity]

you asked for it
vexongo boogex - only cab emu:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6028445/stuffs/cabs/voxengo.mp3

Lecab :
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6028445/stuffs/cabs/lecab.mp3

Pristine Space:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6028445/stuffs/cabs/ps.mp3

imo the lecab sounds more flat but with more high-mid + treble.
the boogex and PS sound allmost the same , boogex has more highmids (just a tiny bit) imo

 

[narcossintese]

+1 to KeFir. It works great, doesn´t have all the bullshit knobs, excellent stereo mode... The bad things are the ugly GUI and the annoying gain knob reset thing. I was hoping that Recabinet plugin was going to be the ultimate impulse loader, but now they´ve said that it won´t even load external impulses. Bummer.

 

[Scottxx]

Between Lecab, Kefir, Boogex and SIR2... nothing beats SIR2; far better tone. I didn't try Pristine Space.

 

[Robert W]

I tried A/B'ing LeCab and Vexongo using a V30 impulse a board member posted here a while ago, and honestly, I couldn't really tell them apart.

I also tried some K100 and T100 impulses as well and again, I couldn't really tell them apart.

 

[colonel kurtz]

couldn't the issue of whether there's a difference be pretty easily settled with a null test?

of course this wouldn't settle which is "better"...but it will expose any differences in the impulse loaders

 

[John_C]

The test comparing to mathematica is the most informative. It tells you how accurate the plugin is at the convolution.

Convolution is relatively simple maths (simple, not easy ), but it takes literally an infinite amount of time to perform correctly. The difference between different convolution plugins is how far they're prepared to go and how well designed the performance optimisations are.

 

[AudioGeekZine]

Kefir seemed to have a retarded cpu load last few times I used it. I've been using Liquidsonics Reverberate LE lately. Don't like the one that comes with Reaper.

 

[abt]

Mellomuse IR1A is the best IMO. I use the RTAS version in Pro Tools which works great. I has so much trouble with other impulse loaders especially with wrapped VSTs that had loads of latency and general flakiness.

 

[006]

IR1A is all I use nowadays too, I can run a lot more instances of it than anything else I have tried, been solid so far (>5 months).

 

[deLuther]

skeksis268, in fact convolution plugins uses more complicated approach by involving FFT, rather than direct approach, which is not computationally effective.
So differences can be due FFT algorithm involved and partitioning approach (because usually buffer sizes is smaller than impulse length).
So in reality convolution are not that simple

 

[reneisgod]

Here's a question

example;
4 guitar tracks, do you;

1. bus them all to the same impulse loader (1 wav file)
2. use a seperate impulse loaders, 1 per guitar (4 instances 4 wav files)

I normally just put all my tracks through 1 impulse loader,
i havent personally noticed any difference using 1 per track.

 

[deLuther]

Linear nature of convolution allows such things, it`s normal, should not be any difference if one impulse used, maybe can be some dependence on particular implementation of convolution algorithm in plugin, but if algorithm was done properly all must be fine.

 

[John_C]

skeksis268, in fact convolution plugins uses more complicated approach by involving FFT, rather than direct approach, which is not computationally effective.
So differences can be due FFT algorithm involved and partitioning approach (because usually buffer sizes is smaller than impulse length).
So in reality convolution are not that simple

cool, didn't know it used FFT but i guess it makes sense

 

[jimwilbourne]

I'm on a mac. so I run LAconvolver. it's not that bad. although I think the quality could be a little better.
but it's free.

and the ampsim that I use to model a tone similar to a 5150 has it's own impulse loader. although I haven't yet done a A/B comparison with LAconvolver and the built in one.

anyone know of any other mac compatible impulse loaders I could try?

 

[deLuther]

cool, didn't know it used FFT but i guess it makes sense

Convolution in time domain equal to multiplication in frequency domain, so FFT is used to transform into frequency domain and back.
And such approach requires far less operations than direct convolution with impulse length greater than 64 points.

 

[006]

I'm on a mac. so I run LAconvolver. it's not that bad. although I think the quality could be a little better.
but it's free.

and the ampsim that I use to model a tone similar to a 5150 has it's own impulse loader. although I haven't yet done a A/B comparison with LAconvolver and the built in one.

anyone know of any other mac compatible impulse loaders I could try?

Hey man... it's already been mentioned by a few people replying in this thread - MellowMuse IR1A loader is great. You can get it for $50 from MellowMuse's site. Cubase does not use AU format plug-ins, it requires VST, which has also been covered in the thread :Smug: