Load Box recommendations, please
 

UPDATE

I AM MODIFYING THE TOPIC IN THIS THREAD. Here goes:

I notice that every company that makes a load box says that theirs is the best thing in the world. Would some of you that have experience using modern load boxes [reactive or resistive] please chime in a tell me which ones are best, and WHY?

I would appreciate hearing from the group on this, as it seems to me that load boxes are not all equal. There must be variables in design and quality, especially with the reactive ones. So please let me know which ones to consider.

Thanks!


[Original content still below so that previous replies make sense.]

Hello,

I've been hearing a lot about using load boxes, cab ir loaders, and stuff like that.

I hate [or at least strongly dislike] latency.

So I'm thinking the best way to do this in Pro Tools is to use an amp, into a reactive load box, into some sort of dedicated hardware cab loader that I can monitor directly while also routing it into Pro Tools.

Is there a combo that will allow me to monitor with no latency at all, just as if I was using a real cabinet miced?

Anybody doing this?

I'd like some info from some of you that are deep into this type of stuff.

I have obviously used amp simulator software, power soaks, and stuff like that, but usually I just get myself to a place where I can crank up my amps real loud and mic everything up. However, I am trying to build a studio on my property and it might be nice to not have to have amps at blistering volumes to deal with. I do have a lot of great sounding high-powered amps [Marshall, Ampeg v-4s, AC-30........] that I like to use.

So.......anybody?




mightyduck

Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
 

Not sure if it will help but I do sometimes use a DI box or a Y cable to split a guitar between an amp and a multi effect, where the effect box is direct monitored just to give a no latency foldback to make it easier to play along.

Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
 

I've done a fair amount of recording with both the Palmer DI and the Palmer load box and they really do both sound very good.

Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
 

Thanks. How do you have it set up exactly? Do you ever use load boxes or guitar cab impulse responses?


mightyduck

Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
 

Thanks. I am very interested to know exactly what products people are getting good results with.

Do you use IRs for cabinets at all? How do you monitor? What do you think of the set-up I described? Trying to eliminate latency, you know. Not sure how much of an issue it is for others.




mightyduck

Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
 

I am not following why you are asking about IR modelleling and monitoring latency etc. If you have a reactive load or (not totally sealed) isolation box and you listen to that when playing then you are set for monitoring. You can do whatever you want with IR or other processing while mixing.

Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
 

And I am curious on why you have latency. Its time to describe your usual setup/routing/plugin chain. I track direct guitars with no latency to speak of, whether its guitar>DI>Pro Tools with an amp sim plugin, or real amp with either mics or load box(none of which cause latency on their own):o

Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
 

Hi Darryl,

That's certainly one approach. Speaking as a performing musician it is sub-optimal in some respects though, I think. My undergraduate degree is in Studio Music and Jazz / Guitar. I think its fair to say that I am an accomplished guitarist / musician. When playing amplified guitar, the whole rig, including the speakers, becomes part of the instrument and, particularly when soloing, one's playing is, or at the very least can be, responsive to, and informed by, all that. So there is something to be said for doing the performance while hearing exactly what the speakers are doing. There is an interaction [i.e., held notes, feedback, sustained notes for over 30 seconds or a minute, e-bow, certain tone lending itself to certain note choices and rhythmic stuff].

So its good to at least have the ability to direct monitor the actual sound that is going to be on tape, while doing the take, without latency. That way there is some natural relationship between the sound and the playing. Not to discount the idea of having the ability to tweak stuff later in the mix process, btw.


mightyduck

Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
 

Hey man,

No real “usual” setup. Mostly I like to use ProTools like a tape recorder when tracking, monitoring direct through console. This would be with the rhythm section for tracking you know, So we don’t put plug-ins or crap like that in the chain. That kind of stuff would go on hardware at the console if at all. Usually just eq. And I like to go to tape at the same time. So everything synced and split at the console outs , 24 to ProTools and 24 to 2-inch. That’s a big recording studio situation. Smaller situations maybe I just go to ProTools but I still usually don’t put plug ins In the path when tracking. Sometimes i will use stuff just to have a certain effect or something, but typically I try to just get good original sounds to begin with.

I know there is no latency with what you were describing, other than with amp sim plugs, but I’m talking about cab loaders impulse responses. Thinking there is going to be a way to monitor that before it goes into ProTools. Using hardware cab loader I guess, but they may still have a little latency.

Another possible issue with the cab IRs may be that they are not infinitely long, right? So long sustained notes [feedback tricks, e-bow, and so forth] may get weird. I don't know. It may not create any issue. Hmmm. Your cab simulator would not have that potential problem, but I hear some of the cab IRs sound great, that's why I got interested. I'm sure its all useful.

mightyduck

Re: Load Box recommendations, please
 

UPDATE

I AM MODIFYING THE TOPIC IN THIS THREAD. Here goes:

I notice that every company that makes a load box says that theirs is the best thing in the world. Would some of you that have experience using modern load boxes [reactive or resistive] please chime in a tell me which ones are best, and WHY?

I would appreciate hearing from the group on this, as it seems to me that load boxes are not all equal. There must be variables in design and quality, especially with the reactive ones. So please let me know which ones to consider.

Thanks!