|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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
__________________
MD Last edited by mightyduck; 09-21-2018 at 02:09 AM. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
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.
__________________
Dell XPS 8900 i7-6700K CPU @ 4.00GHz 64 Gig Memory:Seagate 2x 2TB, 4TB,500gb EVO OS Windows 10 pro PT 2023.3 Studio through an A&H Qu-32 |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
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.
__________________
HP Z4 workstation, Mbox Studio https://www.facebook.com/search/top/...0sound%20works The better I drink, the more I mix BTW, my name is Dave, but most people call me.........................Dave |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
Quote:
mightyduck
__________________
MD |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
Quote:
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
__________________
MD |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
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.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
Quote:
__________________
HP Z4 workstation, Mbox Studio https://www.facebook.com/search/top/...0sound%20works The better I drink, the more I mix BTW, my name is Dave, but most people call me.........................Dave |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
Quote:
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
__________________
MD Last edited by mightyduck; 09-17-2018 at 01:35 AM. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: recording with load boxes, cab ins, and all that
Quote:
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
__________________
MD Last edited by mightyduck; 09-17-2018 at 02:19 AM. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
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!
__________________
MD |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
>1 mΩ DI boxes | mesaone | General Discussion | 6 | 10-19-2015 08:41 AM |
Pro Tools 10 not load plugins,freezing load.HELP | javierboz | Windows | 2 | 11-08-2012 04:25 AM |
Pro tools recording studio wont load | dee101 | Pro Tools M-Powered (Win) | 1 | 01-03-2011 04:20 AM |
DI-boxes! | timeey | General Discussion | 6 | 07-27-2010 07:27 AM |
Norton Disk Doctor... to load or not to load | MixMonster | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 10 | 04-05-2004 11:25 AM |