Using Powercab IRs with Helix

[modelation 7]

This may have been discussed before and I missed it (sorry) ,,,,

It looks like using an IR only in the Powercab is the same as using an IR only in the Helix but with the IR as the last block in the signal chain. This seems non ideal as the optimal signal chain would be something like Amp->IR(cab)->Reverb->Delay. Using an IR in the Powercab, this would be Amp->Reverb->Delay->IR(cab). Does it make sense to use two IRs: Amp->IR(cab)->Reverb->Delay->IR(PC)? Has anyone done a comparisons between these signal chains? Maybe there is not much difference? Two IRs in series of course could be problematic.

 

[dgothard 2]

To me using the Cab or IR  last emulates more of how a real amp would operate where you have PreAmp->FX Loop (Delays & Reverbs)->Poweramp->Speaker vs how you would operate to do recording by  having a Cab then applying delays, reverbs like you might do with a mic'ed amp into a DAW.  Either way is not wrong just different.

 

 

[modelation 7]

I agree that this is much like a typical amp with FX loop setup. But an ideal setup would be like a concert hall where the delay and reverb would come after the speaker cab IR. Probably doesn't make much difference though.

[amsdenj 586]

Since convolution is linear, it probably doesn't make much difference for most effects like EQ, reverb, delay, modulation or other linear effects that might typically go after the amp in a live or recording situation. However, compression would be different. Since convolution is a linear time varying system, the compressor input would see different signals depending on whether it was before or after an IR block. This is similar to the discussion about EQ before and/or after compression. Both are valid and do different things.

 

However, if the block is non-linear, than positioning before or after the IR block could make quite a difference. But typically we wouldn't put distortion or amp blocks after an IR.