Boss GT 1000Core

[MrDinsdale]

Sorry to be blunt, but you don't know that. You are theorizing only. You don't know that multiple IR's are being used, nor do you know that using an IR somehow compromises the so called push/pull functionality that is supposed to be in AIRD, which in my opinion has more to do with dynamics and even if there is some frequency modeling that occurs...that does not necessarily mean that using an IR negates it! As far as I'm concerned, the AIRD stuff is always there...and they provide us a few cab options, which are basically the end IR capped on the end of the process....or you can use a custom one. Keep it simple.

If you think its really more than that, then please share some audio samples exemplifying this incredible technology you are imagining.

But hey...I'm just guessing too. And what I can say is that the Aguilar IR I use, sounds way better then anything I heard in the factory cabs.



absolutely

Calm down dude.

I don’t think it’s that big of a cognitive leap to make the assumption Augmented Impulse Response Dynamic technology had some basis in Impulse Responses.

I’m not going to trawl back through videos and interviews but I distinctly remember a guy from boss talking about capturing preamp and cab sims for AIRD being time consuming process because it’s not just a single impulse response implying multiple.

 

[Krisfield]

You’re right. It’s Boss’s Impulse Response technology. But it goes further than a static IR. And yeah, it’s in the name, AIRD. I’m pretty sure if Boss wasn’t using IR tech it wouldn’t put it in the name.

Calm down dude.

I don’t think it’s that big of a cognitive leap to make the assumption Augmented Impulse Response Dynamic technology had some basis in Impulse Responses.

I’m not going to trawl back through videos and interviews but I distinctly remember a guy from boss talking about capturing preamp and cab sims for AIRD being time consuming process because it’s not just a single impulse response implying multiple.

 

[BEADist]

Whatever AIRD is, it is not convincing the guitar community it seems...

Anyways, I just have one because I like the looks
(well exept for those silver shiny knobs which I swapped)

 

[Krisfield]

Wow, nice move. They look good. Are they after market Roland knobs? I might change mine too.

I think most guitarists go for Celestion IR’s. I like GTCore Speaker Simulator.

Whatever AIRD is, it is not convincing the guitar community it seems...

Anyways, I just have one because I like the looks
(well exept for those silver shiny knobs which I swapped)

View attachment 4777581

 

[BEADist]

Wow, nice move. They look good. Are they after market Roland knobs? I might change mine too.

They are from my GT-8...
I have been too lazy to google and order replacements.

 

[Nuage420]

I’m not going to trawl back through videos and interviews but I distinctly remember a guy from boss talking about capturing preamp and cab sims for AIRD being time consuming process because it’s not just a single impulse response implying multiple.

It was the CEO of Boss during one of his live streams. I watched that one as well. Pretty sure it's the GTK episode.

 

[Dewdman42]

(face palm)

Here is the diagram from the Ultimate GT1000 document. I circled the part where IR's are most likely used, despite whatever other kinds of modeling tech happens early in the AIRD signal chain, related to amp modeling and push/pull dynamics...

The document goes on to say the following:

Nowhere in that document does it state or imply that using a speaker IR somehow negates or replaces AIRD functionality. It instead says that you can swap the cabinet part at will...and you can even use your own IR's if you want.

Further to that, officials from Roland/BOSS very well may have stated that the built in cabinets involve multiple IR's, as that is obvious...the built in Cabinets provide different options for Mic's, mic distance and placement:

Most likely that is simply a collection of IR's and you are selecting which IR you want by using those menu options. This is no different then many IR libraries sold, which include IR's with different mics and mic placements, Roland has just packaged that kind of flexibility into a simple interface where you can quickly change which IR to use....again...in combination with the AIRD signal chain behavior.

Conversely when you use a custom IR, you can only upload a limited number of them and you will have to pic ahead of time the specific mic and placement IR you want to use in each case in order to avoid running out of IR slots...but the UI greys out those options when a custom IR is used.

I see absolutely no indication whatsoever that using a custom IR somehow negates AIRD functionality. That is pure speculation on the part of many people on the internet ever since the GT-1000 came out, due to extremely limited information from BOSS/Roland about exactly what the AIRD trademarked gear actually does under the covers. Some even speculate that its typical Roland marketing jargonism and pure snake oil...I am not saying I agree or disagree with that, if Roland says that AIRD does something more in terms of the push/pull dynamics I will take them on their word for that, but still, I don't see custom IR's as being something that in any way at all negates or removes that built in AIRD functionality which is not only the cab but its the entire signal chain. And in fact I would be extremely shocked if the last stage...the actual speaker cones....were not internally also IR's. They just provide multiple mics, etc.. and you can choose through the menus which specific IR will be used at that final stage.

Regards
Mr Calm.

 

[Dewdman42]

I think most guitarists go for Celestion IR’s.

Guitarists are all over the map regarding favorite IR's. Truly all over the map. Celestion makes great guitar speakers and we got used to the tone of the vintage30, but many other great speakers from them since then, greenbacks, etc have a classic tone that we associate with some of our favorite artists, but these days there are literally thousands of permutations and different speakers, cabs and IR's..and people combine IR's, and even use tools that can create IR's algorithmically such as MCabinet. It can be a huge rabbit hole of endlessly trying different many different IR's all of which sound kind of cool in their own way...and to some degree...I have been turned off by that process also...But I think if you use them enough you end up with some favorites and then in whatever situation you will use your favorites. I don't particularly think the IR's from Celestion are any better then many IR's from redwirez and other providers. The Celestion ones are also kind of pricey honestly.

I bought that Redwirez Bass IR pack, its only $10 and within minutes I discovered the Aguilar cab and was blown away, I haven't even bothered to try the rest yet... That one was so good it was worth every penny of the $10 to get it. I'm actually thinking about buying an Aguilar Rig just because of that friggin IR impressing me so much.

 

[MrDinsdale]

(face palm)

Here is the diagram from the Ultimate GT1000 document. I circled the part where IR's are most likely used, despite whatever other kinds of modeling tech happens early in the AIRD signal chain, related to amp modeling and push/pull dynamics...


View attachment 4778191

The document goes on to say the following:

View attachment 4778199

Nowhere in that document does it state or imply that using a speaker IR somehow negates or replaces AIRD functionality. It instead says that you can swap the cabinet part at will...and you can even use your own IR's if you want.

Further to that, officials from Roland/BOSS very well may have stated that the built in cabinets involve multiple IR's, as that is obvious...the built in Cabinets provide different options for Mic's, mic distance and placement:

View attachment 4778201

Most likely that is simply a collection of IR's and you are selecting which IR you want by using those menu options. This is no different then many IR libraries sold, which include IR's with different mics and mic placements, Roland has just packaged that kind of flexibility into a simple interface where you can quickly change which IR to use....again...in combination with the AIRD signal chain behavior.

Conversely when you use a custom IR, you can only upload a limited number of them and you will have to pic ahead of time the specific mic and placement IR you want to use in each case in order to avoid running out of IR slots...but the UI greys out those options when a custom IR is used.

View attachment 4778210

I see absolutely no indication whatsoever that using a custom IR somehow negates AIRD functionality. That is pure speculation on the part of many people on the internet ever since the GT-1000 came out, due to extremely limited information from BOSS/Roland about exactly what the AIRD trademarked gear actually does under the covers. Some even speculate that its typical Roland marketing jargonism and pure snake oil...I am not saying I agree or disagree with that, if Roland says that AIRD does something more in terms of the push/pull dynamics I will take them on their word for that, but still, I don't see custom IR's as being something that in any way at all negates or removes that built in AIRD functionality which is not only the cab but its the entire signal chain. And in fact I would be extremely shocked if the last stage...the actual speaker cones....were not internally also IR's. They just provide multiple mics, etc.. and you can choose through the menus which specific IR will be used at that final stage.

Regards
Mr Calm.

Yeah quite possibly right there! There’s a good chance you’re not opting out of AIRD functionality perhaps although it is still a system that has been designed to work together.

I still think the sentiment of playing around with what’s in there and applying EQ and tweaks elsewhere in the chain before dropping loads of money on IRs is sound advice for beginners though.

 

[Dewdman42]

it has also been designed to work together with IR's!! And most likely the speaker portion is in fact exactly that.

Many IR's are available for free, the bass pack from Redwirez is only $9.99 and its excellent.

 

[MrDinsdale]

Spent a bit of time yesterday tinkering with my patch trying to emulate an 800rb. Stripped it back again and just spent a bit of time trying to get something that I liked rather than emulating something else (which I also like) and think I've got something pretty cool. Its got that SVT style warm drive sound but without feeling overly vintage.

I'd love to be good enough with electronics to design my own pedals and preamps but love that I can still create something fresh by stacking and splitting stuff on the GT1000.

 

[Krisfield]

I tried matching the sound and tone of my Tech21 VT Bass with the GTCore. What I did was setup a reamp connection of the GTCore to my MacBook and recorded a dry track. Then inserted (Send1/Return1) the VT Bass to the GTCore and reamped the dry track through the VT Bass with all knobs set flat. Then I setup up a basic patch with the Concert Amp and EQ. Now I reamped the GTCore patch and started A/Bing with the recorded VT Bass track. It took me a couples of hours, but I think I got pretty close.

Excellent ear training if anything.

 

[BEADist]

I tried to replicate my Tech21 paradriver di with the BASS DRV (dist type, BDDI 'model') and EQ but did not get close enough. I am going to setup the Core looper in front and a A/B switch (boss LS-2) to compare Core vs Tech21. Switching cabels was not fun haha!

I am SO glad I cannot design and build my own pedals, I wouldn't have time to actually play the pedals I am afraid..

@Correlli, screenshot of the EQ would be appreciated. You probably will post it on ToneStudio but I have a linux PC and cannot use the Boss editor...

 

[MrDinsdale]

It’s a shame the eq isn’t more precise, full sweeping on frequencies or at least more granular increments would be so handy.

 

[Les Fret]

Did anyone compare the Core with the GX-100? The GX is cheaper and has more pedals, a touch screen and an expression pedal. Why is it cheaper? Is the sound the same?

 

[Nuage420]

Did anyone compare the Core with the GX-100? The GX is cheaper and has more pedals, a touch screen and an expression pedal. Why is it cheaper? Is the sound the same?

I've owned both, currently running the gx100 and I'm more than happy. The IU on the gx it's a game changer. I'm not a tone snob and I've dialed in every effect I want to sound great through whatever amp I feed it into from full tube to hybrid to solid state. I don't use the amp Sims or cab iRs.
They sacrificed some processing power for the touch screen, I haven't noticed any deficiencies in performance. If there are any sound differences I don't think they're enough to be noticable.

 

[MrDinsdale]

Did anyone compare the Core with the GX-100? The GX is cheaper and has more pedals, a touch screen and an expression pedal. Why is it cheaper? Is the sound the same?

There are a few guitar ones on YouTube. This is good as it looks at the process of creating patches as well as the tones etc.

 

[Johno Dunn]

Spent a bit of time yesterday tinkering with my patch trying to emulate an 800rb. Stripped it back again and just spent a bit of time trying to get something that I liked rather than emulating something else (which I also like) and think I've got something pretty cool. Its got that SVT style warm drive sound but without feeling overly vintage.

I'd love to be good enough with electronics to design my own pedals and preamps but love that I can still create something fresh by stacking and splitting stuff on the GT1000.

I think this is where the CORE really shines, creating instead of replicating. Even though I’m using the Concert pre, I’m not really going for an SVT sound. I play only fretless, so I have a side chain with slapback delay and reverb that is always on. I have a HP on the divide set for the FX side so I get my full tone through the B side and adjust the A side to taste.

 

[Les Fret]

I've owned both, currently running the gx100 and I'm more than happy. The IU on the gx it's a game changer. I'm not a tone snob and I've dialed in every effect I want to sound great through whatever amp I feed it into from full tube to hybrid to solid state. I don't use the amp Sims or cab iRs.
They sacrificed some processing power for the touch screen, I haven't noticed any deficiencies in performance. If there are any sound differences I don't think they're enough to be noticable.

Can you run two instruments in it, each with its own effect chain? I only see one input whereas the Core has two inputs.

 

[MrDinsdale]

26708253[/URL], member: 153492"]Can you run two instruments in it, each with its own effect chain? I only see one input whereas the Core has two inputs.

I think you’d still be able to use an fx loop return perhaps for your second instrument input?