The Recabinet 3 IR library is designed to be mix-ready (not in the sense of processed, but in the sense of careful placement, capture, signal chain, and IR selection.) Some people don't like that approach, which is one of the reasons why third party IR import will be of great benefit to anyone who doesn't like the "sound" of the Recabinet library. As for speaker dynamics - it's admittedly a subtle thing, but it's also totally accurate with the sonic behavior of physical speakers. Anything more obvious/gimmicky would be (and is) inaccurate. One of the reasons why so few developers have attempted to tackle this is because IRs on their own are incredibly close to the real thing. I'm not always the most practical guy, so I decided to study and model speaker dynamics over the course of a year, even though I knew all along that it's a difference that a majority of people may not care about or even be able to perceive. I knew that some people would laugh and make fun of the comparison clips (which has happened a few times), and I don't care. Where you really hear a difference is in the way the guitars glue into the mix, and the overall sense of "3D." IRs can sound really good on their own, but without the dynamics, it's essentially impossible to get them to sit in the mix at the right level relative to the other instruments, even if you're a seasoned mix engineer. I'm not trying to tell anyone that they shouldn't be happy with their pre-existing tools or workflow, or that there's only one way to get a good guitar sound. I do, however, feel committed to the cause of accurately emulating analog hardware in the digital domain, even if the pursuit of modeling accuracy beyond what's currently available on the market from other vendors is a difference that matters to very few people.