- This topic is empty.
February 27, 2011 at 8:16 pm #107673Wet dry outputs
Is there a way to set up the TF, so that on one side, the signal goes straight thru to the output (no converters — hard wired if possible) and on the other side have only a wet signal?
February 28, 2011 at 5:08 pm #121635nickroseModeratorEventide Staff
No. You have to have one or the other, at any given time. It does sound as if a DPDT switch could be set up to give you what you want (see a local competent tech for more details).
March 5, 2011 at 1:58 am #121661
Can you be a bit more specific — I'd want to know what to tell a tech …. do you mean add a switch that would, for example, allow the input to be directly wired to one of the outputs so that if the other "half" is set to "wet only" you have a mini parallel loop within the stomp box?
March 7, 2011 at 10:08 pm #121679
In a series line level effect loop in my amp, could two simple mono to stereo 1/4" adaptors be used to create what I am looking for?
For example, I could split the signal with a mono to stereo 1/4" adaptor where one out goes to the TF, set to wet only, and have the other out of the adaptor goes to a similar 1/4" adaptor that receives the TF on one side and the dry signal from the first adaptor which then is returned to the amp — and thereby preserving the analog signal?
Are there technical reasons why this would not be workable?
March 7, 2011 at 10:15 pm #132901nickroseModeratorEventide Staff
I'd want to know what to tell a tech
You need someone you can work with and tell them precisely what you need. I'm not really sure what you are trying to do, and either way, it would likely go beyond the scope of this Forum. You might also want to talk to the amp manufacturer.
March 7, 2011 at 10:49 pm #121682goldglobMember
1. I think that just splitting a signal into two like that will do something weird to the impedance that the Factor wants to see? (could be wrong, but worth following this up).
2. What you are suggesting amounts to a parallel loop of course, which over the years has (too) slowly become to be seen as not a good idea; because even though preserving the analog path sounds good in theory, the phase cancellation you get with digital/analog in parallel yields an ugly unnatural sound, far worse than just analog or just digital. A series loop is the way to go.
March 7, 2011 at 11:28 pm #132902
Thanks Nickrose but this question is not dependent on any particular amp.
IMHO, its still a very very basic question about the use of a common 1/4" mono to stereo adaptor for combining
1) a mono output of the TF (placed in a generic series effect loop)
2) a mono dry signal (derived from the effect loop send, and, therefore, bypassing the TF)
for return to amp via the mono effects loop return:
Are there "electronic" considerations, voltages or phase issues, for example, with the TF (or any other line level device) in such a simple implementation that makes this solution problematic?
March 8, 2011 at 2:07 am #132903
Basically, yes, there are electronic considerations in doing this. (BTW, I'm not referring to the TF or any specific device by any manufacturer.) Can it be done? Yes, but there's a reason that they make line-mixers. Will it work? That depends on if you like the result. As goldglob suggests, impedence and phase cancellation are several considerations, as are signal strength, grounding considerations, and others. Then again, you may like what it does and I doubt that it'll seriously damage your pedal or amp.
I think a better question would be why do you want to do this? I'm not trying to suggest that it's a bad idea, but rather just curious what you're looking for, what the result is that you want to achieve. Maybe there are other ways to achieve it.
March 8, 2011 at 8:54 pm #132908
As disclosed above, I am trying to create a viable parallel effects loop to preserve the analog signal and selectively add in delay.
I come from a rack based guitar rig where I had a Soldano X88R preamp > Eclipse > VHT 292 power amp > speaker cabs. And by now its very well established that effects such as delay, reverb, chorus, etc all are best placed within the signal chain after high gain preamp settings.
The new head I ordered has preamp out and power amp in jacks and enough space to mount the TF and a Nobles MS-4 midi switcher (to control amps settings with specific TF settings) within the head cab. Additionally, I may use a Voodoo Labs ISO-5 to power them.
If need be I could add, for example, the Suhr Mini Mix II, to the setup, but openly wonder if this is sonicly or electrically necessary, given such a basic set of requirements.
Obviously, if the Eventide Stopmpboxes were updated to allow for this while addressing any phase issues, etc,, this would be seen as highly desirable for that contingent of guitar players that get thier gain from the amps rather than OD stompboxes (that Eventide does not make at all) and make much much better use of the (mostly) series effects loops that are typically offered.
March 8, 2011 at 10:31 pm #132909
Technically, you never exactly said that you were trying to "create a parallel loop"… Whether or not it's sonically necessary is up to your ears.
It might be useful to understand why digital processing necessarily involves "phase issues," regardless of who made the digital device. It also might help to not assume that everyone here uses some kind of cheap distortion pedal…
I think the best thing you can do is to try your setup both with Y-Cables and with a Suhr Mini-Mix. You might want to try it with the series loop, too. Trying it yourself is the only way you'll know what sounds best to you, you know?
March 8, 2011 at 11:07 pm #132910
No, I never did say I was creating a "parallel effects loop" as I did not necessarily believe (in the original post) that it was necessary to explain; I added this in view of another's post since it made it easier to filter out some of the responses — my apologies otherwise:)
I am not sure why you presume to assert that I assume "that everyone here uses some kind of cheap distortion pedal…" — there is no basis for this flaming. I own OD pedals and have no such bias.
I do not have a Mini Mix and never said I own one — obviously, if I did I could/would have, otherwise, conduct such a basic test.
I am simply posting to:
1) Inquire if, for technical reasons beyond my current understanding, in a basic setup as I have outlined above, in view of all the inquiries, whether it is necessary …. ie. whether I do in fact really need buy a Mini Mix, for example…
2) add some positive feedback on the improving the breadth of implementing the Eventide Stompboxes given their excellent design and tone and the changes that are now fairly common in guitar amps.
March 9, 2011 at 1:21 am #132915goldglobMember
The Suhr looks good, bloody expensive, I bet there's a cheaper option, I remember seeing a Nobels box on eBay that does the same thing (and had level controls as well). I think to avoid the phase cancellation you'd have to run the TF 100% wet (can that be done, I have a MF?). Back to your original simple split idea: that impedance thing is like when kids plug two guitars into one amp with a simple splitter thing, turn one guitar up, the other loses vol. Anyway, I might even try it to test my inkling.
March 9, 2011 at 3:04 am #132916
Yeah, you can set the TF for 100% wet, too. There's also a DRYKILL setting in the system menu that globally use a mix value of 100% without changing the mix parameter stored in the preset (TF UM p32). Alternatively, you can turn the GLOBAL MIX on, which would allow you to use the mix knob to set the mix globally (to 100% or any other value), again without changing the stored value (TF UM p40).
I agree, goldglob, that it's worth trying. And yeah, those line mixers can get pretty pricey. Suhr has always made good stuff, though, at least from what I've seen but they aren't the only ones who make line mixers. Your analogy of the 2 guitars into 1 amp is a good one, too, and accurate in my experience.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.