G-major 2 in my loop effects

  • Thread starter Thread starter Levenso
  • Start date Start date
L

Levenso

New member
Hi everyone.

Here's my question, I'm just about to purchase a G-Major 2 and I was wondering how was it with the tone loss in a serial effects loop.

Here's my kit, I play on a Mesa Mark V and I use Voodoo lab Ground control pro and GCX to activate my stompboes (pre-amp), control MIDI presets (G-Major 2) and channels and "solo" switches on my amp.

My initial plan was to assign one of the 8 relays of my GCX to the G-M2, so it would be out of the serial chain when not in use. However, I don't want to cut the spill over of the Delay when closing the relay. For instance, if I go from a lead sound (using G-M2 delay) to a rythm sound (not using G-M2 at all), it will close the GCX relay my G-M2 is connected to and therefore cut the delay feedback effect. Hence, if I want to avoid this situation, my best bet is to connect my G-M2 directly to my amp effects loop and not using a GCX relay.

Knowing the G-M2 doesn't have a true bypass, my question is, will I lose tone if let my G-M2 directly in the effects loop?

I don't mind having a very slight change in my tone, after all, it's for live performance and not for studio recording. If you can notice the difference, but the difference is so small that you need to put your ear on the cab and testing it in a quiet environment, than it's not an issue when playing with a band in a venue (IMO). But if the drop is so obvious that I'll lose the "shovelful of rock" sound that I get from my amp, than Houston we have a problem...

thanks
 
I run a G Major 2 in the loop of my 5153. Set the input to "Consumer" and rock and roll. There is an every so slight roll off on the top end, but it can be over come by adjusting your presence knob. Great unit.
 
I've got a GM2 that i've run through the serial loop of a Diezel D Moll and an Engl SE. In my experience it's been pretty transparent and is not a tone sucker.

Make sure you set the Kill Dry properly. Believe it needs to be off for serial loops.
 
a) it sucks tone (as many other units), but IMO more than the vintage Rocktron stuff
b) it hugely depends on the impedance rating of your fx loop. It sucks with Diezels f.i. (as most TC stuff)
c) tone suckage depends on how you run the fx internally (!) (inside the Major) - serial or parallel
d) it works best in a parallel loop IMO (kill dry on)
e) already mentioned: in a series loop: kill dry off and try around with pro/consumer levels and adjust the in/out pots properly
 
I've used it in Herbert and Hagen. I've used it in my Mesa triple recto and royal Atlantic. Evh and peavey never an issue. I'll se ya mine if you want I'm not using it. Just singing now.
 
duesentrieb":185ogrw2 said:
a) it sucks tone (as many other units), but IMO more than the vintage Rocktron stuff
b) it hugely depends on the impedance rating of your fx loop. It sucks with Diezels f.i. (as most TC stuff)
c) tone suckage depends on how you run the fx internally (!) (inside the Major) - serial or parallel
d) it works best in a parallel loop IMO (kill dry on)
e) already mentioned: in a series loop: kill dry off and try around with pro/consumer levels and adjust the in/out pots properly
Click to expand...


The G major 2 is the worst rack unit I have ever used as for altering the tone. It is because it digitizes the Dry signal and then converts it back. There is no real dry signal through on a G Major 2, it is digitizes then brought back to analog . The A/DA converters are not very good IMO.

The other good processors leave the analog signal analog and sound much better if not transparent. Actually many of the late 80's and mid 90's rack gear are way better in series since they did not digitize the analog signal.
 
Huge fan of the Gmajor 2 here... and I will be the first to tell you it DOES effect the tone ever so slightly... but I have found it is nothing that can't be compensated in the EQ...

I find more people hate it because it "sucks tone" rather than hate it because the effected tone actually sounds "bad" if that makes any sense... people want a perfectly transparent unit, and well, it just isn't, but in my opinion it doesn't hurt your sound in any way shape or form... maybe just add a tad more presence on the front of the amp and you're fine... also, remember the Gmajor has an EQ as well, and if you are going to leave it on all the time that may work for you as well... I just run the input and output knobs a at around 1 o'clock and leave it on all the time, and every amp i've used the unit with sounded fucking incredible (Diezel VH-4, Herbert, Mark IV, Mark V, EVH 5153 50 watt, and even a Peavey 5150...)

Here is a video of me demo'ing a VH-4 AND a 5153 50 watt... in the demos the Gmajor is in the serial loop, and on all the time, if you know anything about the VH-4 you'll know that the serial loop isn't switchable, only the parallel loop (which I never used)... rig sounded incredible to me... same with the EVH... Gmajor was in the loop and just on all the time...





Please don't mind the playing, as you'll notice I spend more time watching the TV than concentrating on what the hell I'm playing lol... there is some lead playing later on in the VH-4 video if you want to here the Gmajor used for that sort of thing as well, both clean and lead just have a touch of chorus reverb and delay...
 
The G-Major 2 is great in many ways, but you will notice that it´s there. If you set the internal routing to parallel and use it with something like a Suhr Minimix you don´t have to worry about it at all, though, but that depends a bit on what you want to do with it.
 
I bought one & traded it in within 2 weeks. It wasn't for me but I know people who swear by them.

I personally noticed a loss of tone with the G-major 2. Something about putting a relatively cheap digital FX unit slap-bang in the middle of my expensive professional boutique pre/power amp didn't ring right with me, despite the ADA converter claims. There were also some FX switching delay issues when using the midi out from my VH4. The channels on the VH4 would switch faster than the effects.

As I wasn't using the tremolo (etc) effects that required the serial loop, I ran the G-major in the parallel loop with better results, retaining some of the direct pre to poweramp analog signal.

The other thing is that the G-Major limits your effects to those that are in the box. For me it was a lesson in understanding what I needed as a guitar player. I realized that there were only a small handful of effects that I needed & I found some great, single purpose stomp FX that do the job.
 
So what other rack multi fx would u guys suggest rather than the gm2? Digitech gsp1101?
 
Well, there aren´t many units that wouldn´t benefit tonally from running in parallell, but units like the Lexicon MPX-1 or MPX-G2 are definitely steps up in terms of features and quality of effects.
 
Blackie08":3vctvcit said:
So what other rack multi fx would u guys suggest rather than the gm2? Digitech gsp1101?
Click to expand...

Still trying to tweak it, but I don't recommend the Digitech.

What are you looking to get out of your rack effects? Honestly, it died last year but I'd buy another Quadraverb for the delays and reverbs. Tap tempo isn't really there though, which is important to me. I don't want to be running multiple cables from my amp to my board to run 4CM with my pedal effects. I used to run a Boss RV-5 and Line 6 Echo Park in my loop which sounded better, but the tap-dancing gets really annoying after a while.

I really want to integrate a totally midi rig. My Sig:X sound is deteriorated by the GSP1101... lost low end saturation... really takes the balls out of the amp, and introduces a bunch of unwanted noise.

I almost feel like, in order to not lose my amp's inherent tone, I need an analog processor, not digital. And yet, the Quadraverb was pretty awesome for what it did...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top