hardwired killdry vs mix control

[thegame]

I prefer using parallel loops over series loops. As such, to effectively use a processor in a parallel loop it's output should be 100% wet. I've found this works perfectly with a processor or pedal that has either a dedicated wet only output or internal dip switch that converts the main (mixed) output to wet only. When using units without this feature, and thereby having to adjust their mix control to 100% wet, I've found that never works very well. It's as if the signal is not 100% wet which not only diminishes the strength of the effect itself but seems to cause phase issues, washing out some frequencies and just messing up the tone.

What gives with this? Is it just poor design on some FX units ? The last one I tried this way was a Strymon El Capistan delay. It was cool in front of the amp or in a serial loop but horrible in a parallel loop.

 

[psychodave]

This is an excellent question. I always thought I was doing something wrong, but the way you describe it, it makes sense.

 

[DanTravis62]

This is an excellent question. I always thought I was doing something wrong, but the way you describe it, it makes sense.

Yep, subbed.

I've always wondered about this too.

 

[NewWorldMan]

I’ve fought that before too. Curious on the thoughts of others.

My assumption was always that the mix pots got close but never quite got to 100% when maxed out, at least not the same as being wired 100% wet. I just figured there was always a small amount of bleed through causing issues.

 

[thegame]

I’ve fought that before too. Curious on the thoughts of others.

My assumption was always that the mix pots got close but never quite got to 100% when maxed out, at least not the same as being wired 100% wet. I just figured there was always a small amount of bleed through causing issues.

Yes, without being anywhere near an expert in FX units, I'm inclined to agree with that. Also I think it's likely that in many digital processors, the mix ratio is happening digitally as well, before the signal reaches the D/A stage. No matter how fast the processor, A/D and D/A conversion takes time.

 

[BeZo]

I feel like this is the drawback of parallel setups in general. The dry path is practically nothing, while the wet path would go through cables out to effects and back. In a rack, not a big deal. I personally run 30 foot cables in my snake. That could be 70-80 feet of cable, plus whatever latency the effects have. That would introduce columb filtering if it got bad enough.

I would rather have the control of a serial effects loop personally. With a parallel, there aren't easy ways to go 100% wet for a part, say a song outro or ambient bridge. I love lowering myself to turn knobs to make whoosh and warble parts.

 

[RedB4Black]

I prefer FX units to have kill dry setting. The Strymon Dig has it. It works great. I use it in a Musicom Labs Parallelizer along with a Blue Sky which does not have kill dry but I set the mix to 100%. It seems to work fine as I only mix in a very slight about of reverb.

 

[RedB4Black]

I feel like this is the drawback of parallel setups in general. The dry path is practically nothing, while the wet path would go through cables out to effects and back. In a rack, not a big deal. I personally run 30 foot cables in my snake. That could be 70-80 feet of cable, plus whatever latency the effects have. That would introduce columb filtering if it got bad enough.

I would rather have the control of a serial effects loop personally. With a parallel, there aren't easy ways to go 100% wet for a part, say a song outro or ambient bridge. I love lowering myself to turn knobs to make whoosh and warble parts.

The Musicom labs Parallelizer I use helps with that because it has a dry mix knob as well. Plus no AD/DA conversation on the dry signal paths…. Versus in some Digital FX units