Jeff 4212 effects send question

Len Rabinowitz

Len Rabinowitz

New member
I put this in another thread and didn't get any response. I'm sort of curious about it so here it is:

I have three effects in the chain in the following order: Send-Chorus-Delay-Looper-Return. Remember that the Looper is not an effect like the others- It's a recorder. We had a pretty involved thread up here about it and decided that this was the best order.

I was reading the manual about the effects send and series vs. parallel. Is there a kind of fundamental incompatibility here between the chorus and delay on the one side and the looper on the other? It seems to me that the chorus and delay should be series while the Looper should be parallel.Right now I am running it all parallel in the order mentioned above. It sounds good, but sometimes I get some funny level problems with the loops. Probably the settings on the looper, but I am still learning this.

What do you guys think? Answers? Suggestions?
 
I guess it depends on the order the loops are in because I think you want to make sure you maintain the order of the effects.
 
Thanks Matt! The order was a matter of some speculation here, but we basically decided that chorus-delay-looper was the best.

The questions come out of the fact that the looper isn't and effect per se but a recorder. It's really fundamentally different from the other two items.

It's maybe more of a theoretical question than anything else. It all sounds pretty good together, but I do sometimes get some issues that might be related to this sort of thing.

I have only had the amp two months, so I am only now starting to master it to the point of really thinking about things like the series/parallel capability of the loop.

I thought "This thing should have two effects loops!" and then I saw the Mod 50...

Do you use both loops on yours?
 
Well if it was me I would probably want the looper first to grab the unprocessed signal. Then you would be feeding that looped signal into the other effects to give them what your wanting. I haven't tried this combination mind you but I think a looper after the effects would tend to get muddy and possible add a lot of weird artifacts to the rest of the loop signal.

I may be totally wrong on this one but I know from a studio standpoint I would never loop and already prcessed signal if I could loop an original and then chain it into the effects I want down stream in the effects chain.
 
I think it depends on how you are using the looper, Len. Are you using for a solo performance where the looper basically functions as a rhythm guitar player? Thats what I was imagining. In that case, Id want it last so I can record whats being looped with any combination of effects.

I dont use both loops on mine. I only run one thing (TimeFactor) through the loop and I use the parallel because I think it sounds better and I can control how much of my dry signal gets affected.
 
See, that's what would be true of my delay and chorus. But I think the looper would be better series. I could put the looper in between the guitar and amp, but then I lose that "clean loop with distorted solo" capability that is nice.

Actually, the main function of my loops are backgrounds through the PA. Those don't matter. I sometimes use it as a rhythym guitar, but sometimes its a 2nd guitar, call and response, slicer, kind of thing.

:confused:
 
I have a Tourmaster 4100 head, and I use a delay, reverb, and looper in the FX loop.run in series, in that order..It sounds great...they are all pedals...mostly Boss, and a DSL Echotap..but I keep the return full up, and the send at about 9 o'clock....so that the loop is unity gain...I use the looper as a rhythum guitarist
 
Len Rabinowitz said:
But I think the looper would be better series. I could put the looper in between the guitar and amp, but then I lose that "clean loop with distorted solo" capability that is nice.quote]

I was thinking looper in the series also. That way it is %100 signal of what you want to have repeated in the loop. Isn't the paralell loop more for "mixing" or "fading" in the amount of effect you want along side of the unprocessed signal???

If I'm looping I want it to see %100 signal all the time. I wouldn't wanted a half faded out signal washing around in the background. Maybe I don't get it though.
Click to expand...
 
I think that is exactly my point- One loop is handling things that should serial and things that should be parallel. It sounds OK, but I am not sure what to do. Maybe I will shift it to series, or maybe I will try the loop in front of the amp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top