Speaking of FX loops... questions on tone.

  • Thread starter Thread starter RockStarNick
  • Start date Start date
RockStarNick

RockStarNick

Active member
DISCLAIMER: Super techy nerdy question here...

Lets say that you have an effect that is:
- true bypass
- capable of handling line level signals
- NOT capable of a 100% wet setting

That means your only option is the SERIES FX loop. Now, I hear alot about the parallel loop maintaining tone, but if you're not worried about delay trails (meaning that OFF means OFF, and the effect is true bypassed), then wouldnt a SERIES loop be just fine?

In theory, what would sound better???

1. PARALLEL FX loop, with a delay unit that can be set to 100% wet, but when bypassed is a eh-eh buffered bypass, and the FX blend knob is at around 50%

or

2. SERIES FX loop, with a 30' cable going from the send, back to the return. (simulating a box with true bypass).

:confused:
 
series loops are better. period. :rock:

I haven't found a parallel loop that didn't piss me off in more than 5 ways. :doh:

The mixing capability in a parallel loop always sucks. :thumbsdown:

If you need something in parallel, buy a splitter/line mixer setup for the series loop. :thumbsup:
 
guitarslinger":ei1yoib0 said:
series loops are better. period. :rock:

I haven't found a parallel loop that didn't piss me off in more than 5 ways. :doh:

The mixing capability in a parallel loop always sucks. :thumbsdown:

If you need something in parallel, buy a splitter/line mixer setup for the series loop. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

I agree here 100%. The only use I've liked w/ a Parallel efx loops is the reverb tank I have in my Mod50.

I use my Lexicon MPXG2 to do my "wet / dry" stuff. I can dail in the the "dry tone" and the "amount of effects" I want. Works perfectly. I can't tell a difference between the tone w/ and w/o the lexicon in the mix. (Mind you, if you want to get a Lexicon MPXG2, make sure you get version 1.10).

Eric
 
RockStarNick":2anoykm8 said:
In theory, what would sound better???

1. PARALLEL FX loop, with a delay unit that can be set to 100% wet, but when bypassed is a eh-eh buffered bypass, and the FX blend knob is at around 50%

or

2. SERIES FX loop, with a 30' cable going from the send, back to the return. (simulating a box with true bypass).

:confused:
Click to expand...

I used a Boss DD-20 (set+4 and out B effect only) in the parallel loop with 24' cables and it sounded great (not noisy at all).

Now I use a G-System in the serial loop with 24' balanced cables and a ebtech line level shifter. Couldn't be happier.

Either can sound great or crappy depending on how its set up. FWIW, I think the parallel loop in the mod50 is the best I've used on any amp.
 
Great info so far, guys. Thanks a bunch.

Well, I'd be going "ghetto" with a (gasp) stompbox in the FX loop. :lol: :LOL:

Don't laugh yet, though. It's one of the new Digitech Hardwire pedals, which CAN handle a line level signal. Tried it out on my practice amp the other night and got some surpisingly awesome tones out of it. Seems like good quality stuff...

Another Question:
Since FX loops are buffered, how much does cable distance/cable quality affect your tone and signal? I'd probably have a good 15'-20' of cable going out to my pedalboard to the delay, and then another 15'-20' back...

NOTE: This is the first time I'd be getting an amp with a normal effects loop... my previous amp was a Bogner Shiva, which if you didn't know, was ultra hot, and required this wacky "step down" cable with some resistors soldered in line, and then had to be fed back into a onboard boost-amp thing, in order to even work right. Big PITA...
 
RockStarNick":1rdwvro6 said:
Great info so far, guys. Thanks a bunch.

Well, I'd be going "ghetto" with a (gasp) stompbox in the FX loop. :lol: :LOL:

Don't laugh yet, though. It's one of the new Digitech Hardwire pedals, which CAN handle a line level signal. Tried it out on my practice amp the other night and got some surpisingly awesome tones out of it. Seems like good quality stuff...

Another Question:
Since FX loops are buffered, how much does cable distance/cable quality affect your tone and signal? I'd probably have a good 15'-20' of cable going out to my pedalboard to the delay, and then another 15'-20' back...

NOTE: This is the first time I'd be getting an amp with a normal effects loop... my previous amp was a Bogner Shiva, which if you didn't know, was ultra hot, and required this wacky "step down" cable with some resistors soldered in line, and then had to be fed back into a onboard boost-amp thing, in order to even work right. Big PITA...
Click to expand...
Not laughing :D The Hardwire DL-8 sounds damn good in the the series loop of the Mod :rock:
 
I love serial too 99% of the time too.. but I sometimes run my moog analog delay 100% wet in parallel.


I would rather just turn up the delay volume w/ the external out level on the delay.... than mess with a wet/ dry % pot where it may turn down my master signal to turn up delay, and vise versa.
 
Well...if in fact my Mesa DC-3 switches to Serial when put at 100%, well then I like Series Loop better...it is what I've always used without knowing it.

Now I have to get reed of some crappy pedals going through that loop...

Carlos
 
Maybe Im missing something but I cant see why everyone thinks the series loop is better? As I understand it, if you are using a series loop, then all of your pure tone is going through the effect even when bypassed. Also, say you are running your delay 30% wet (managed on the effect), then 70% of your dry tone is still running through the converters of the effect (and if its digital thats means analog / digital transformation AND back again) for no real purpose.

When I use my TimeFactor in the parallel loop, I set it 100% wet and use the effects knob on the amp to let the MOD 50 allow in the amount of wetness I want while keeping all my non-wet tone completely pure.

What am I missing? Why would I not want to do this?
 
All this loop gay talk! Just plug in and who needs any stinking effects, just use your mouth wah!
 
EWSEthan":3j7b7x5r said:
Maybe Im missing something but I cant see why everyone thinks the series loop is better? As I understand it, if you are using a series loop, then all of your pure tone is going through the effect even when bypassed. Also, say you are running your delay 30% wet (managed on the effect), then 70% of your dry tone is still running through the converters of the effect (and if its digital thats means analog / digital transformation AND back again) for no real purpose.

When I use my TimeFactor in the parallel loop, I set it 100% wet and use the effects knob on the amp to let the MOD 50 allow in the amount of wetness I want while keeping all my non-wet tone completely pure.

What am I missing? Why would I not want to do this?
Click to expand...

Parallel loops are hardly ever 100% compatible with any given FX unit, unless there's a good "kill-dry function".

Phasing issues are hell.

Running a 2290 in series doesn't hurt my tone at all.
 
Jeff Hilligan":2yka0kla said:
All this loop gay talk! Just plug in and who needs any stinking effects, just use your mouth wah!
Click to expand...
:scared:

:lol: :LOL:

I actually prefer my sound with Zero FX.

Or what we can do is forget all about any loops...and just throw everything through the input...Mike Eiziger from Incubus does this and has an awesome sound. Next time don't give us more than one option for a Loop... ;)
 
EWSEthan":3w2ync0b said:
Maybe Im missing something but I cant see why everyone thinks the series loop is better? As I understand it, if you are using a series loop, then all of your pure tone is going through the effect even when bypassed. Also, say you are running your delay 30% wet (managed on the effect), then 70% of your dry tone is still running through the converters of the effect (and if its digital thats means analog / digital transformation AND back again) for no real purpose.

When I use my TimeFactor in the parallel loop, I set it 100% wet and use the effects knob on the amp to let the MOD 50 allow in the amount of wetness I want while keeping all my non-wet tone completely pure.

What am I missing? Why would I not want to do this?
Click to expand...

I agree with this. I always prefer the parallel loop to a series. I hear a difference and I like having one knob to adjust overall FX levels on the amp. Having the original dry signal there all the time is a benefit to the tone IMO. I understand some FX units are going to sound very good thru a serial loop, but the entire signal is usually passing through the A/D D/A converters. I may be crazy, but I hear a definite difference. Just my take on it though.




Parallel loops are hardly ever 100% compatible with any given FX unit, unless there's a good "kill-dry function".

Phasing issues are hell.
Click to expand...

I've never had any phasing issues with parallel loops. I am curious as to what compatability issues you've encountered. I never have had a problem.?.?
 
muudrock":7gqnfnth said:
Parallel loops are hardly ever 100% compatible with any given FX unit, unless there's a good "kill-dry function".

Phasing issues are hell.
Click to expand...

I've never had any phasing issues with parallel loops. I am curious as to what compatability issues you've encountered. I never have had a problem.?.?
Click to expand...

Boss SE-50

Roland SDE-330

phasing problems on both with my HK Access Parallel loops.
 
guitarslinger":3j6bkta3 said:
muudrock":3j6bkta3 said:
Parallel loops are hardly ever 100% compatible with any given FX unit, unless there's a good "kill-dry function".

Phasing issues are hell.
Click to expand...

I've never had any phasing issues with parallel loops. I am curious as to what compatability issues you've encountered. I never have had a problem.?.?
Click to expand...

Boss SE-50

Roland SDE-330

phasing problems on both with my HK Access Parallel loops.
Click to expand...

Interesting..... I used to have an SE 50 and never had an issue with it in the parallel loop of my Mod 100. I've never owned the HK preamp. Maybe the HK's loop was the problem? So far with the Mod amps, I've used several units in the parallel loop from a GForce to an old Quadraverb and have had no issues.
 
I'm using a TC G-Force with the Kill-dry function thru the parallel loop and I think it sounds great, no phasing issues or anything like that.
I also like the idea that my entire signal isn't passing thru the AD/DA converters.
I've also tried it with the series loop w/out the Kill-dry function and IMO think it sounds better thru the parallel loop.
Just my 2 cents worth.
 
I run a lot of filters through my loop- and they have to be run in serial. I am eying a sherman filterbank to run there in the future :)

any distortion fuzz pedal run after the pramp also needs to be run in serial. (some people run them there it!)
 
Another reason I like Serial:

If I'm going to do any compression or EQ, I definitely want the whole signal to go through the unit. Granted, I'm using a pretty decent EQ and comp.
 
:)

it is best to have both.

both are better for some uses, parallel keeps mroe of the amps tone intact.. though parallel prohibits the use of more effects.

bad eqs make me cringe... hissssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
options options options.
 
blueburl":3ssl2rir said:
:)



bad eqs make me cringe... hissssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
Click to expand...
Which is why I use a TC 1128. totally transparent to my ears. :thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top