Hey guys, new here... FX loop question, multiple amps

[Zachman]

Wheew... That's it, I'm charging for anymore.

LOL

At least no one can truthfully say I didn't try to be helpful.

i gave up a while back

even the 12 space rack i was designing wasnt this complicated

Ya, I've done this a few times-- I think 8 for myself and several rack builds, and pedal board builds for friends.

Mentoneman and mkalei/(billybogner) will verify. I started doing this long before the internet or anyone who knew what the hell I was thinking/talking about. Turns out that I've been doing things the way lots of pro builders are nowadays-- back when this stuff was still new. I was rather adventurous, and dove in head first with learning how this stuff all works. I am a TOTAL gear geek and I guess, I always have been-- Likely always will be too. It has come in handy on several occasions, when I had to figure out a fix for someone at the last minute- because something wasn't working the way they thought it would. hehehehe

You should see the E-mail correspondence between me and Bob Bradshaw, when I was describing to him what I wanted to do with my rig... My rig deals w/ 22 control/loop functions. I N S A N E... but fun and I found that the more of a pain in the butt the design phase is-- it makes using the gear that much easier so I can concentrate on playing guitar not tap dancing.

Programming is another story. That happens to be fun for me, though sometimes un-nerving.

 

[Gambit]

I use it that way.

wow, to be honest I read through the GCX manual and there were a few examples of how it can be used but I didnt see any using multiple amps at once.

would you mind elaborating on how you connect everything. If I'm not mistaken the GCX is loops, so the send goes to the amp input.... where does the return go?

cool man

The GCX is a patch bay so think of it like this:

Guitar to GCX input
GCX individual loops-- pedals--to amp inputs
Amps line level sends to GCX
GCX sends to fx inputs and effects outs to line mixer to power amp

I think I understand the difference between preamp and poweramp now, how an FX loop seperates them and how they interact. I'm not 100% on the line path.

Guitar to GCX input. Check.

GCX individual loops-- pedals-- to amp inputs. Question. I understand how to run the pedals through the GCX loops from the examples. How do I then connect the pedals to the amps inputs?

Just an example

Guitar to GCX Input Do I then need to go from the feed on the back to the GCX loop 1 input?
GCX Loop 1 Input
GCX Loop 1 Send- pedal 1's Input
GCX Loop 1 Return-pedal 1's Output
GCX Loop 1 Output- GCX Loop 2 Input

GCX Loop 2 Input
GCX Loop 2 Send- pedal 2's Input
GCX Loop 2 Return-pedal 2's Output
GCX Loop 2 Output- GCX Loop 3 Input

GCX Loop 3 Input
GCX Loop 3 Send- Amp 1's Input
GCX Loop 3 Return- Load box out from AMP 1
GCX Loop 3 Output- GCX Loop 4 Input

GCX Loop 4 Input
GCX Loop 4 Send- Amp 2's Input
GCX Loop 4 Return- Load box out from AMP 2
GCX Loop 4 Output- GCX Loop 5 Input

GCX Loop 5 Input
GCX Loop 5 Send- Amp 3's Input
GCX Loop 5 Return- Load box out from AMP 3
GCX Loop 5 Output-- GCX Loop 6 Input

GCX Loop 6 Input
GCX Loop 6 Send- Y cable-- FX Processor A's L/R Inputs to mixer channel 1 and 2 Inputs confused, i go from the loop 6 send to both inp[uts on the processor (via Y cable) and then from the two outputs on the rack FX piece to a seperate mixer? GCX Loop 6 Return-
GCX Loop 6 Output- GCX Loop 7 Input

GCX Loop 7 Input
GCX Loop 7 Send- Y cable-- FX Processor B's L/R Inputs to mixer channel 3 and 4 Inputs same confusion
GCX Loop 7 Return-
GCX Loop 7 Output- GCX Loop 8 Input

GCX Loop 8 Input
GCX Loop 8 Send- Y cable-- FX Processor C's L/R Inputs to mixer channel 5 and 6 Inputs same confusion
GCX Loop 8 Return-
GCX Loop 8 Output-

Mixer L/R outputs to stereo power amp to L/R "Wet" cabinets So this mixer I am buying that the FX is going through connects to a stereo power amp which then goes to my cabinets?

Does the last pedals output on the GCX go to the first amps input?

Amps line level sends to GCX. Are these the FX sends? I dont know what line level sends are.

Trying to figure this out.

They can be, BUT by doing that you only use the pedal with the 1st amp. My way you can use the pedals with ANY of the 3 amps simultaneously, or individually.

A Line out/load box will give you NOT just your preamp tone-- BUT your entire preamp and poweramp sections tone, running your effects. translation-- It will sound bigger and better. Never heard of a line out load box, do I need seperate ones for each amp? So its loop send to amp input and then amp something to load box? and then from load box back to loop return?
A Line out box which takes your preamp and power amp section and bumps that down to a line level signal that you can feed your processors with, and send those to the appropriate inputs on your GCX, and then from there go to the mixer and to the power amp-- as another example.

Wheew... That's it, I'm charging for anymore.

Hey I really appreciate the long answer, if it means anything im starting to "get it" but things like load boxes and splitting cables in FX units into mixers I didnt think I had to buy are all still foreign to me.

 

[Zachman]

I use it that way.

wow, to be honest I read through the GCX manual and there were a few examples of how it can be used but I didnt see any using multiple amps at once.

would you mind elaborating on how you connect everything. If I'm not mistaken the GCX is loops, so the send goes to the amp input.... where does the return go?

cool man

The GCX is a patch bay so think of it like this:

Guitar to GCX input
GCX individual loops-- pedals--to amp inputs
Amps line level sends to GCX
GCX sends to fx inputs and effects outs to line mixer to power amp

I think I understand the difference between preamp and poweramp now, how an FX loop seperates them and how they interact. I'm not 100% on the line path.

Guitar to GCX input. Check.

GCX individual loops-- pedals-- to amp inputs. Question. I understand how to run the pedals through the GCX loops from the examples. How do I then connect the pedals to the amps inputs?

Just an example

Guitar to GCX Input Do I then need to go from the feed on the back to the GCX loop 1 input? No
GCX Loop 1 Input
GCX Loop 1 Send- pedal 1's Input
GCX Loop 1 Return-pedal 1's Output
GCX Loop 1 Output- GCX Loop 2 Input

GCX Loop 2 Input
GCX Loop 2 Send- pedal 2's Input
GCX Loop 2 Return-pedal 2's Output
GCX Loop 2 Output- GCX Loop 3 Input

GCX Loop 3 Input
GCX Loop 3 Send- Amp 1's Input
GCX Loop 3 Return- Load box out from AMP 1
GCX Loop 3 Output- GCX Loop 4 Input

GCX Loop 4 Input
GCX Loop 4 Send- Amp 2's Input
GCX Loop 4 Return- Load box out from AMP 2
GCX Loop 4 Output- GCX Loop 5 Input

GCX Loop 5 Input
GCX Loop 5 Send- Amp 3's Input
GCX Loop 5 Return- Load box out from AMP 3
GCX Loop 5 Output-- GCX Loop 6 Input

GCX Loop 6 Input
GCX Loop 6 Send- Y cable-- FX Processor A's L/R Inputs to mixer channel 1 and 2 Inputs confused, i go from the loop 6 send to both inp[uts on the processor (via Y cable) and then from the two outputs on the rack FX piece to a seperate mixer? YesGCX Loop 6 Return-No
GCX Loop 6 Output- GCX Loop 7 Input

GCX Loop 7 Input
GCX Loop 7 Send- Y cable-- FX Processor B's L/R Inputs to mixer channel 3 and 4 Inputs same confusion
GCX Loop 7 Return-
GCX Loop 7 Output- GCX Loop 8 Input

GCX Loop 8 Input
GCX Loop 8 Send- Y cable-- FX Processor C's L/R Inputs to mixer channel 5 and 6 Inputs same confusion
GCX Loop 8 Return-
GCX Loop 8 Output-

Mixer L/R outputs to stereo power amp to L/R "Wet" cabinets So this mixer I am buying that the FX is going through connects to a stereo power amp which then goes to my cabinets? Yes

Does the last pedals output on the GCX go to the first amps input? No

Amps line level sends to GCX. Are these the FX sends? Not like you're thinking about them being individual effects loops from your amp I dont know what line level sends are. They are a way to get your WHOLE amp's tone-- not just a preamp out like you would with and effects loop send.

Trying to figure this out.

They can be, BUT by doing that you only use the pedal with the 1st amp. My way you can use the pedals with ANY of the 3 amps simultaneously, or individually.

A Line out/load box will give you NOT just your preamp tone-- BUT your entire preamp and poweramp sections tone, running your effects. translation-- It will sound bigger and better. Never heard of a line out load box, do I need seperate ones for each amp? YesSo its loop send to amp input and then amp something Speaker output jackto load box, to amp speaker? and then from load box back to loop return? Yes
A Line out box which takes your preamp and power amp section and bumps that down to a line level signal that you can feed your processors with, and send those to the appropriate inputs on your GCX, and then from there go to the mixer and to the power amp-- as another example.

Wheew... That's it, I'm charging for anymore.

Hey I really appreciate the long answer, if it means anything im starting to "get it" but things like load boxes and splitting cables in FX units into mixers I didnt think I had to buy are all still foreign to me.

Hope that helps

 

[Gambit]

I cant believe it but I think I actually may be understanding a bunch of this!!!!


I am going to draw a schematic of my rig today and post it here later, maybe you can comment on it and let me know whats what.

Do I put amps first in the GCX loops or Rack FX? I saw you used amps and then rack fx. I know I put pedals that are intended to go before the amp before all of them.

I understand the connections now from Loop- Y cable- to fx unit- and then the outputs go to a line mixer. Is this all so I can have the same FX on all the amps?

I decided it would probably be best for me to give each amp its own rack unit rather than have the same FX on all of them. I also want to leave one amp dry. Hence the wet/dry/wet setup. Can I just have the rack FX go into the amps FX loop or do I still need to use the mixer?

If I want the tremoverb sound to be coming specifically out of the mesa speaker... is there a way to do this on the line mixer? I dont want all 2 or 3 amps coming out of both speakers the same way, more likely a stereo configuration.


Drawing a schematic today.

 

[Gambit]

I read your reply in the midi thread about FX and how I can send the desired fx to each amp.

Lets say I wanted one G major to go to the Tremoverb.

One G major to go to the JCM 2000

And I wanted to leave the Orange totally dry.

How would I set this up with the mixer?

How would I specify which speakers I wanted to get what amps?


I should probably be asking you this already, can you suggest a line mixer and load box that fits what I'm asking? Yes I understand this all costs money, but I'm still trying to find what is considered to be reasonably priced.

Drawing a rough schematic today.

 

[Zachman]

I read your reply in the midi thread about FX and how I can send the desired fx to each amp.

Lets say I wanted one G major to go to the Tremoverb.

One G major to go to the JCM 2000

And I wanted to leave the Orange totally dry.

You would have the Tremoverb and JCM2000 Both active in the switchers loops, and have the loop w/ the G-Major "on" (You don't need (2) G-Majors-- See), BUT w/ the example I gave you can't have the loop w/ the Orange's load box OFF AND have the amp active. There is a way to do this, but I can see that you haven't really thought all this through, and I (no offense) am not enthusiastic enough to re-think and re-type all this everytime you have another scenario pop up. Guys get paid BIG bucks to do this. Perhaps someone else might chime in and show you how in order to add that bit of flexibility (To have each line out box's signal be switchable), would require that each line out box signal have it's own loop just as your amp's, and effects do-- in order to do that. You'd likely need (2) GCX switchers to have a sufficient amount of loops.

How would I set this up with the mixer?

As I illustrated

How would I specify which speakers I wanted to get what amps?

You can't. This was all based on each amp using it's own speaker, per your spec.

I should probably be asking you this already, can you suggest a line mixer and load box that fits what I'm asking?

A Rane SM26 mixer will do this and they're about $100 used.

Suhr Line out Box

Yes I understand this all costs money, but I'm still trying to find what is considered to be reasonably priced.

Drawing a rough schematic today.

Yes, It's a pay to play game.

 

[muudrock]

Guys get paid BIG bucks to do this

Looking at what time your first post was made to the most recent, you've got about 10 hours. 10 billable hours @ $70/hr=$700. You should go into biz with Bradshaw Zach.

Seriously, you've put out a ton of good info in this thread.

Gambit, you reeallly need to know where you want to go with this rig and what you want it to do, and like has been said, take a lot of time to carefully plan it out. I've built several rigs from simple to complex and I can only tell you that you need a good plan and you need to stick to it. Guys on here like Zach, Samhill and others have good experience doing this stuff, but theres only so much you can get off the forum. Fire up your browser, get a comfortable chair and hit the web. Bradshaw's site has a ton of good info but you'll probably need to re-read it all several times as it can be overload.

If you do it right, you'll have an awesome rig....

 

[Zachman]

Guys get paid BIG bucks to do this

Looking at what time your first post was made to the most recent, you've got about 10 hours. 10 billable hours @ $70/hr=$700. You should go into biz with Bradshaw Zach.

Seriously, you've put out a ton of good info in this thread.

Thanks... Just trying to pay forward the help others have given me.

Gambit, you reeallly need to know where you want to go with this rig and what you want it to do, and like has been said, take a lot of time to carefully plan it out. I've built several rigs from simple to complex and I can only tell you that you need a good plan and you need to stick to it. Guys on here like Zach, Samhill and others have good experience doing this stuff, but theres only so much you can get off the forum. Fire up your browser, get a comfortable chair and hit the web. Bradshaw's site has a ton of good info but you'll probably need to re-read it all several times as it can be overload.

If you do it right, you'll have an awesome rig....

It is tough, because as he discovers more and more, his vision will change as things become more clear.

As he gains "experience" using this stuff, he'll realize that certain things that he thought would be cool, aren't-- and things that he didn't think would be, are.

I wish him the BEST success

 

[Gambit]

Yeah I really appreciate all of zachmans replies. I am understanding this slowly but surely. To sum up:

what im looking for: running multiple amps, stompboxes and rack effects... all midi controllable. stompboxes on floor. seperate amps to have seperate FX. (if all the amps are running the same FX is goes against the whole wet/dry/wet thing we were talking about.) I understand your whole point about the FX and what would need to be done with the orange to keep it out of the signal. I'll figure that one out as I go along.

what i'm going to do:

guitar to
pedal switchers (main pedals I use) to
GCX which will have additional floor pedals in its loops, then amps, then FX rack pieces
If I decide I want each amp to have seperate FX I will simply take the rack pieces out of the loops and put them directly into each amps FX loops.

I understand the load box is necessary to bring the speaker strength to line level, keeping my GCX from being damaged.

The only thing Im still having trouble with is how the mixer works.

I understand how in this diagram the FX rack pieces go via Y cable to the mixer.... then you said from the mixer to the power amp... and then from the power amp to the speakers.

1.) The FX cant be the only thing connected to the mixer... If that were the case when I wasnt using the FX then there would be no signal going to the speakers. What else connects?



2.) How do I make it that the mesa amp stays with the mesa speaker if they are no longer connected via speaker cable (the amp is now running in the GCX's loop, the speakers are connected to the mixer/power amp now)?

 

[stephen sawall]

1 ~ true .... in a w/d/w the wet cabs get nothing when not using effects.

2 ~ The power amp output of the MESA is connected to it's own cab. Not the GCX. You can not run any power amp into the GCX ever. It well hurt it.

The line out of the MESA is what he was talking about (I think ?)

I have never seen any rig any place that had separate effects for each amp. I have looked at 1000's by now. Has anyone ever seen this ? It is just a bad idea if you ask me. Who knows maybe it well work for you.

You do understand the rig you want to build well cost a lot of money ? More than a few thousand from what I can see.

 

[Zachman]

Yeah I really appreciate all of zachmans replies. I am understanding this slowly but surely. To sum up:

what im looking for: running multiple amps, stompboxes and rack effects... all midi controllable. stompboxes on floor. seperate amps to have seperate FX. (if all the amps are running the same FX is goes against the whole wet/dry/wet thing we were talking about.) I understand your whole point about the FX and what would need to be done with the orange to keep it out of the signal. I'll figure that one out as I go along.

what i'm going to do:

guitar to
pedal switchers (main pedals I use) to
GCX which will have additional floor pedals in its loops, then amps, then FX rack pieces
If I decide I want each amp to have seperate FX I will simply take the rack pieces out of the loops and put them directly into each amps FX loops.

I understand the load box is necessary to bring the speaker strength to line level, keeping my GCX from being damaged.

The only thing Im still having trouble with is how the mixer works.

I understand how in this diagram the FX rack pieces go via Y cable to the mixer.... then you said from the mixer to the power amp... and then from the power amp to the speakers.

1.) The FX cant be the only thing connected to the mixer... If that were the case when I wasnt using the FX then there would be no signal going to the speakers. What else connects?

No,that is not true. There is only no signal to the wet side of the rig if you have the loop inactive.

As I said earlier... My example was only 1 example of how you could do this.

Some easy changes to accommodate your concern would be:

* Routing a dry signal from your amps to the wet side of your rig (via a switchable loop), which is what I do. Check out the Block diagram I posted again. OR

* You could use a loop Control Function to "Bypass" the fx unit directly (This is what I do for my TC 1210), allowing you to continue to pass dry signal to the fx unit/ wet side of your rig's speakers OR

* You could pre-program presets on your fx unit to call up a patch which you have set to mix level at 0%, continuing to send signal from your effects unit to the wet side of your rig.

2.) How do I make it that the mesa amp stays with the mesa speaker if they are no longer connected via speaker cable (the amp is now running in the GCX's loop, the speakers are connected to the mixer/power amp now)?

Wrong again... BUT you're getting closer

Each amp is connected to it's own speaker, per your original spec.

* Amp inputs are connected to your switcher's sends

* Amp 1's speaker output jack is connected to Load Box 1's input, Load Box 1's speaker output connects to Amp 1's speaker cabinet or internal speaker if it's a combo.

* Load Box 1's line out connects to a dedicated loop in your switcher.

Repeat for Amp 2, Amp 3 and so on.

How many pedals TOTAL?
What processors? D-Two and.... ?
Will you amps require channel switching? How many of them? What other possible amp functions do you want to control? (Eq in/out, Boost etc...)

The reason I am asking is because I am trying to figure out how many loops/control functions this rig of yours will require.

Have you ever played with the 3 amps that you're talking about using-- all running blended together?

 

[Gambit]

OK!! I didnt realize the load box goes back into the loop return AND into the dedicated speaker.

Things are looking brighter already!


I'm hearing mixed things on the rack FX.

Should I put it in the rack and have all the amps effected by the rack FX or should I dedicate an FX to each amp?

I am starting with the two amps, and I eventually will go to three but for now I am starting with two. So one would run without the FX and the other would have the FX in its FX loop.

I'm not sure what the need for the mixer and power amp are if I run the FX directly into the amp. I also dont need to go from the power amp to speakers because my speakers are connected to their respective amps.

In a three amp scenerio if I wanted to run the effects on two and leave one amp dry all the time the only question is how do I run the first amp without having being effected by the Rack FX in the GCX loop thats effecting the other two amps.


Im getting it..

 

[Zachman]

OK!! I didnt realize the load box goes back into the loop return AND into the dedicated speaker.

Things are looking brighter already!

Cool

I'm hearing mixed things on the rack FX.

Consider the sources you're hearing these "mixed things" from, and remember-- Not all rack effects are equal, nor are the opinions you hear about them.

Should I put it in the rack and have all the amps effected by the rack FX or should I dedicate an FX to each amp?

Up to you... I've already given you my opinion/input on the matter.
Eventide H8000FW $6000... (3) Eventide H8000's $18,000 Just using an extreme example to illustrate the point

I am starting with the two amps, and I eventually will go to three but for now I am starting with two. So one would run without the FX and the other would have the FX in its FX loop.

Okay...

GUYS... Help me out here and explain to our friend.

I'm not sure what the need for the mixer and power amp are if I run the FX directly into the amp.

There are a few, but if you insist on running your effects in the effects loop of only one of your amps-- and having only mono fx-- through that one amp, and/or no dry signal from your amp, without the ability to switch them via your switcher-- they are irrelevant.

I also dont need to go from the power amp to speakers because my speakers are connected to their respective amps.

Oh, okay... GUYS... Help me out here and explain to our friend.

In a three amp scenerio if I wanted to run the effects on two and leave one amp dry all the time the only question is how do I run the first amp without having being effected by the Rack FX in the GCX loop thats effecting the other two amps.

Like I posted earlier, you'd have to do things a little differently, than the 1st example I posted. I sited a few alternatives

Im getting it..

Right on

BTW, you didn't answer ANY of the questions I posted: I copied and pasted from my earlier post, but added a couple of questions

How many pedals TOTAL? What are they?
What processors? D-Two and.... ?
Will you require amps channel switching? How many of them? Which Amps? What other possible amp functions do you want to control? (Eq in/out, Boost etc...)

The reason I am asking is because I am trying to figure out how many loops/control functions this rig of yours will require.

Have you ever played with the 3 amps that you're talking about using-- all running blended together?

 

[Gambit]

Pedals total: infront of amp apx 8 in 2 pedal switchers plus volume control.

In GCX: apx 4 pedals, 2-3 rack FX, 2-3 amps.... channel switching on all 3, trem switch on tremoverb. I think I need two GCX's.

I haven't played with the 3 together yet, may even more likely switch between them, I truly dont know yet so I want the rig to be adjustable enough so I have both options.

As far as the mixer, power amp and FX controls go.... trust me, no one understands how little I know about all this more than me. There's no course in school about this shit, you basically hop on message boards like this and try to fish info out of very intelligent people like yourself, along the way trying to make some friends.

I am making a HUGE effort to learn this stuff, im sure it can be frustrating from someone who knows it all already.... I appreciate your time. Trust me its been a bit overwelming for me too.


So if I want both amps with wet FX i run the FX to the mixer and then into the respective amps?

Power amp I have no idea.


=)

 

[Zachman]

Pedals total: infront of amp apx 8 in 2 pedal switchers plus volume control.

In GCX: apx 4 pedals, 2-3 rack FX, 2-3 amps.... channel switching on all 3, trem switch on tremoverb. I think I need two GCX's.

I haven't played with the 3 together yet, may even more likely switch between them, I truly dont know yet so I want the rig to be adjustable enough so I have both options.

4 pedals= 4 loops
3 effects processors= 3 loops
3 amps (inputs-- where your pedals will be routed)= 3 loops
Channel switching for 3 amps= 3 loops (There is another possibility here too, perhaps an RJM Amp Gizmo, to MIDI enable the channel switching of your amps)
Trem switch on tremoverb= 1 loop
Line out box signal for each amp= 3 loops

Total so far 17 loops

Other things to consider: Pre-FX and or post-fx volume pedals, tap temp control for your delay, a tuner insert location, MIDI thru box.

I can't really get any more specific, because you still didn't answer what the effects were. The reason that is important is some pedals don't like to see a buffered signal hitting their inputs (such as certain fuzz pedals) and that is rather important since units like the GCX have ALL buffered loops and they are NOT switchable.

Your rig is easily as complex as mine, and is something you will end up spending around $15K-$50K to build (depending on several factors) such as: The cost of having a professional like Bradshaw--wire it (HIGHLY recommended), Cable type (You'll be around $1K just in cable/connectors), Switcher Selection, MIDI foot controller Selection (GCP WON'T do it for you-- IF you want instant access switches for each function within each preset for 17 loops), Mixer selection, Rack case, Foot Pedal Board/Case, Power Conditioners, Isolated power for each amp to avoid ground loops, If you're using a wah as one of your pedals on the floor-- a power supply to power it, misc. hardware (rack pedal tray), Amp Selection, Cabs, etc...


Some detailed pics of the back of my rig, just to give you an idea:

As far as the mixer, power amp and FX controls go.... trust me, no one understands how little I know about all this more than me. There's no course in school about this shit, you basically hop on message boards like this and try to fish info out of very intelligent people like yourself, along the way trying to make some friends.

I am making a HUGE effort to learn this stuff, im sure it can be frustrating from someone who knows it all already.... I appreciate your time. Trust me its been a bit overwelming for me too.

Sorry if I was grumpy earlier

So if I want both amps with wet FX i run the FX to the mixer and then into the respective amps?

No, you'd run the mixer L/R outs to a separate stereo power amp, which is running (2) cabs-- separate from your individual amp's 'Dry' speakers)-- for your L/R stereo effects. That is 5 mics (each of the 3 amps + the 2 wet cabs)and NOT too many sound guys are going to be happy to accommodate you)

Power amp I have no idea. =)

Some of my suggestions to check into

VHT 2150
VHT Classic
VHT 2 Ninety: Two
Mesa/Boogie Simul 395 (My favorite)
Mesa/Boogie Strategy 500
Mesa/Boogie Strategy 400
Mesa/Boogie Simul 2: ninety
Marshall EL34 Dual mono block 100/100

 

[Gambit]

Ok let me see if I have this now.

The amps are connected to their respective speakers and there we have the dry signal.

The rack effects after the amps in the GCX go out to a mixer, which then goes to a power amp, which then powers "wet" speakers.

In this setup its 5 cabinets which is too much, this needs to be re-thought.

I would rather have my tremoverb running dry always and my JCM2000 being the amp that used rack FX. That way I could simply run the rack FX through the JCM 2000, I would only have two speakers to contend with rather than 5, I would have a wet and a dry signal.... and I could still have front end FX going into the Mesa.

Sounds smarter to me, what do you think? Five amps is WAY overkill, I didnt realize each wet amp would have two speakers, I just figured the one speaker it did have would have FX.

 

[Zachman]

Ok let me see if I have this now.

The amps are connected to their respective speakers and there we have the dry signal.

The rack effects after the amps in the GCX go out to a mixer, which then goes to a power amp, which then powers "wet" speakers.

In this setup its 5 cabinets which is too much, this needs to be re-thought.

choo got it mang

I would rather have my tremoverb running dry always and my JCM2000 being the amp that used rack FX. That way I could simply run the rack FX through the JCM 2000, I would only have two speakers to contend with rather than 5, I would have a wet and a dry signal.... and I could still have front end FX going into the Mesa.

Sounds smarter to me, what do you think? Five amps is WAY overkill, I didnt realize each wet amp would have two speakers, I just figured the one speaker it did have would have FX.

I agree that 5 mics for 5 cabs is a lot-- which is why I use (3) cabs w/d/w-- w/ the dry cab being fed by one of four (Heads) at a time-- not blended, but I would really miss not being able to run the effects through my clean amp, those are some of the coolest sounds.

In previous rigs I used to blend/Slave amps, as you describe doing (granted not in as complex a manner), but discovered that in the end-- I prefer doing things the way that I am now w/ each head being run through the same (Dry) cab-- 1 at a time, and having the signal of the selected head driving the wet cabs.

The way I configured my rig I can run:

* Just the middle Dry selected head through the Dry cab only w/ nothing coming out of the (2) wet cabs-- but still use the pedals (which are all routed in front of which ever amps head is selected/or NOT)
* w/d/w
* wd/d/wd (mixing the dry signal into the wet cabs)
*d/d/d
* stereo (by turning my hotplate to load, and eliminating the middle dry cab)
OR
* w/d (If I come out of the mono out on the CAE Switchers Interface-- to the power amp)

Keep Rockin and thinking about your rig. Things will evolve several more times before you discover your path. Just remember-- all of this gear stuff-- they're mere tools to facilitate your ability to make "Music", so they are used best when they make the job of playing music "easier" for you.

Don't get so caught up in the gear chase-- that the music takes a back set.

Best of luck

 

[Gambit]

Cool. I think I'm getting more and more of a grasp of what exactly I'm doing.

If I was only running two speakers for gigs (2 heads), would you agree my best bet would be to run one wet and one dry? That's what I'm leaning towards, again, front end FX in both.

I've been writing music my whole life, and the gear thing is all VERY new to me... I try not to get too caught up in it but truth is I like the toys. No question though, its of course about writing music.

And when I am writing, its me and an acoustic guitar... thats it.

I am going to draw a plan of a rig some time in the next week, I am involved in two shows right now (im an actor and a musican) and rehearsals are getting nutty. Id of course still love for you to comment on what I'm doing and offer any further input. I think I've taken enough of your time though. =)

Much appreciated, keep on rockin in the free world brother.... and of course thank you!

 

[Zachman]

Cool. I think I'm getting more and more of a grasp of what exactly I'm doing.

If I was only running two speakers for gigs (2 heads), would you agree my best bet would be to run one wet and one dry?

That wouldn't be the way I would approach it, but it's not a right or wrong thing-- It's a subjective decision best left to the individual to make the call-- whether or not it works 'Best' for their purpose.

That's what I'm leaning towards, again, front end FX in both.

Leaving no stone unturned, and experimenting is the best way to see/hear/experience IF something works for you or not, so I would say be adventurous.

I've been writing music my whole life, and the gear thing is all VERY new to me... I try not to get too caught up in it but truth is I like the toys. No question though, its of course about writing music.

And when I am writing, its me and an acoustic guitar... thats it.

I am going to draw a plan of a rig some time in the next week, I am involved in two shows right now (im an actor and a musican) and rehearsals are getting nutty. Id of course still love for you to comment on what I'm doing and offer any further input. I think I've taken enough of your time though. =)

Much appreciated, keep on rockin in the free world brother.... and of course thank you!

You're welcome...

 

[stephen sawall]

To be honest Zachman .... I learned a few things myself. I now think I have pretty clear picture of what and why your rig is the way it is.