How important is the effects loop to you?

[Gainzilla]

An old marshall?? Why ruin a good thing? Newer modern amps?? No loop..No buy..

Right on.

Old marshalls nothing a HP and another PA can't fix.

Anything new must have a loop, it provides the water of life.

These ^^

+2, Scott, that water of life quip is epic!!!!

 

[RG955TT]

Must have!

 

[Anonymous]

My question is... does the pedal that Bruce Egnater just made, negate the reason to even have a loop in the first place? It seems that thing can replace an effects loop. Either that pedal, or a Suhr mini mix and a mixer. Am I wrong? Wouldnt those 2 defeat the purpose of having an effects loop on most amps?

 

[mjtripper]

On a clean amp I don't care one way or the other but on everything else it's a must have.

 

[Anonymous]

My question is... does the pedal that Bruce Egnater just made, negate the reason to even have a loop in the first place? It seems that thing can replace an effects loop. Either that pedal, or a Suhr mini mix and a mixer. Am I wrong? Wouldnt those 2 defeat the purpose of having an effects loop on most amps?

Can you explain how you think this would work to me?

The Suhr mini mix effectively turns a serial effects loop into an adjustable parallel loop. You still need an effects loop. How could you use it without a loop?

The new pedal Bruce designed (unless you are talking about something different) allows you to effectively use instrument level pedals in a pro audio level effects loop. Once again, you need an effects loop...

Am I missing something?

Steve

 

[TheMagicEight]

Never use the loop. IMO effects need to be used sparingly to be tasteful, and for me it's more of a hassle than it's worth.

 

[Anonymous]

Never use the loop. IMO effects need to be used sparingly to be tasteful, and for me it's more of a hassle than it's worth.

It's more of a hassle than it's worth to be tasteful?

Steve

 

[joepete77]

I thought my reverb pedal didnt mesh with my main amp, then tried running it through the loop and was thrilled with the results. I never thought I needed a loop as most of my amps are older but this has me re thinking it.

 

[srinivassa]

Hardly use loops. Live I do without the hassle & focus on tone; recording there are plenty of in the box options. Funny, every amp I have has a loop that gets neglected

This for me. I am going to buy a MXR 10-band eq and try it in the loop of several amps, just to see if the extra eqing does anything for me that the tone stack doesn't already do. It's an experiment though. I don't have any problems running everything out front.

Verb, Modulation, and Delay are all pretty much clean channel effects for me, so I don't have issues with them out of the loop.

My question is... does the pedal that Bruce Egnater just made, negate the reason to even have a loop in the first place? It seems that thing can replace an effects loop. Either that pedal, or a Suhr mini mix and a mixer. Am I wrong? Wouldnt those 2 defeat the purpose of having an effects loop on most amps?

Can you explain how you think this would work to me?

The Suhr mini mix effectively turns a serial effects loop into an adjustable parallel loop. You still need an effects loop. How could you use it without a loop?

The new pedal Bruce designed (unless you are talking about something different) allows you to effectively use instrument level pedals in a pro audio level effects loop. Once again, you need an effects loop...

Am I missing something?

Steve

Yeah, as I understand Bruce's box, it just reduces the level of the signal. Then, it lets you run instrument level effects. Then, it boosts it back up to line level. Just gives you more pedal options inside the loop. Doesn't really change how a loop functions. It's still taking place after all the preamp stuff. It just lets you use pedals that work better at instrument level signal strength inside the loop more effectively.

 

[TheMagicEight]

Never use the loop. IMO effects need to be used sparingly to be tasteful, and for me it's more of a hassle than it's worth.

It's more of a hassle than it's worth to be tasteful?

Steve

I also prefer a full stack to a half stack, but for a small bar, it's not worth dragging out the second cab. That's about the same thing for me with effects. But that's just me, and effects aren't really my thing.

 

[warren]

I'd prefer to have one as I sometimes like a smidge of delay. Both my current amps have one. Although I haven't used the loops on either in several months. So I guess I don't really care that much. I just like having the option for if or when I feel like using it.

But delay and eq are the only things I'll put there. Don't care for reverb and I put my noise gates out front.

 

[racerevlon]

As I use less and less effects it becomes more about being able to fully leverage the capabilities of something like an ISP Decimator G-String pedal to cut all unwanted noise. If there's no loop, you can only use half that pedal, and then how do you manage the post-gain noise?

Not a must-have, but REALLY important for having a quiet(er) rig.

 

[petejt]

Is an effects loop a must have when buying an amp? Will it make/break the purchase for you? Will go have it modded for a loop if you want it? Just run pedals upfront if there is no loop? Just curious to hear everyones responses.

I prefer not to have an effects loop in an amp. I bought an amp partly on the fact that it did not have an effects loop.

When I want effects in front of the amp, I use pedals up front.

When I want effects after the amp, I slave the amp into a load/line box, then into the effects, then re-amplify with a stereo poweramp.


To me effects loops are useless unless they are stereo and the amp head has stereo poweramp built in.