Rig advice... desperatly could use some help please!

[Anonymous]

Ok, Ive had a slew of great gear... time to sell it all off and keep one rig, right? Seriously... we have all heard that one before, but shortly you will be seeing all my prized possessions in the classifieds.

So what did I decide to keep around? A Randall RM 1250, Lexicon MPX G2, and a behringer FCB 1010 midi pedal. Keeping in mind, I still need to buy a Matrix or similar power amp for a W/D/W rig to screw around with for playing in the man cave, can someone please tell me if I should ditch the MPX G2 and go with an older AXE FX Ultra. I am using either one for only the effects and I need to properly route the effects.

I want to solely concentrate on getting the routing down so that I can properly run this W/D/W without any hiccups. Do any of you know what unforeseen problems I may run into before I take on this project? Please tell me anything I might need to know, or suggest anything I should be looking to buy that I might not be thinking of.

Thanks, Chad

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah, but Reza... all I am going to be using this for is the fx anyways. I need to spend the cash wisely and the old ultra or standard will be saving me some nice coin!

 

[Zachman]

Ok, Ive had a slew of great gear... time to sell it all off and keep one rig, right? Seriously... we have all heard that one before, but shortly you will be seeing all my prized possessions in the classifieds.

So what did I decide to keep around? A Randall RM 1250, Lexicon MPX G2, and a behringer FCB 1010 midi pedal. Keeping in mind, I still need to buy a Matrix or similar power amp for a W/D/W rig to screw around with for playing in the man cave, can someone please tell me if I should ditch the MPX G2 and go with an older AXE FX Ultra. I am using either one for only the effects and I need to properly route the effects.

I want to solely concentrate on getting the routing down so that I can properly run this W/D/W without any hiccups. Do any of you know what unforeseen problems I may run into before I take on this project? Please tell me anything I might need to know, or suggest anything I should be looking to buy that I might not be thinking of.

Thanks, Chad

Aloha Chad,

The Axe would certainly give you great sounding effects, so it boils down to whether or not it's sonic signatures do it for your sense of satisfaction.

As to "Unforeseen" issues:

Plan for future growth, so as to limit obsolescence.

 

[Anonymous]

Sounds like the MPX G2 gets the ol chopping block soon! I just want to know more than anything if the AXE FX Ultra will run smoothly through the serial fx loop of the Randall and through the Matrix power amp... do you guys think I can run that rig without any complications in setup for a W/D/W? Noise issues?

I know I sound like a broken record, but I cant help but feel like I will sell most of my prized stuff and then end up a simplified rig that still wont run smoothly... Im very paranoid that it wont work out the way I want it too. I just want the fx to run smoothly in front and in the fx loop without noise issues. Do you guys think that this setup will work alright?

Thanks for the help!

 

[glpg80]

I've said it before and i'll say it again. If you spent more time playing what you currently have then you would realize nothing is "better" as everything you have ever owned will do the job you're looking for 10 times over and then some. If you're going for an Ultra just go for an axe-fx II and be done with it. There are now templates you can use with an improved GUI over both the ultra and standard which in the end will save time and headache.

Keep the modified recto, grab a boost, grab an Axe fx II and be done with it. You would have absolutely everything you would ever need in that setup with many tonal and recording options.

 

[Anonymous]

I have the kemper for recording, plus the added benefit of this rig to play in a live context or just for jamming at home... I really want to keep that recto over most of the amps that I am selling because it really is a special amp, but I just cant hoard anymore!!! I cant stand who I have become and just want to start focusing on recording and practicing!!!

 

[glpg80]

I have the kemper for recording, plus the added benefit of this rig to play in a live context or just for jamming at home... I really want to keep that recto over most of the amps that I am selling because it really is a special amp, but I just cant hoard anymore!!! I cant stand who I have become and just want to start focusing on recording and practicing!!!

If you're recording i wouldnt even bother with a W/D/W setup. The hot thing these days is the added simplicity of feeding FOH everything you ever need via XLR, and even stereo. Setup an FRFR flat response speaker system for the axe-fx II and use the computer interface to grab and tune the effects for live use. Keep the recto for over-dubs or dual tracking rhythms and trade for an axe fx II for solo's, FOH, and effects. Keep the kemper at home for your recording rig.

Not hard. Many many many possibilities for recording and playing out with that setup. You would have versatility, the heavier tones via modified recto, kemper for direct in the studio, and axe-fx II for effects, FOH, and solo tracking which IMHO both the recto and kemper lack.

 

[Anonymous]

The Axe II is pretty tempting, but how is it superior over the Ultra in terms of what kind of effects they both have in each unit? I hear there is very little in difference. Wouldnt this mean I am throwing more money away if I only use the units for just effects? Cant the Ultra put certain effects before the amp and in the loop just as the Axe II can? What am I missing here... please fill me in, I just dont see the need to spend the extra coin just yet if I dont have to.

Thanks, Chad

 

[glpg80]

The Axe II is pretty tempting, but how is it superior over the Ultra in terms of what kind of effects they both have in each unit? I hear there is very little in difference. Wouldnt this mean I am throwing more money away if I only use the units for just effects? Cant the Ultra put certain effects before the amp and in the loop just as the Axe II can? What am I missing here... please fill me in, I just dont see the need to spend the extra coin just yet if I dont have to.

Thanks, Chad

The software provided allows for a computer to be connected and easily tuned. There are now templates that exist which allow someone to plug in and just play if that is the type of person they are. For use as effects and FOH feed's this is extremely important for different patches of songs on a setlist and visually seeing what your effect chain looks like. Also the axe fx II is rack mounted - good luck waiting for a kemper to do the same. For live use it is a no-brainer - you do not need W/D/W setup anymore. Everything is condensed in a controlled manner that saves both your back and the consistency of the tone you are trying to nail.

I would keep the mesa, trade for an axe fx II, ditch the W/D/W, and sell everything else.

 

[Zachman]

The Axe II is pretty tempting, but how is it superior over the Ultra in terms of what kind of effects they both have in each unit? I hear there is very little in difference. Wouldnt this mean I am throwing more money away if I only use the units for just effects? Cant the Ultra put certain effects before the amp and in the loop just as the Axe II can? What am I missing here... please fill me in, I just dont see the need to spend the extra coin just yet if I dont have to.

Thanks, Chad

The software provided allows for a computer to be connected and easily tuned. There are now templates that exist which allow someone to plug in and just play if that is the type of person they are. For use as effects and FOH feed's this is extremely important for different patches of songs on a setlist and visually seeing what your effect chain looks like. Also the axe fx II is rack mounted - good luck waiting for a kemper to do the same. For live use it is a no-brainer - you do not need W/D/W setup anymore. Everything is condensed in a controlled manner that saves both your back and the consistency of the tone you are trying to nail.

I would keep the mesa, trade for an axe fx II, ditch the W/D/W, and sell everything else.

There are many decaffeinated brands on the market, which claim to be as good as the real thing. Some are pretty good, but if you're one of those whose a bit more discerning, and are given the choice-- one might prefer not to have DEcaf.

 

[LukeCurd]

You will need one buffered splitter for the guitar input signal. One for the Rector Dry and one for the Randall.
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/PSplitII/

Now, you want to run effects to both inputs of both amps and in both loops correct?

I would stay away from the AXE FX units as they have one processor for the amp duties of the unit and another processor for the effects. You or correct in it would be a waste of money.

The only effects I run stereo is Delay and Panner. Everything else is mono or dry. Not sure what effects you want to use in stereo but a Dual Mono rig sounds better for your needs. You can go w/d/w later but lets get down the basics.

http://www.rjmmusic.com/wiring/RG/RG_4P ... _2Amps.pdf

 

[Greg Riley]

Wow! Thats a rack of tasty goodies One would never wanna lift that rack.. I would see a box van with a ramp for sure

The Axe II is pretty tempting, but how is it superior over the Ultra in terms of what kind of effects they both have in each unit? I hear there is very little in difference. Wouldnt this mean I am throwing more money away if I only use the units for just effects? Cant the Ultra put certain effects before the amp and in the loop just as the Axe II can? What am I missing here... please fill me in, I just dont see the need to spend the extra coin just yet if I dont have to.

Thanks, Chad

The software provided allows for a computer to be connected and easily tuned. There are now templates that exist which allow someone to plug in and just play if that is the type of person they are. For use as effects and FOH feed's this is extremely important for different patches of songs on a setlist and visually seeing what your effect chain looks like. Also the axe fx II is rack mounted - good luck waiting for a kemper to do the same. For live use it is a no-brainer - you do not need W/D/W setup anymore. Everything is condensed in a controlled manner that saves both your back and the consistency of the tone you are trying to nail.

I would keep the mesa, trade for an axe fx II, ditch the W/D/W, and sell everything else.

There are many decaffeinated brands on the market, which claim to be as good as the real thing. Some are pretty good, but if you're one of those whose a bit more discerning, and are given the choice-- one might prefer not to have DEcaf.

 

[Zachman]

Wow! Thats a rack of tasty goodies One would never wanna lift that rack.. I would see a box van with a ramp for sure

The Axe II is pretty tempting, but how is it superior over the Ultra in terms of what kind of effects they both have in each unit? I hear there is very little in difference. Wouldnt this mean I am throwing more money away if I only use the units for just effects? Cant the Ultra put certain effects before the amp and in the loop just as the Axe II can? What am I missing here... please fill me in, I just dont see the need to spend the extra coin just yet if I dont have to.

Thanks, Chad

The software provided allows for a computer to be connected and easily tuned. There are now templates that exist which allow someone to plug in and just play if that is the type of person they are. For use as effects and FOH feed's this is extremely important for different patches of songs on a setlist and visually seeing what your effect chain looks like. Also the axe fx II is rack mounted - good luck waiting for a kemper to do the same. For live use it is a no-brainer - you do not need W/D/W setup anymore. Everything is condensed in a controlled manner that saves both your back and the consistency of the tone you are trying to nail.

I would keep the mesa, trade for an axe fx II, ditch the W/D/W, and sell everything else.

It can actually all fit in a Dodge Caravan, but yes-- I usually have a rental truck w/ a hydraulic lift gate.

There are many decaffeinated brands on the market, which claim to be as good as the real thing. Some are pretty good, but if you're one of those whose a bit more discerning, and are given the choice-- one might prefer not to have DEcaf.

 

[glpg80]

I would stay away from the AXE FX units as they have one processor for the amp duties of the unit and another processor for the effects. You or correct in it would be a waste of money.

The only effects I run stereo is Delay and Panner. Everything else is mono or dry. Not sure what effects you want to use in stereo but a Dual Mono rig sounds better for your needs. You can go w/d/w later but lets get down the basics.

You gave a fact about the axe fx but then didnt justify it with any reasoning. He asked a specific question about his concerns over the axe fx and i answered it truthfully. The only difference is that he would have more shit to carry around and nothing that would benefit both his home studio and playing live.

One thing i have found that is always true - with W/D/W or WD/WD/WD or WD/D/WD or WD, if the soundguy does not know what he is doing your rig is going to sound like straight up tinned ass that wont cut through the mix. With going directly to FOH and also stereo with the axe you get tonal stability no matter the venue and the tones will sound exactly as you intended when building the patches.

Zach you dont have to keep posting pictures of your setup all over the god damn forum as a justification for your own valid reason. You're starting to remind me of this guy:

 

[Zachman]

I would stay away from the AXE FX units as they have one processor for the amp duties of the unit and another processor for the effects. You or correct in it would be a waste of money.

The only effects I run stereo is Delay and Panner. Everything else is mono or dry. Not sure what effects you want to use in stereo but a Dual Mono rig sounds better for your needs. You can go w/d/w later but lets get down the basics.

You gave a fact about the axe fx but then didnt justify it with any reasoning. He asked a specific question about his concerns over the axe fx and i answered it truthfully. The only difference is that he would have more shit to carry around and nothing that would benefit both his home studio and playing live.

One thing i have found that is always true - with W/D/W or WD/WD/WD or WD/D/WD or WD, if the soundguy does not know what he is doing your rig is going to sound like straight up tinned ass that wont cut through the mix. With going directly to FOH and also stereo with the axe you get tonal stability no matter the venue and the tones will sound exactly as you intended when building the patches.

Zach you dont have to keep posting pictures of your setup all over the god damn forum as a justification for your own valid reason. You're starting to remind me of this guy:

FWIW, a sound guy that sucks, can make the direct signal from an axe sound like crap too.

Got it! You figure, pictures of my setup being posted, serve as an apparent means of me-- justifying my gear. Why would I need to justify my gear selection? Because the Axe-fx makes me feel as though somehow my stuff is lacking by contrast? Nope... Sorry you feel that way. The Axe is cool, but despite what some seem to project, it is NOT the same, nor is it an honest replacement. (for me anyway) My intention when posting pics is often to serve as a frame of reference, re: my pov, and personal standards re: gear-- as opposed to or in solidarity w/ someone's posted claims..

 

[glpg80]

FWIW, a sound guy that sucks, can make the direct signal from an axe sound like crap too.

Got it! You figure, pictures of my setup being posted, serve as an apparent means of me-- justifying my gear.[/b] Why would I need to justify my gear selection? Because the Axe-fx makes me feel as though somehow my stuff is lacking by contrast? Nope... Sorry you feel that way. The Axe is cool, but despite what some seem to project, it is NOT the same, nor is it an honest replacement. (for me anyway) My intention when posting pics is often to serve as a frame of reference, re: my pov, and personal standards re: gear-- as opposed to or in solidarity w/ someone's posted claims..

That is my whole point Zach - you feel as though your words are not enough and spamming your rig is the only option. The reverse can be said about W/D/W in a live venue. It is cool, but who would warrant it for a 50 minute gig or have the means to carry it all (for me anyway). You can re-word what i said however you like. My point is even more clear when you look at the RT home page for example:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rig-Talk/276347625759982

And you just did it again in this post. Can you not simply say what you want in the post with words? No one else on this forum spams their rig pictures to make a "point of reference" i find it odd you feel as though you cannot do the same.

As for the sound guy, he has less chance of fucking up a direct XLR feed than a W/D/W setup with multiple mics, mic distances, ambient temperature of cabinets, venue size, so on and so forth. Is the AFII a direct replacement? Of course not. But with the analog realism comes the analog realism of un-controlled variables and added weight/investment.

I used to be the same claiming that the AD/DA buffering has beneficial affects towards your tone. But honestly in a live setting if the person has bad ears and cranks the highs on the board to compensate then out goes the window all of the bothered time on your end, plus much more.

Also there is simplicity. For years i was against the Axe and for many reasons. But these days i can honestly say it is close enough for the books and my back. The options are there and can do alot. Does this mean it is right for someone else? That would depend on what they are trying to do. With the OP, i would say the axe-fx serves that purpose very well while also feeding FOH.

 

[Zachman]

FWIW, a sound guy that sucks, can make the direct signal from an axe sound like crap too.

Got it! You figure, pictures of my setup being posted, serve as an apparent means of me-- justifying my gear.[/b] Why would I need to justify my gear selection? Because the Axe-fx makes me feel as though somehow my stuff is lacking by contrast? Nope... Sorry you feel that way. The Axe is cool, but despite what some seem to project, it is NOT the same, nor is it an honest replacement. (for me anyway) My intention when posting pics is often to serve as a frame of reference, re: my pov, and personal standards re: gear-- as opposed to or in solidarity w/ someone's posted claims..

That is my whole point Zach - you feel as though your words are not enough and spamming your rig is the only option. The reverse can be said about W/D/W in a live venue. It is cool, but who would warrant it for a 50 minute gig or have the means to carry it all (for me anyway). You can re-word what i said however you like. My point is even more clear when you look at the RT home page for example:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rig-Talk/276347625759982

And you just did it again in this post. Can you not simply say what you want in the post with words? No one else on this forum spams their rig pictures to make a "point of reference" i find it odd you feel as though you cannot do the same.

As for the sound guy, he has less chance of fucking up a direct XLR feed than a W/D/W setup with multiple mics, mic distances, ambient temperature of cabinets, venue size, so on and so forth. Is the AFII a direct replacement? Of course not. But with the analog realism comes the analog realism of un-controlled variables and added weight/investment.

I used to be the same claiming that the AD/DA buffering has beneficial affects towards your tone. But honestly in a live setting if the person has bad ears and cranks the highs on the board to compensate then out goes the window all of the bothered time on your end, plus much more.

Also there is simplicity. For years i was against the Axe and for many reasons. But these days i can honestly say it is close enough for the books and my back. The options are there and can do alot.

I had no idea my rig was the banner on the RT facebook. I think that's cool!

If a sound guy is going to screw up w/ 3 w/d/w guitar feeds , he'll screw up w/ 2 L/R stereo feeds, just as well. It isn't that complicated.

For the record, I've NEVER EVER advocated taking a huge rig to an inappropriately sized venue, for a battle of the bands type of logistics.

Truly, there are pros and cons, and considerations to all paths-- as it relates to selecting, using, and owning gear. (Budget, Size, Weight, Complexity, Ease of Use, Ease of Service, Variety, Expectations)

As to posting pics and seeing pics of guitar rigs, on a gear forum-- I love it. Sorry you feel the way you do.

 

[syncrodude007]

Chad go w/ the Axe set up... I dig Zachs crazy kat & rig porn...

 

[Anonymous]

The more you guys point me the way of the Axe FX II, I keep considering one thing. I have a damn Kemper!!!

Im thinking of just buying a few QSC K 12 FRFR monitors and just going through pure kemper and profiling the hell out of my equipment before I sell it all off!!! This kemper sounds so bad ass through my Yamaha NS10's, I can only imagine they will sound just as good through the K12's!!!

This way, when I go to a venue the Sound guy can feed me a direct XLR, and I can have 2 x 1000 watt powered floor monitors feeding me my signal straight in front and off to the side of me when and if I do play out in the next year!

Maybe I am wrong about my approach all together! What do you guys think?

 

[glpg80]

The more you guys point me the way of the Axe FX II, I keep considering one thing. I have a damn Kemper!!!

Im thinking of just buying a few QSC K 12 FRFR monitors and just going through pure kemper and profiling the hell out of my equipment before I sell it all off!!! This kemper sounds so bad ass through my Yamaha NS10's, I can only imagine they will sound just as good through the K12's!!!

This way, when I go to a venue the Sound guy can feed me a direct XLR, and I can have 2 x 1000 watt powered floor monitors feeding me my signal straight in front and off to the side of me when and if I do play out in the next year!

Maybe I am wrong about my approach all together! What do you guys think?

It would sound great for sure! It is your rig boss do whatever floats your boat - only reason i recommended the ax fx II was for user interface with effects + templates since you were already considering the ultra from the beginning. If you decided you no longer want the added effects and would rather put to use the kemper then go for it

I'd still keep the mesa