Stereo W/D?

[glpg80]

Is it possible to run a stereo W/D using a head's poweramp as either L or R of the mix? I don't really want to run a guitar head into a load just to get a dry signal and run another poweramplifier for both L and R combined. Would rather utilize the guitar head for one side, and look for a smaller poweramp to run the other side to save on weight and tubes.

Can this be done and if so, how?

 

[Zachman]

Is it possible to run a stereo W/D using a head's poweramp as either L or R of the mix?

Yes, If you only want mono FX (in the FX/Wet side). Ex. Guitar-Amp/Cab-DRY-Amp Line out/FX Send-FX input. FX Output to 2nd amp (FX Return)/cab

I don't really want to run a guitar head into a load just to get a dry signal and run another poweramplifier for both L and R combined.

See Above

Would rather utilize the guitar head for one side, and look for a smaller poweramp to run the other side to save on weight and tubes.

Can this be done and if so, how?

Then why not use a head/cab for the middle Dry, and send from that into fx, and into a single stereo power amp, for Stereo FX in a L/R cab?

 

[psychodave]

The way I would accomplish it would be to use a stereo delay unit like the KORG DL8000R, run one side through my main amp and out to 1 cabinet. Then I’d take a line level signal from something like the Suhr ISO. I’d and feed the signal into the other side of my effects unit and out to a poweramp then into another cabinet. This will provide a stereo delay/echo. To get the “wet” cabinet to be totally wet you may need a mixer. They way I have it described above will have both dry and wet signal in each cabinet. FWIW, I always run dry signal into my “wet” cabinets. To me it adds depth and a better sound.

 

[glpg80]

Would this work?

 

[Zachman]

Would this work?

Not the way you think... Why not just run Stereo?

Amp send to fx input L(mono)
FX L OUT to Amp Return
FX R OUT to 2nd amp/cab

 

[glpg80]

Not the way you think...

Care to explain why?

I'd like to for many reasons really. Stereo W/W or D/D would introduce a delay between switching patches, cutting off reverb or delay trails when changing patches, and you're at the mercy of your gain-settings of every component in the chain that's stereo. It's just asking for problems in a live situation as well if a piece of gear shits the bed or if a particular piece of gear is noisy. I'd also like to control the amount of W/D mix via MIDI: Dry for rhythms, wet for cleans, a mix for solos.

 

[psychodave]

Would this work?

Not the way you think... Why not just run Stereo?

Amp send to fx input L(mono)
FX L OUT to Amp Return
FX R OUT to 2nd amp/cab

I agree this is the simplistic way to do it. I like to use the ISO box so I can mix both wet and dry into my “wet” cab(s).

I’m not sure if that diagram posted above will work or not.

 

[Zachman]

Not the way you think...

Care to explain why?

I'd like to for many reasons really. Stereo W/W or D/D would introduce a delay between switching patches, cutting off reverb or delay trails when changing patches, and you're at the mercy of your gain-settings of every component in the chain that's stereo.

Not in my experience. That said, there are a few fx processors (NOT most) which have a glitch while loading presets, BUT the line mixer tames that.

Using a switching system, and a line mixer-- when you turn off a loop, you're turning off the input stage of the unit, so delay tails will still fade away-- not just get cut off as if you were turning off the output section. The gain stages are affected by how hot of a signal your amp that's driving the gear-- is set, at the input of the fx units-- so That can be an issue, BUT doesn't have to be. Ex. I had an old rig that I used 2 line mixers... one to quickly adjust the input signal (gain stages) more easily than having to adjust every item in the chain, I'd just adjust one knob to cut/boost the line signal feeding the fx-- without worrying about how loud or soft the amp was set. The other line mixer was for the outputs of the fx units, for the stereo mix.

It's just asking for problems in a live situation as well if a piece of gear shits the bed or if a particular piece of gear is noisy. I'd also like to control the amount of W/D mix via MIDI: Dry for rhythms, wet for cleans, a mix for solos.

When using a switching system if an individual unit shits the bed, the rig is still usable, because when you turn off the loop you remove the device and the cables connecting it from the signal chain. As far as adjusting the wet mix-- I do it via a volume pedal, though using MIDI depending on how many units you intend to control at one time is also doable though much more convoluted.

I prefer stereo fx, and doing it the way you have it in a w/d configuration you'd only have mono fx-- done in a very convoluted way, imo.

 

[glpg80]

I prefer stereo fx, and doing it the way you have it in a w/d configuration you'd only have mono fx-- done in a very convoluted way, imo.

I believe you're following the signal chain incorrectly or are misinterpreting the diagram. I respectfully continue to disagree. With MIDI level controlling, it won't matter the gain differences of the amplifier's effects output. I can control levels on a patch to patch basis and have them programmed in. If the effects loop is designed correctly, which Steve knows what he's doing so I assume it is, the output impedance should be relatively low which helps reject noise. There's also no mono anything in that design - there's both wet left and wet right at 100% being mixed with a 100% dry signal at the mixer post effects.

 

[Zachman]

I prefer stereo fx, and doing it the way you have it in a w/d configuration you'd only have mono fx-- done in a very convoluted way, imo.

I believe you're following the signal chain incorrectly or are misinterpreting the diagram. I respectfully continue to disagree. With MIDI level controlling, it won't matter the gain differences of the amplifier's effects output. I can control levels on a patch to patch basis and have them programmed in. If the effects loop is designed correctly, which Steve knows what he's doing so I assume it is, the output impedance should be relatively low which helps reject noise. There's also no mono anything in that design - there's both wet left and wet right at 100% being mixed with a 100% dry signal at the mixer post effects.

It is entirely possible I'm misunderstanding your intent. The level of the amps output WILL increase the input signal sent to your effects as you adjust it higher, and lower the signal it sees when the amp's volume is lowered, which is why some amps have adjustable Line output controls. (When one has many devices, it becomes irritating to contend with... Believe me). The MIDI Control will likely be operating the OUTPUT levels of the gear, in practical application while potentially also controlling mix level per the unit being controlled, but the signal feeding the physical input of the device isn't going to be adjusted via MIDI, in general.

If there's only 2 amps, I'm confused how you are getting Dry, and stereo fx simultaneously. You're actually getting mono and mono fx mixed down from stereo-- but it isn't stereo anymore. Perhaps someone can chime in and help me understand what I'm missing.

I see the only possibility w/ your diagram of dual mono (W/D), or Stereo (perhaps w/ a parallel dry mixed in to wash out the fx result, but that's not the same thing as W/D/W-- which is mono Dry, and Stereo FX--in Stereo, in parallel, simultaneously. .. and guys like psychodave and I like having the ability to mix in DRY signal into the wet stereo cabs), but we're using 3 image sources not just 2. If you mix your stereo fx down to mono to feed only one amp, it's not stereo anymore. It is mono, and only W/D, not W/D/W. What am I missing? You'll have the content, but not the stereo imagery