Which FX unit?

[Seitz333]

Usually I know what I want when it come to gear. I currently have an Eventide H3000 D/SE and I think it is great. I would like a second FX unit just for something different. I'm not really looking for an amp modeler just basic effects. I will be using this in my amps FX loop with or instead of the Eventide via a Voodoo Lab GCX. I also have a Suhr Shiba pedal and a Fulltone OCD in the GCX loops. My price range is up to $800.

Suhr Custom Classic ---> CAA PT100 ----> GCX ---> Bogner 2x12 Oversize with Celestion V30's

Here are the units I have been looking at, if you can recommend any others please let me know.

Digitech GSP1101 - Never really cared for Digitech units but I hear this is a good one.
TC Electronic G-Major 2 - Had one and it did not really do anything to excite me.
Pod X3 Pro - Had a PODxt Pro and it did not blow me away.
Digidesign Eleven Rack - Looks very interesting, plus I use ProTools
Axe-Fx - Out of the price range
TC Electronic G-Force - Out of the price range
Lexicon MX400XL - Looks interesting

Thanks

Chuck

 

[manyaxes]

Sell the Eventide buy an axefx. Will do everything the eventide can do at least as well plus tons of other cool stuff.

And the axefx is about to get 10ms preset switching. Compare that to your eventide's eternal switch times.

 

[glpg80]

Sell the Eventide buy an axefx. Will do everything the eventide can do at least as well plus tons of other cool stuff.

And the axefx is about to get 10ms preset switching. Compare that to your eventide's eternal switch times.

why does this recommendation not surprise me..

lexicon is simply amazing when it comes to reverbs - being an all-in-one effects unit im sure that, in unison with your eventide, it will definately deliver. if im not mistaken the 400XL model has stereo inputs/outputs as well.

if you plan to use a GCX the switching times of an axe fx wont matter - the GCX takes the units completely out of the loop whereas the axe-fx might or might not be true bypass - need an axe expert on this but i believe there is still ADA conversion going on. therefore i think the lexicon is the wisest investment of those choices for your future plans and also your budget.

i owned a g-major for 4 years, and while i loved the lush delays and the tone it delivered it definately is overwhelming to program at times and can sound like utter shit if you get your level controls internally all messed up. so i wouldnt recommend either of those units from my experiences - but the quality of the effects they offer can be had if you dont mind tweaking.

 

[MrDan666]

I don't know whether or not the PT100's FX Loop is Parallel or Serial?

So if it was a serial loop, you would actually lose all your sound for however many milliseconds it takes for the FX unit to change patches.
In a parallel loop, you still have your untouched dry tone on 100% of the time and the other signal from the FX unit is blended in parallel with the dry signal. So you won't get any signal drop outs at all. Only the wet signal will be silent for a matter of milliseconds until it reaches the next patch. The dry signal volume will remain the same

If it's a serial loop, you can just get around that issue by using a Suhr MiniMix which does the same thing.

I personally wouldn't worry about putting the FX units in a GCX loop and switching them in and out of your FX Loop. Just use MIDI control to bypass both units. If the FX Loop is a good one, then you shouldn't notice barely any signal loss

 

[manyaxes]

Most times parallel loops suck big time, just act any Recto owner. Mod houses will be forever in debt to Randall Smith for giving them so many customers who want the parallel to serial loop conversion. Even if the parallel loop itself is well made and doesn't suck tone, it will inherently limit what you can do and what fx you can put in your presets. No matter what how you tweak it, you are forced to go 100% wet in you fx processor (the famous killdry button) and you cannot use nonlinear complex fx such as pitch shifting and are limited to simple things like 100% wet delays unless you want tone suckage and phase problems.

I have found that most if not all parallel loops will always leak some dry signal, even if you mix it 100% wet. The moment you have ANY dry signal thru your loop into the power amp, you're in trouble. All digital FX units will have some latency, no matter how good or fast is. Even the axefx has a little latency (switching latency is a completely different subject), we're talking about the time the fx unit takes to process your signal. Analog pedals don't have this problem.

When the parallel loop combines the dry and wet signals, as the we signal has been delayed a little bit by the fx processor, the result is the sum of the signal plus a similar signal just delayed a bit. That means phasing issues, and the infamious tone suckage and helicopter-like sounds.

Of course you can set your fx unit 100% wet, and mix the dry and wet signal at the parallel loop potentiometer, let's say at 5% wet, but then you are forced at 5% wet in all your presets for all your effects, and possibly the clean and dirty channels. What if I need 20% for my clean patch and 5% for my lead one?

 

[Anonymous]

Most times parallel loops suck big time, just act any Recto owner. Mod houses will be forever in debt to Randall Smith for giving them so many customers who want the parallel to serial loop conversion. Even if the parallel loop itself is well made and doesn't suck tone, it will inherently limit what you can do and what fx you can put in your presets. No matter what how you tweak it, you are forced to go 100% wet in you fx processor (the famous killdry button) and you cannot use nonlinear complex fx such as pitch shifting and are limited to simple things like 100% wet delays unless you want tone suckage and phase problems.

I have found that most if not all parallel loops will always leak some dry signal, even if you mix it 100% wet. The moment you have ANY dry signal thru your loop into the power amp, you're in trouble. All digital FX units will have some latency, no matter how good or fast is. Even the axefx has a little latency (switching latency is a completely different subject), we're talking about the time the fx unit takes to process your signal. Analog pedals don't have this problem.

When the parallel loop combines the dry and wet signals, as the we signal has been delayed a little bit by the fx processor, the result is the sum of the signal plus a similar signal just delayed a bit. That means phasing issues, and the infamious tone suckage and helicopter-like sounds.

Of course you can set your fx unit 100% wet, and mix the dry and wet signal at the parallel loop potentiometer, let's say at 5% wet, but then you are forced at 5% wet in all your presets for all your effects, and possibly the clean and dirty channels. What if I need 20% for my clean patch and 5% for my lead one?

Both series and parallel effects loops have their issues, although I don't completely agree with your characterization. If you wanna solve all your problems, you need a line out to efx and then a power amp and two (or a stereo) cabs for your efx and a dry cab for the main tone. Best flexibility. Highest cost...

Steve

 

[manyaxes]

I agree a wd or a wdw rig is great and sounds incredible. I was just saying that a parallel loop is not inherently better than a serial one.

 

[MrDan666]

Both series and parallel effects loops have their issues, although I don't completely agree with your characterization. If you wanna solve all your problems, you need a line out to efx and then a power amp and two (or a stereo) cabs for your efx and a dry cab for the main tone. Best flexibility. Highest cost...

Steve

That's what i use too Steve, because I'm so damn fussy about FX Loops that i will only use one if its super transparent. Not many Loops are transparent enough for my liking, so i just go the Wet/Dry route and it solves the tone suckage issues completely.

 

[Shark Diver]

Both series and parallel effects loops have their issues, although I don't completely agree with your characterization. If you wanna solve all your problems, you need a line out to efx and then a power amp and two (or a stereo) cabs for your efx and a dry cab for the main tone. Best flexibility. Highest cost...

Steve

That's what i use too Steve, because I'm so damn fussy about FX Loops that i will only use one if its super transparent. Not many Loops are transparent enough for my liking, so i just go the Wet/Dry route and it solves the tone suckage issues completely.

+2 worth the effort!

Lot of great fx units - I'd check out some analog ones as well.

 

[ejecta]

Sell the Eventide buy an axefx. Will do everything the eventide can do at least as well plus tons of other cool stuff.

And the axefx is about to get 10ms preset switching. Compare that to your eventide's eternal switch times.

Is there a noticeable glitch when switching patches on the Axe?