Multi Effects Philosophy

[Zachman]

 

It depends which program you're using. Yeah, the ART's verbs stink (their algorithm is just horrific), so I don't use them. I like the verb in the Alesis, so I use it for that. Some of the other programs sound quite good, so I use the ARTs for that. I use different parts of a tool for what it's good at rather than out the entire tool. I'm not putting them between the guitar and the amp. I'm putting them between the preamp and the amp, or in the effects loop. There's nothing between the guitar and the amp. I don't really care what anyone else does . . . if it sounds good to my ears, I go with it. We're creating sounds, not recreating them, so whatever works is what works--isn't that the point? It might be a mega-processor that's fresh from the lab, or it might be a piece-of-crap box that's 30 years old . . . if it gives the sound it gives the sound. I think that limiting yourself to "this is what my guitar hero" does limits your sonic choices . . . I'll try anything and everything to see what it'll sound like. Often times sonic purity and clarity is NOT the goal--it's something that sounds good. Why on EARTH would I want to sound like someone else? And, if the truth be told, a LOT of those "A list" guys don't know the guts of what they're using. They either paid someone else to put them together or went on someone else's advice and are simply perpetuating what someone else told someone who told someone. And, as far as session guys go, I doubt they'll have ANY effects in there. More likely they're running completely dry and the engineering adds effects in later (who records wet?), so I don't know where that's valid. I'm quite happy with my sound, and every time I'm out I have at last 4 or 5 guitarists coming over to see how I'm gettting my sound so I'm doing SOMETHING right.

 

 

Like you, I too use the processors for what they're good at, and fortunately they're ALL the industry benchmark of excellence in all that they do.

 

Michael Landau is one example I'll site re: recording W/D/W real time.

 

You're right re: whatever works for "you"

[phaboo]

 

Michael Landau is one example I'll site re: recording W/D/W

 

 

Again, it makes no difference to me what anyone else does. I check out other rigs all the time so I can steal whatever's working, but my own ears are the final judge.

 

I cruise forums looking for new ideas . . . I'll steal what works for me and dump the rest. I really don't care what anyone has decided is "best." There is no best in tone. There's what lets you make the noises you want to make.

[Zachman]

Again, it makes no difference to me what anyone else does. I check out other rigs all the time so I can steal whatever's working, but my own ears are the final judge. I cruise forums looking for new ideas . . . I'll steal what works for me and dump the rest. I really don't care what anyone has decided is "best." There is no best in tone. There's what lets you make the noises you want to make.

 

I agree... I sited Landau because you asked for an example

 

If you're doing session work or sideman work- the client decides what the "Best" tone is, and for those interested in continuing to do that kind of work, the ability to provide the "Best tones" according to the client, when the client needs it- will likely keep getting called back, and keep collecting their check.

 

NOT the main reason why I've chosen the gear I have, but a byproduct of choosing the gear I have, is the ability to dial in WHATEVER comes up, that someone else (The client, producer, artist) may want to hear, in addition to providing ALL the tones I want as well. We all know that tone is a subjective thing, but I'll stick w/ my method and I am fine with you sticking with yours.

 

Judging by your comments, you've likely NEVER tried the gear that I am referring to and when it comes to choosing gear, there is no substitute for experience to shape ones outlook on what works best. Just saying... The frame of reference makes a HUGE difference in what is possible, when making comparisons as to what works well, as opposed to what works adequately.

[phaboo]

I agree... I sited Landau because you asked for an example If you're doing session work or sideman work- the client decides what the "Best" tone is, and for those interested in continuing to do that kind of work, the ability to provide the "Best tones" according to the client, when the client needs it- will likely keep getting called back, and keep collecting their check. NOT the main reason why I've chosen the gear I have, but a byproduct of choosing the gear I have, is the ability to dial in WHATEVER comes up, that someone else (The client, producer, artist) may want to hear, in addition to providing ALL the tones I want as well. We all know that tone is a subjective thing, but I'll stick w/ my method and I am fine with you sticking with yours. Judging by your comments, you've likely NEVER tried the gear that I am referring to and when it comes to choosing gear, there is no substitute for experience to shape ones outlook on what works best. Just saying... The frame of reference makes a HUGE difference in what is possible, when making comparisons as to what works well, as opposed to what works adequately.

 

I asked for an example? I read back over my post and don't see it.

 

Yes, in the studio recording for someone else the client will decide what's best. But, that's not my area (thank God) so I don't worry about that.

 

And, you assume too much. I've tried just about everything, and my stuff works MUCH more than adequate. I suppose you'd have to hear it . . . these discussions can be pretty frustrating when there's no way to actually set up the toys and play with them. Have you ever tried effects in parallel?

 

It's also a function of how you use your effects . . . I use mine to fill out the sound, but they're rarely in the foreground. I keep it simple, because (for me) too much just clutters things up. So, even if there was a huge difference in the effected tone with a better unit it wouldn't make a huge difference in the final tone, especially when you mix a band in. When recording I'll go dry, because I want to have move options when mixing. Committing an effect to a recording that way, imho, is a mistake. I may LISTEN to it wet (ie, add effect into the monitor mix) but I'd never RECORD wet.

 

My main concern was getting the raw tone through undisturbed and be able to mix effects in the background, and I found a way that works quite well. It also allows me to add in ANY effect, no matter how horribly designed or barbaric it may be, as I'm not passing my raw tone through it--I like that flexibity. That works best for me, as I can now link in anything and still have my original tone.

 

So, it works, and I'm off to play. Sure, I could dump half my rack and replace it with a particular effector and possibly pass my raw tone through undisturbed (or maybe not), but I'll pass. I'd rather be playing my guitar then re-engineering something that already works quite well.

 

Side thought: I've seen guys post mp3's of recordings to compare tone, but is that even useful? There's usually quite a bit of signal massaging going on to try and make the recorded tone sound like the cabinet (and quite often it sounds NOTHING like the cabinet but someone likes it) so is that a true measure? Don't know. But, I digress . . .

 

And yes, tone is very subjective. You might think mine sounds like garbage but I'm quite happy with it. It says what I want it to say. Perhaps you misunderstand my postings . . . I never said my method was the best. I said I've tried it, it works well for me, and I posted it because someone else might also get good results with it. Isn't that the point of having a discussion board?

[Zachman]

 

Like you, I too use the processors for what they're good at, and fortunately they're ALL the industry benchmark of excellence in all that they do. Michael Landau is one example I'll site re: recording W/D/W real time. You're right re: whatever works for "you"

 

 

I have used the Processors that you have in those rig pics, (I am apprehensive that you have or that that those pics are actually your rig, but-- I digress) and I am not just assuming how they work, I am quite familiar with them. At the risk of sounding like a snob, compared to what I am talking about, they are toys and not even in the same league. Anyone who can't perceive the appreciable difference between an Alesis Midi verb, Quadraverb, or those ART processors and the Eventide, TC Electronic, and Lexicon gear I am referring to is either deaf or has NEVER spent ANY appreciable time with them.

[Gorgon90]

At the risk of sounding like a snob, compared to what I am talking about, they are toys and not even in the same league. Anyone who can't perceive the appreciable difference between an Alesis Midi verb, Quadraverb, or those ART processors and the Eventide, TC Electronic, and Lexicon gear I am referring to is either deaf or has NEVER spent ANY appreciable time with them.

 

I like my old Quadraverb GT... Zachman, yeah, you are a snob.

 

Ah to hell with it! Gimme my Trace Elliot Super Tramp Tube 1x12" hybrid combo, my Viscount EFX-10 half rack processor and my new Nobels SPX-31 so I can line mix the effects and I'll kick both of your arses (Zach and Phaboo).

 

(I might need a few grand in other outboard gear and a talent implant to make that happen but who's counting )

[Zachman]

I like my old Quadraverb GT... Zachman, yeah, you are a snob. Ah to hell with it! Gimme my Trace Elliot Super Tramp Tube 1x12" hybrid combo, my Viscount EFX-10 half rack processor and my new Nobels SPX-31 so I can line mix the effects and I'll kick both of your arses (Zach and Phaboo). (I might need a few grand in other outboard gear and a talent implant to make that happen but who's counting )

 

I used to use one too, and liked it back then as well-- Then I learned what else was available and used those things, leading me to my current POV as to what is "Good" and "Desirable" For ME-- I am not suggesting that if anyone isn't using what I prefer, that they are somehow making an error. NOT AT ALL... I actually take great pride using older stuff and not so sophisticated stuff and getting it to do stuff that usually has guys coming up and asking me how the hell I am doing it. That being said, it still doesn't provide the tone results of my big rig.

 

It's not a competition with other's tone for me, it's a competition with myself to get the BEST tone I can get, with the tools I have at my disposal. (Be it the big rig or an amp and a few pedals or a processor or two, mono, combo, head/cab, stereo, W/D or W/D/W)

 

You RAWK brother!!!

 

You may be right, I may be a snob, or just experienced enough to know what I prefer and why. I've used a LOT of gear to come to the conclusions that I have and to support my preferences in gear and why I run it the way I run it.

[elchico04]

what is the general opinion towards the g major? I am not looking to spend a million dollars for the best unit out there.

 

Also what is this talk about loading times?

I never knew anything about this. How long are the times generally for units like the g major and comparable units.

[Zachman]

what is the general opinion towards the g major? I am not looking to spend a million dollars for the best unit out there. Also what is this talk about loading times? I never knew anything about this. How long are the times generally for units like the g major and comparable units.

 

No lag time w/ the G-Major. G-Major is a big bang for the buck and sounds pretty good. Nice delay, and Reverbs, etc... The main issue with them is the build quality compared to the more expensive G-Force, but I give it my seal of approval, (Whatever that means, to anyone but me, and the guys who I've built rigs for).

 

Here is a rig that I built for a friend w/ the G-Major:

 

 

 

 

Seriously though, The G-Major is a BIG Bang for the Buck.

[Gorgon90]

It's not a competition with other's tone for me, it's a competition with myself to get the BEST tone I can get, with the tools I have at my disposal. (Be it the big rig or an amp and a few pedals or a processor or two, mono, combo, head/cab, stereo, W/D or W/D/W) You RAWK brother!!!

As do you. I learn a lot from your posts most days, I hope you know I was joking earlier with the intention of defusing a possible argument as I think both you and Phaboo can contribute a lot to this forum, particularly as there are so few of us rack fans these days.

 

If you are a snob, then it is entirely grounded in experience and that is an opinion to be respected by all, even if they don't agree with it from their own experience.

 

Similarly, my 20+ years of playing let me get tones out of my 3 channel hybrid combo and pair of cheapo second hand

[Gorgon90]

This should be interesting as it's multi-fx related. Please tell me what you guys think of the tone this clip...

 

Sound Of Bad Playing

 

Please excuse all sh*te playing as it was a single take messing around with Audacity for the first time over a backing track.

[phaboo]

Hope this refreshes your recollection.

 

Holy cats you're a pedant. Go to dictionary.com and check "rhetorical."

 

I have used the Processors that you have in those rig pics, (I am apprehensive that you have or that that those pics are actually your rig, but-- I digress)

 

You know, I came here to share some ideas and see what other people do. Instead, all I get is a bunch of ad hominem (google that, too) attacks. You're just an asshole, plain and simple. If you think the way I did it is stupid, then fine. I never said you had to do anything any different.

 

and I am not just assuming how they work, I am quite familiar with them. At the risk of sounding like a snob, compared to what I am talking about, they are toys and not even in the same league. Anyone who can't perceive the appreciable difference between an Alesis Midi verb, Quadraverb, or those ART processors and the Eventide, TC Electronic, and Lexicon gear I am referring to is either deaf or has NEVER spent ANY appreciable time with them.

 

Again, more ad hominem attacks. This isn't a debate, you moron. It's an exchange of ideas. If I can get good results with what you consider crap equipment, then good for me! If you don't like it and you want to use other stuff, then good for you!

 

I never said there wasn't a difference . . . can you read? I said that, as I use the effects BEHIND the main tone to fill things out, by the time they're mixed in with the dry tone and the sound of the entire band that the difference will not be apparent to a listener. If the only way you can hear the difference is to stop the band, soundproof the room, and do careful A/B testing then it's not enough of a difference for me to spent a chunk of cash. Can you understand that through your thick ego?

 

You're showing EXACTLY what's wrong with WAY too many guitarists--the asshole attitude. It's impossible to have any meaningful sharing of information when it's all condescending sneers, personal attacks ("I am apprehensive that you have or that that those pics are actually your rig") and stupidness. You showing EXACTLY the reason guitarists have a reputation of being assholes, because many of them ARE.

 

Those ARE my rigs, I built those cabinets AND those speakers, I built my own switching system (which works quite well also, by the way) and I built my own guitars. I'm sure you'd think they were all crap as well . . . but you know what? From the other side of the stage nobody f*cking cares. It sounds exactly like what I want it to sound, so what I play sounds EXACTLY like what's in my head.

 

It must really suck to be in a band with you. Hell, it must suck to be in the same ROOM with you.

 

I thought I could come hear to exchange some ideas . . . apparently I was wrong. Have fun ruling your little internet kingdom. I'm off to play guitar.

[phaboo]

. . . as I think both you and Phaboo can contribute a lot to this forum, particularly as there are so few of us rack fans these days.

 

Sorry, not me. Don't need this kind of stupidity. If I did, I'd get married again.

 

Have a nice life, guys!

[JMPMarshall]

I'm glad to see the one sided pissing competition has been resolved.

 

I'm kind of lost as to where to go with my effects. I'm working on heading back all to rack. I intend to use a Mesa Quad and either a VHT 2/50/2 (what can I say I love EL34s) or the 2:95 it was designed to go with.

 

I haven't been happy with my sound for sometime. The problem I have with the MPX-550 I'm using is that I can find a reverb I like but it's not quite there and as soon as I add a delay I lose algorithms therefore I lose my decent reverb. Not to mention the mix control is global making it very dificult to program.

 

I'd like to add a volume and wah pedal again so I was thinking of removing my pedals from my rack and mounting them to a board with a Axess BS-2 before the wah and volume and GRX-4 with my whammy, chorus, phaser, and a overdrive.

[hjcooper]

Axe-Fx

 

Not for the modeling, but for the effects in this case. Stick your pre in the loop. You can run effects pre- and post-. Effects quality is said to be top-notch.

[JMPMarshall]

I only need reverb and delay ALL of my other effects are run via pedals. Zachman has the front panel to wah and volume on his rack so why don't I just put it on a board with my pedals? I'd like to hear reasons for mounting the pedals with the outboard wah and volume vs the rackmount pedals.

[Spacehog26]

If you start having pedals on your pedalboard, along with your MIDI controller and expression pedals or whatever, you start to run out of room fast. That's why I run pedals (well, currently only 1 pedal, a Boss AC2 - the models of the various overdrive pedals in my GSP1101 are close enough for live use and reduce cable length and clutter) in my rack. My pedalboard is about 3'x1', and just has room for my Rocktron All Access, Boss FV500H expression pedal, Morley Bad Horsie wah and Little Alligator volume pedal. If I wanted to run anything else in there, I'd need a bigger board!

[Zachman]

Couple of stories I have about the Quad GT. Back in the day, I had a friend who had a Marshall JMP-1, Quad GT and a Marshall 8008 Valvestate power amp as his rack. He used to slag off the Quad as a preamp left right and center. He then did a deal to p/x his JMP-1 and 8008 for a Marshall 9100 valve power amp. He had a Roland GP100 on order as the best preamp available at the time but while he was waiting for it, he practiced with the Quad into the 9100 and realised that it was not Quad that was the tone sucker but the 8008/JMP-1 combination. He nearly cancelled his GP100 order he was that impressed with it - didn't though.   Other story I have is when my band tried some recording at a shitty practice studio. The other guitarist tried my Quad DI'd and got the sound he's been looking for since forever in one of the presets.   Now that is good stuff!   Fair play, you spend lots of money on your dream rig (as I know you have) then it damn well ought to sound unbelieveable!   As do you. I learn a lot from your posts most days, I hope you know I was joking earlier with the intention of defusing a possible argument as I think both you and Phaboo can contribute a lot to this forum, particularly as there are so few of us rack fans these days.   If you are a snob, then it is entirely grounded in experience and that is an opinion to be respected by all, even if they don't agree with it from their own experience.   Similarly, my 20+ years of playing let me get tones out of my 3 channel hybrid combo and pair of cheapo second hand

[Zachman]

If you start having pedals on your pedalboard, along with your MIDI controller and expression pedals or whatever, you start to run out of room fast. That's why I run pedals (well, currently only 1 pedal, a Boss AC2 - the models of the various overdrive pedals in my GSP1101 are close enough for live use and reduce cable length and clutter) in my rack. My pedalboard is about 3'x1', and just has room for my Rocktron All Access, Boss FV500H expression pedal, Morley Bad Horsie wah and Little Alligator volume pedal. If I wanted to run anything else in there, I'd need a bigger board!

 

OR you could rack your pedals in a tiny rack, and have a way smaller foot pedal.

 

Don't feel bad the pedal board for my rig is 48" * 17" (INSANE, I know... )

 

[Saturnine10]

Thats it? ^^^^^

 

LOL

 

Crazyness.

[Zachman]

Thats it? ^^^^^ LOL Crazyness.

 

hehehe ya- That's good ole Tiny

[Spacehog26]

OR you could rack your pedals in a tiny rack, and have a way smaller foot pedal.

I did have more pedals on a rack shelf (Monte Allums DS-1, Digitech Whammy, Marshall Bluesbreaker (original) and the AC-2), but it seemed a waste of 2U of rack space for little gain - the Whammy in the GSP1101 is actually better at tracking than the pedal (at least via MIDI), and the DS-1 and Bluesbreaker sounds are covered more than adequately by the models in the GSP1101 (I actually use the Voodoo Lab Sparkle Drive model for my mild overdrive now). So I just velcroed the AC-2 to the side of my rack in the back (it's one of those nice Boss pedals that powers up "on" rather than "off") and freed up the 2U. Now all I need is something to fill it (I'm thinking a Lexicon MX400 and a G-Major, along with a line mixer and something else, possibly a separate preamp for my acoustic sounds).

 

It's funny, with 6 channels available to me (I use a Peavey JSX head and a Peavey Triple XXX head, with both (nicely balanced) power stages to drive my cabs) you wouldn't think I'd need to use an overdrive pedal at all, but I guess old habits die hard. I play mostly prog rock and metal, and seem to get through a LOT of different sounds in a gig!

 

I'd love to be able to afford a big scary rig like yours, with multiple heads and effects that are worth more (singly!) than my car, but I don't have the budget for it (only a part time gigging musician with a day job and a mortgage). Or indeed the space! Still, I'm very happy with what I use, it's a great improvement over a floor full of pedals both sonically and in terms of ease of use - trying to sing while simultaneously stepping on four or five pedals to change sounds wasn't fun!

[Zachman]

 

I did have more pedals on a rack shelf (Monte Allums DS-1, Digitech Whammy, Marshall Bluesbreaker (original) and the AC-2), but it seemed a waste of 2U of rack space for little gain - the Whammy in the GSP1101 is actually better at tracking than the pedal (at least via MIDI), and the DS-1 and Bluesbreaker sounds are covered more than adequately by the models in the GSP1101 (I actually use the Voodoo Lab Sparkle Drive model for my mild overdrive now). So I just velcroed the AC-2 to the side of my rack in the back (it's one of those nice Boss pedals that powers up "on" rather than "off") and freed up the 2U. Now all I need is something to fill it (I'm thinking a Lexicon MX400 and a G-Major, along with a line mixer and something else, possibly a separate preamp for my acoustic sounds). It's funny, with 6 channels available to me (I use a Peavey JSX head and a Peavey Triple XXX head, with both (nicely balanced) power stages to drive my cabs) you wouldn't think I'd need to use an overdrive pedal at all, but I guess old habits die hard. I play mostly prog rock and metal, and seem to get through a LOT of different sounds in a gig! I'd love to be able to afford a big scary rig like yours, with multiple heads and effects that are worth more (singly!) than my car, but I don't have the budget for it (only a part time gigging musician with a day job and a mortgage). Or indeed the space! Still, I'm very happy with what I use, it's a great improvement over a floor full of pedals both sonically and in terms of ease of use - trying to sing while simultaneously stepping on four or five pedals to change sounds wasn't fun!

 

 

I understand... I didn't always have my current big rig, and use many different setups at different times. Sometimes a combo and a pedal or two, sometimes a head and cab with a couple of pedals and a single rack processor, usually an Intellifex, sometimes a stereo rig, sometimes the Big Gun, but it's all about getting the results we want.

 

When I decided to dive head first off the tallest peak of sanity that I could find, by building my current monstrosity it was pure self-indulgence on my part to build my tone mecca, and truthfully, it's mainly for studio use, and for my personal inspiration. I did design it with the ability to be used as a real time Live rig to chameleon whatever my heart desired. I also designed it with the stuff I did because I got sick of feeling like I was always compromising something somewhere in my rig. (Wishing it could do this or that)

 

I do take pleasure in making due with simple gear and having guys come up looking perplexed, and asking how the hell I am getting the sounds I am, but it's more fun for me to play with the tones I hear in my head, and the ability to control the gear in real time, to do what I want, so I built the big rig.

[Zachman]

It must really suck to be in a band with you. Hell, it must suck to be in the same ROOM with you. I thought I could come hear to exchange some ideas . . . apparently I was wrong. Have fun ruling your little internet kingdom. I'm off to play guitar.

 

 

Are you mad?

 

Looks to me like you came in here to post pics of your gear, and get a standing ovation- to satisfy YOUR ego, then start posturing as though you are some guru of gear, and you happened to choose to get in a pissing contest with someone, who loves gear, has used the gear that you are using, has a pretty substantial grasp on what is available, how to run it, and who's personal preferences apparently vary from yours, and you are the one who lost his cool and started name calling, when statements YOU made were countered and disagreed with. How embarrassing for you.

 

I suppose IF your opinion of me was somehow relevant, I might care a bit, but then again... When someone wants to call me names, hoist up their antiquated gear as "just as good" as the gear that is clearly the leader in the industry- and has been for decades, and says that they can't hear an appreciable difference, then SORRY YOUR opinion is invalid, to me-- and now you know why.

 

I, as I get older- have a bullshit meter- and the sensitivity is set to 10, and when you showed up, the alarm bells went off. Man my intuition is good sometimes.

 

SO- as far as your opinion of me goes:

 

 

[Zachman]

 

I'm glad to see the one sided pissing competition has been resolved. I'm kind of lost as to where to go with my effects. I'm working on heading back all to rack. I intend to use a Mesa Quad and either a VHT 2/50/2 (what can I say I love EL34s) or the 2:95 it was designed to go with. I haven't been happy with my sound for sometime. The problem I have with the MPX-550 I'm using is that I can find a reverb I like but it's not quite there and as soon as I add a delay I lose algorithms therefore I lose my decent reverb. Not to mention the mix control is global making it very dificult to program. I'd like to add a volume and wah pedal again so I was thinking of removing my pedals from my rack and mounting them to a board with a Axess BS-2 before the wah and volume and GRX-4 with my whammy, chorus, phaser, and a overdrive.

 

 

are you running mono, stereo, W/D, or W/D/W?

 

Do you or have you considered running your MPX through a line mixer?