Skip navigation
Up to Discussions in POD HD
3226 Views 38 Replies Latest reply: Nov 28, 2012 2:39 AM by aabicudo RSS
John_J Just Startin'
John_J
92 posts since
Oct 1, 2007
Currently Being Moderated

May 26, 2011 8:14 PM

Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

Hi, everyone!

 

I'm working on building my patches on a PODHD500. A patch I've made uses a single amp, with a 20ms digital delay on the right side of the stereo split for extra stereo width. I'm already conserving DSP by assigning EXP2 to my amp Channel Volume instead of using a Volume Pedal block.

The problem I face is getting a clean boost for solos. I tried placing the Boost Comp before the amps, but it only resulted in more gain, rather than more volume.
I tried placing the Boost Comp after the amps, but as the Boost Comp is a mono effect, it summed my signal to mono and I lost the stereo processing.

 

One solution which is possible, but not efficient is to use two Boost Comps, one on either side of the stereo split, after the amp and delay.

Something I've noticed is that it's not possible to place an effects block AFTER the amp block, but BEFORE the stereo split.

Is this true? Or did I miss something?

 

Thanks in advance!

  • Octo777 Iknowathingortwo
    Octo777
    851 posts since
    Feb 23, 2008
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2011 9:29 PM (in response to John_J)
    Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

    If all you are looking for is a volume increase, then set up 2 patches, one with your regular playing volume, and another solo patch at the higher volume.

     

    Cheers.

  • ozbadman Gear Head
    ozbadman
    1,474 posts since
    Apr 17, 2008
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2011 10:37 PM (in response to John_J)
    Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

    Put an effects loop as the last element in your chain, plug in a stereo patch cable send->receive in the effects loop (TRS to two monos I believe), and set the send/receive volumes to boost the signal. Assign it to a footswitch and you're good to go.

  • jjm35 Just Startin'
    jjm35
    21 posts since
    Apr 20, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 28, 2011 3:04 AM (in response to John_J)
    Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

    The best way would be to assigning two different values to a footswitch so we can switch between a little bit of more/less gain&volume in the amp that we have selected, and in that way, there is no need of any boost, EQ or nothing.

    The problem is that not possible on actual firmware (i think), but that will be a very easy thing to implement (the possibility of assign two values of some parameters at once to a FS)

    • dbun Just Startin'
      dbun
      64 posts since
      Jan 28, 2007
      Currently Being Moderated
      May 28, 2011 3:30 AM (in response to jjm35)
      Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

      would would be nice is the ability to assign the Output of the amp model to a footswitch and not just the expression pedal. The switch would toggle between the MIN and MAX values.


      What you could then do is assign the MIN value to your normal guitar volume and boost the MAX up a little bit for your clean boost. Stepping on a footswitch would just toggle between these two values.

    • toasterdude Just Startin'
      toasterdude
      745 posts since
      Oct 23, 2006
      Currently Being Moderated
      May 28, 2011 6:20 AM (in response to jjm35)
      Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

      jjm35 wrote:

       

      The best way would be to assigning two different values to a footswitch so we can switch between a little bit of more/less gain&volume in the amp that we have selected, and in that way, there is no need of any boost, EQ or nothing.

      The problem is that not possible on actual firmware (i think), but that will be a very easy thing to implement (the possibility of assign two values of some parameters at once to a FS)

      Have you been reading the Fractal forums? lol

      The soon to be released Axe II will have a similar feature. x/y settings.

      In most blocks you will be able to have 2 settings and switch between them. You could have a delay with 2 distinct settings for example.

      Set one to shorter delay and the other with longer delay time or more repeats. Assign x/y toggling to a FS and you can have 2 delay settings without using more DSP since there is only one Delay Block actually loaded.

       

      The same can be done for amps. Set your amp up how you like it for rythm and then make the y setting have a bit more volume, maybe a pinch more gain, boost the mids a touch or whatever you want and assign to FS. Again not using DSP resources. Great idea and it seems similar to what Line 6 does in the M series.

       

      It would be great if Line 6 steals/borrows some ideas from competitors as well as themselves.

      • jjm35 Just Startin'
        jjm35
        21 posts since
        Apr 20, 2006
        Currently Being Moderated
        May 28, 2011 6:26 AM (in response to toasterdude)
        Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

        Yeah, I have in the past a Roland VG-99 that already have this usefull feature. I miss that feature so much

      • Octo777 Iknowathingortwo
        Octo777
        851 posts since
        Feb 23, 2008
        Currently Being Moderated
        May 28, 2011 6:33 AM (in response to toasterdude)
        Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

        toasterdude wrote:

         

        jjm35 wrote:

         

        The best way would be to assigning two different values to a footswitch so we can switch between a little bit of more/less gain&volume in the amp that we have selected, and in that way, there is no need of any boost, EQ or nothing.

        The problem is that not possible on actual firmware (i think), but that will be a very easy thing to implement (the possibility of assign two values of some parameters at once to a FS)

        Have you been reading the Fractal forums? lol

        The soon to be released Axe II will have a similar feature. x/y settings.

        In most blocks you will be able to have 2 settings and switch between them. You could have a delay with 2 distinct settings for example.

        Set one to shorter delay and the other with longer delay time or more repeats. Assign x/y toggling to a FS and you can have 2 delay settings without using more DSP since there is only one Delay Block actually loaded.

         

        The same can be done for amps. Set your amp up how you like it for rythm and then make the y setting have a bit more volume, maybe a pinch more gain, boost the mids a touch or whatever you want and assign to FS. Again not using DSP resources. Great idea and it seems similar to what Line 6 does in the M series.

         

        It would be great if Line 6 steals/borrows some ideas from competitors as well as themselves.

         

        But all that is currently possible simply by using two patches. It equates to the same as potentially being able to set an FS to increase volume within the patch.

         

        Either way, you are still having to hit a footswitch. Implementing a Fooswitch to change these kind of elements within a patch seems like an unnecessary solution given that its already possible by setting up two patches to do just that.

         

        Unless I am overlooking something?

         

        The only thing that would be missing right now would be effect trails but I would love it/prefer it if they could make trails work across patchs, instead of just within them.

        • toasterdude Just Startin'
          toasterdude
          745 posts since
          Oct 23, 2006
          Currently Being Moderated
          May 28, 2011 6:54 AM (in response to Octo777)
          Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

          Octo777 wrote:

           

           

          But all that is currently possible simply by using two patches. It equates to the same as potentially being able to set an FS to increase volume within the patch.

           

          Either way, you are still having to hit a footswitch. Implementing a Fooswitch to change these kind of elements within a patch seems like an unnecessary solution given that its already possible by setting up two patches to do just that.

           

          Unless I am overlooking something?

           

          The only thing that would be missing right now would be effect trails but I would love it/prefer it if they could make trails work across patchs, instead of just within them.

          I am usually the guy that makes a new patch for everything. I never used stomps or boosts to get a lead sound.  However the x/y idea has mi interest peaked. Also the OP uses 4 patches clean to lead etc. Of course he can make 8 patches but if he wants to go from crunch to lead with a 3db boost he may have to change banks and then switch patches.

           

          In my case I work in banks of ten. Most times 1-6 are different rythm tones and 7-10 are for solos. Many times 7 and 8 are just patch 5 and 6 but louder for solos. 9 and 10  is where I might do delays or q filters to get a different sound. Heck I go so far as to make new patches for when I switch to neck pickup. I could never get a tone that I loved for bridge pickup to also sound great on neck pickup. It was always a compromise.

           

          If I have X/y capabilities I could have patch 1-6 all be rythm, and each one's y settings is a lead setting, which is more versatile than what I have now.

          Plus I now have 4 patches to do more effected lead patches.

           

          My reason for liking banks of 10 is that I don't play all that much and when me and some co workers get together to learn a few tunes to play at a company party, I never know what we will play. Having banks that are for Blues, Country, Funk, Latin, rock, hard rock, etc etc etc I just go to the bank that works for the tune we are doing and I have 10 patches to pick from rather than 4. Having that bank of 10 be even more flexible would be even better.

           

          Unfortunately I don't even have one bank of 10 ready on the Axe yet. My time with it has been limited and it is a brand new beast so I am just learning the ins and outs. Plus. . . I will likely get an Axe II so the idea of working on dozens of patches only to get a new box, doesn't make me all warm and fuzzy.

           

          heck I have not even downloaded 1.31 yet. I want to try it out and see if maybe when they add SLO, Matchless etc I could use HD500 as a more portable rig. I had given up on it as far as amp modeling because of DSP limitationas and lack of several of my go to amps as well as it sounding dark and muddy.  With the 3 day weekend I may have to DL and mess around with it!

          • Octo777 Iknowathingortwo
            Octo777
            851 posts since
            Feb 23, 2008
            Currently Being Moderated
            May 28, 2011 9:15 AM (in response to toasterdude)
            Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

            I dunno. I guess it depends on the individual and their playing style but in the grand scale of things but, one thing I am curious about is, is there really a need to have a boosted sound for every patch?

             

            Playing a Clean solo, then sure I can understand the need for a boosted volume at least, Crunch, I could maybe see the same thing.

             

            But wouldn't an overdriven boost easily be covered by a lead patch?.....and surely a lead patch is already set up to be significantly boosted in the first place? How much louder does it need to go? lol

             

            In my observation, having boosts on both the Overdrive and Lead setting seems like a bit of overkill and in theory you could save yourself 2 slots right there. But that is just my opinion. Each to their own etc.

            • toasterdude Just Startin'
              toasterdude
              745 posts since
              Oct 23, 2006
              Currently Being Moderated
              May 28, 2011 1:32 PM (in response to Octo777)
              Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

              Octo777 wrote:

               

              I dunno. I guess it depends on the individual and their playing style but in the grand scale of things but, one thing I am curious about is, is there really a need to have a boosted sound for every patch?

               

              Playing a Clean solo, then sure I can understand the need for a boosted volume at least, Crunch, I could maybe see the same thing.

               

              But wouldn't an overdriven boost easily be covered by a lead patch?.....and surely a lead patch is already set up to be significantly boosted in the first place? How much louder does it need to go? lol

               

              In my observation, having boosts on both the Overdrive and Lead setting seems like a bit of overkill and in theory you could save yourself 2 slots right there. But that is just my opinion. Each to their own etc.

              Why choose? With the X/y feature on the Axe II I doubt I would add a clean boost to lead patches, but maybe I can have x be bridge pickup and y be neck? Maybe I use the x/y to control dela instead.

               

              The point is there is a way to give players more options without taking up more DSP, so why would we not want that?

               

              I bet some guys set up their patches to work more like pedal boards. I bet some guys have more than 1 delay or drive, tand never have both delays or drives on at once. In current HD line and even Axe FX you would be using the DSP for both delays even though they were never on at once. The x/y idea would allow you to have both sounds but use half the DSP.. . . .how is that bad?

              • Octo777 Iknowathingortwo
                Octo777
                851 posts since
                Feb 23, 2008
                Currently Being Moderated
                May 28, 2011 1:54 PM (in response to toasterdude)
                Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

                toasterdude wrote:

                 

                Octo777 wrote:

                 

                I dunno. I guess it depends on the individual and their playing style but in the grand scale of things but, one thing I am curious about is, is there really a need to have a boosted sound for every patch?

                 

                Playing a Clean solo, then sure I can understand the need for a boosted volume at least, Crunch, I could maybe see the same thing.

                 

                But wouldn't an overdriven boost easily be covered by a lead patch?.....and surely a lead patch is already set up to be significantly boosted in the first place? How much louder does it need to go? lol

                 

                In my observation, having boosts on both the Overdrive and Lead setting seems like a bit of overkill and in theory you could save yourself 2 slots right there. But that is just my opinion. Each to their own etc.

                Why choose? With the X/y feature on the Axe II I doubt I would add a clean boost to lead patches, but maybe I can have x be bridge pickup and y be neck? Maybe I use the x/y to control dela instead.

                 

                The point is there is a way to give players more options without taking up more DSP, so why would we not want that?

                 

                I bet some guys set up their patches to work more like pedal boards. I bet some guys have more than 1 delay or drive, tand never have both delays or drives on at once. In current HD line and even Axe FX you would be using the DSP for both delays even though they were never on at once. The x/y idea would allow you to have both sounds but use half the DSP.. . . .how is that bad?

                 

                I'm not saying that any of that is bad.

                 

                My main point in all of this is, these things are basically already possible, without using any precious DSP, but simply by setting up several patches.

                 

                When the Pod HD has 512 patch slots, it's highly unlikely anyone is ever going to run out.

                 

                To complain that having to change banks mid song in order to access more patches is "inconvenient" is like looking a gift horse in the mouth given what the HD500 is capable of in the right here right now, and not based on what might be possible in any theoretical update.

                • toasterdude Just Startin'
                  toasterdude
                  745 posts since
                  Oct 23, 2006
                  Currently Being Moderated
                  May 28, 2011 2:18 PM (in response to Octo777)
                  Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

                  Octo777 wrote:

                   

                  options without taking up more DSP, so why would we not want that?

                   

                  I bet some guys set up their patches to work more like pedal boards. I bet some guys have more than 1 delay or drive, tand never have both delays or drives on at once. In current HD line and even Axe FX you would be using the DSP for both delays even though they were never on at once. The x/y idea would allow you to have both sounds but use half the DSP.. . . .how is that bad?

                   

                  I'm not saying that any of that is bad.

                   

                  My main point in all of this is, these things are basically already possible, without using any precious DSP, but simply by setting up several patches.

                   

                  When the Pod HD has 512 patch slots, it's highly unlikely anyone is ever going to run out.

                   

                  To complain that having to change banks mid song in order to access more patches is "inconvenient" is like looking a gift horse in the mouth given what the HD500 is capable of in the right here right now, and not based on what might be possible in any theoretical update.

                  If I can fit all I want in a bank of 10 rather than having to use 2 banks, I will. I try to access the 512 patches of HD500 with my midi controller but I can only access 64 unless I do a bank change command.

                   

                  I usually am the guy that makes a ton of patches but read about a cool new feature coming in a competing product that will improve on what I can "already" do. Line 6 already uses this concept on their M series and I think adding it to the HD 500 would make it a better product. Certainly better than sticking a cable in my FX loop. . . .

  • John_J Just Startin'
    John_J
    92 posts since
    Oct 1, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 28, 2011 4:50 AM (in response to John_J)
    Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

    Hey, guys! Thanks for all the replies! :-)

    I haven't tried assigning parameter values max and min to an FS yet, will play around with Edit later and see if I can cook something up.

    Does anyone know if the Effects Loop block eats DSP?

    I doubt it matters, though. Still takes up one block of processing, but it's no biggie compared to losing two blocks of processing using 2 EQs or 2 Boost Comps just to take a solo!

    • Octo777 Iknowathingortwo
      Octo777
      851 posts since
      Feb 23, 2008
      Currently Being Moderated
      May 28, 2011 5:22 AM (in response to John_J)
      Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

      John_J wrote:

       

      Hey, guys! Thanks for all the replies! :-)

      I haven't tried assigning parameter values max and min to an FS yet, will play around with Edit later and see if I can cook something up.

      Does anyone know if the Effects Loop block eats DSP?

      I doubt it matters, though. Still takes up one block of processing, but it's no biggie compared to losing two blocks of processing using 2 EQs or 2 Boost Comps just to take a solo!

      Don't bother trying to assign a paremeter value to an FS. It's not possible.

       

      I'm just guessing while using a bit of common sense, but I doubt the FX Loop uses much if any DSP at all since it's just an I/O option being implemented and it's not actually working to process any sounds as such.

  • jeffwatt Just Startin'
    jeffwatt
    31 posts since
    Jan 29, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 28, 2011 9:10 AM (in response to John_J)
    Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

    Hey John,

     

    I've had great success using the "insert cable in the FX Loop" method of achieving a clean boost.

     

    That said, have you considered using the volume pedal for this? You've already got it set up in your patches... set the "heel-down" position (min) to your rhythm volume and the "toe-down" position (max) to your solo/lead volume. I've found this to be a good solution for those who don't mind using their guitar's volume knob for volume swells and muting the guitar signal, PLUS you don't have to use any FX blocks.

     

    Regards,

    Jeff

    • John_J Just Startin'
      John_J
      92 posts since
      Oct 1, 2007
      Currently Being Moderated
      May 29, 2011 10:08 AM (in response to jeffwatt)
      Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

      Hi, Jeff! Great to hear the Cable / FX Loop method is working out! :-) I think it's my favourite (thereotically speaking) approach for now.

      The only problem with using the Volume Pedal as a Boost is then whenever I turn my Wah on, I'm obliged to play a solo, hehe.

      Thanks for the input, though!

      I like how this discussion is growing and hopefully brings benefit to PODHD500 users out there!

      • litesnsirens Iknowathingortwo
        litesnsirens
        649 posts since
        Mar 20, 2010
        Currently Being Moderated
        May 29, 2011 11:47 AM (in response to John_J)
        Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

        I use the FX loop trick for solo boosts.   I didn't make a special cable, I just used a short mono patch cable.  I just raise the level on the return and assign it to a FS. It works perfectly.  I also use it for some crunch boosts if I just want the same sound as my rhythm crunch but louder.   It adds a lot of options and it doesn't seem to drain and CPU.

        • Nick_Mattocks Best of the Best
          Nick_Mattocks
          9,065 posts since
          Mar 26, 2007
          Currently Being Moderated
          May 29, 2011 12:23 PM (in response to litesnsirens)
          Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

          litesnsirens wrote:

           

          I use the FX loop trick for solo boosts.   I didn't make a special cable, I just used a short mono patch cable.  I just raise the level on the return and assign it to a FS. It works perfectly.  I also use it for some crunch boosts if I just want the same sound as my rhythm crunch but louder.   It adds a lot of options and it doesn't seem to drain and CPU.

           

          That would have been fine pre-Firmware 1.31 as there was a bug whereby the FX Send only sent a summed mono feed before that, and may still be fine if any FX chain pre-the HD500's FX loop is kept mono, but the FX Send bug has now been fixed and ideally you should use a TRS to two mono jack cables for the FX Loop boost trick  - or a TRS plug with the tip and ring connections linked (plugged into the FX Send socket) to a mono plug fed to the Left (mono) Return socket

           

          Your way will still work but you will only send the Left channel from the FX Send socket

           

          Nick

          • litesnsirens Iknowathingortwo
            litesnsirens
            649 posts since
            Mar 20, 2010
            Currently Being Moderated
            May 29, 2011 2:37 PM (in response to Nick_Mattocks)
            Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?t

            I never run stereo, which is probably why this method still appears to work for me.  That said note taken.  I run direct into my Bose L1 PA system which is a mono system by design so I don't employ the use of stereo effects.   So to follow up, although this is still working for me, is there something I should do with the panning to improve it even more? Or is the fact that I don't use stereo effects make any further adjustments moot.

            • Nick_Mattocks Best of the Best
              Nick_Mattocks
              9,065 posts since
              Mar 26, 2007
              Currently Being Moderated
              May 29, 2011 3:09 PM (in response to litesnsirens)
              Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?t

              litesnsirens wrote:

               

              I never run stereo, which is probably why this method still appears to work for me.  That said note taken.  I run direct into my Bose L1 PA system which is a mono system by design so I don't employ the use of stereo effects.   So to follow up, although this is still working for me, is there something I should do with the panning to improve it even more? Or is the fact that I don't use stereo effects make any further adjustments moot.

               

               

              I guess it depends how you connect to your Bose L1 - ie with  a single 1/4" out from your HD500 or by XLR.  A single 1/4" out will sum anything that might be at all stereo to mono - job done, whereas the XLR outputs maintain their position in a stereo image even if you are only using one, so you probably should pan everything you're going to use with the Bose system to centre in the mixer block if using XLR.  As I'm sure you are aware, some FX are stereo and some are just plain mono.  There's nothing stopping you say using a ping-pong delay which is obviously stereo, but of course you would only get the ping or the pong - not both if the panning settings were not centred when using XLR.

               

              Bottom line: if what you do now sounds good, then there's really no need to upset the apple cart by changing things too much

              • lindsayward Just Startin'
                lindsayward
                156 posts since
                Mar 7, 2007
                Currently Being Moderated
                May 30, 2011 4:54 AM (in response to Nick_Mattocks)
                Re: FX Loop vs Studio EQ for volume boost

                Hi. I have a question, but I'll start with an answer.

                 

                - The FX Loop definitely uses less DSP than a Studio EQ

                 

                Anecdotally, anyway. I set up a patch with a few delays and reverbs, and with the FX Loop block I could have one more reverb than if I used a Studio EQ in place of the FX Loop.

                 

                I have been using the Studio EQ with the HI and LOW gain at 0db and the overall Gain on +5db as my volume boost.

                I just tried using the FX Loop for the same thing and it is very similar. I only have a mono cable to test it with, but I run everything mono anyway (panned centred, sent out the XLR to PA, although I'm using headphones for this testing).

                I noticed that the FX Loop introduces more noise to the signal than the Studio EQ.

                 

                I have been running my EQ boost at the end of the signal chain as I thought that would be the cleanest (ince it only boosts the final signal rather than pushing another stomp or the amp harder), but it's the opposite .

                In my testing just now, I found when I put it at the end, I get more breakup than when it's at the beginning.

                The FX Loop at the end changes my sound a lot, but at the beginning it doesn't alter the sound.

                - Can someone explain that to me?

                - Other than DSP (and noise, in my experience) is there any reason one of these would be better than the other?

                Thanks.

                • Nick_Mattocks Best of the Best
                  Nick_Mattocks
                  9,065 posts since
                  Mar 26, 2007
                  Currently Being Moderated
                  May 30, 2011 6:08 AM (in response to lindsayward)
                  Re: FX Loop vs Studio EQ for volume boost

                  lindsayward wrote:

                   

                  Hi. I have a question, but I'll start with an answer.

                   

                  - The FX Loop definitely uses less DSP than a Studio EQ

                   

                  Anecdotally, anyway. I set up a patch with a few delays and reverbs, and with the FX Loop block I could have one more reverb than if I used a Studio EQ in place of the FX Loop.

                   

                  I have been using the Studio EQ with the HI and LOW gain at 0db and the overall Gain on +5db as my volume boost.

                  I just tried using the FX Loop for the same thing and it is very similar. I only have a mono cable to test it with, but I run everything mono (panned centred, sent out the XLR to PA) anyway.

                  I noticed that the FX Loop introduces more noise to the signal than the Studio EQ.

                   

                  I have been running my EQ boost at the end of the signal chain as I thought that would be the cleanest (ince it only boosts the final signal rather than pushing another stomp or the amp harder), but it's the opposite .

                  In my testing just now, I found when I put it at the end, I get more breakup than when it's at the beginning.

                  The FX Loop at the end changes my sound a lot, but at the beginning it doesn't alter the sound.

                  - Can someone explain that to me?

                  - Other than DSP (and noise, in my experience) is there any reason one of these would be better than the other?

                  Thanks.

                   

                  You'll notice that placing most FX pre amp block (such as delay or modulation) the effect is less pronounced than placing the same effect post amp block.   The amp model will introduce some limiting and compression, with the effect before the amp model so you might experience less noise.

                   

                  The FX Loop trick shouldn't introduce more noise when it's positioned post amp block - in fact I would have thought it would have amplified more noise when positioned pre amp block; and neither should it change the character of your tone really - it should just boost cleanly

                  • Dbourget Just Startin'
                    Dbourget
                    234 posts since
                    Feb 9, 2008
                    Currently Being Moderated
                    May 30, 2011 6:34 AM (in response to Nick_Mattocks)
                    Re: FX Loop vs Studio EQ for volume boost

                    I'm having a hard time understanding this thread. I've always used a volume pedal to control my volume whether I'm using a processor or stomp boxes. Wouldn't that take care of your problem? Whenever I want more volume for whatever reason I just step on my volume pedal.

                     

                    Am I missing something here?

                     

                    Dan

                • John_J Just Startin'
                  John_J
                  92 posts since
                  Oct 1, 2007
                  Currently Being Moderated
                  May 30, 2011 7:05 AM (in response to lindsayward)
                  Re: FX Loop vs Studio EQ for volume boost

                  lindsayward wrote:

                   

                  Hi. I have a question, but I'll start with an answer.

                   

                  - The FX Loop definitely uses less DSP than a Studio EQ

                   

                  Anecdotally, anyway. I set up a patch with a few delays and reverbs, and with the FX Loop block I could have one more reverb than if I used a Studio EQ in place of the FX Loop.

                   

                  I have been using the Studio EQ with the HI and LOW gain at 0db and the overall Gain on +5db as my volume boost.

                  I just tried using the FX Loop for the same thing and it is very similar. I only have a mono cable to test it with, but I run everything mono anyway (panned centred, sent out the XLR to PA, although I'm using headphones for this testing).

                  I noticed that the FX Loop introduces more noise to the signal than the Studio EQ.

                   

                  I have been running my EQ boost at the end of the signal chain as I thought that would be the cleanest (ince it only boosts the final signal rather than pushing another stomp or the amp harder), but it's the opposite .

                  In my testing just now, I found when I put it at the end, I get more breakup than when it's at the beginning.

                  The FX Loop at the end changes my sound a lot, but at the beginning it doesn't alter the sound.

                  - Can someone explain that to me?

                  - Other than DSP (and noise, in my experience) is there any reason one of these would be better than the other?

                  Thanks.


                  Hi, everyone!

                  I've found Lindsay's solution (unknowingly?) to be the best!

                  He uses an EQ Boost method with the Studio EQ.

                  Prior to his post, I was unaware that the EQ blocks are stereo!

                  As opposed to the Boost Comp which is mono (whereby I would need two Boost Comps on each sides of the parallel split thus consuming two blocks), an EQ block can be placed at the very end of the signal chain for solo boosts. Also, as opposed to the FX Chain method, the EQ boost does not require external hardware (the stereo split cable), and does not involve the extra A/D D/A losses and signal losses (however slight) of the cable. I tried the EQ Boost method on my patches and it works fine without consuming too much DSP (I can still fill up all 8 blocks granted I don't load really heavy FX).

                   

                  Several points to note:

                   

                  1. I find the Studio EQ to be the best choice at it sounds most transparent at it's default settings, and more importantly the overall Gain is in terms of dB rather than percentage.

                   

                  2. I use the Studio EQ at the very end of the chain just like Lindsay as it boosts the overall volume without driving any of the effects blocks harder than usual.

                   

                  3. I'm using the Studio EQ with the Gain set to 9dB for solos now, Lindsay uses 5dB. Use whichever value works best for you and enables you to cut through the mix without being too loud!

              • litesnsirens Iknowathingortwo
                litesnsirens
                649 posts since
                Mar 20, 2010
                Currently Being Moderated
                May 30, 2011 4:17 AM (in response to Nick_Mattocks)
                Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?t

                I've been using the 1/4" output on the HD500, but I must admit I have been toying with the idea of switching to XLR.  I mount the T1 Tonematch (the small Bose mixer) on my mic stand so a short 6 foot cable would be all I need to connect the HD500 to the Bose.  I could go either way 1/4" or XLR but was thinking of switching to XLR.  I will be sure to pay special attention to the pan settings in my patches.  I think it may be helpful, as it would allow me to use XLR's to go to the Bose from the L output and send the exact same signal to a larger PA for outdoor gigs.  Thanks for the help.

                • Nick_Mattocks Best of the Best
                  Nick_Mattocks
                  9,065 posts since
                  Mar 26, 2007
                  Currently Being Moderated
                  May 30, 2011 4:27 AM (in response to litesnsirens)
                  Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?t

                  litesnsirens wrote:

                   

                  I've been using the 1/4" output on the HD500, but I must admit I have been toying with the idea of switching to XLR.  I mount the T1 Tonematch (the small Bose mixer) on my mic stand so a short 6 foot cable would be all I need to connect the HD500 to the Bose.  I could go either way 1/4" or XLR but was thinking of switching to XLR.  I will be sure to pay special attention to the pan settings in my patches.  I think it may be helpful, as it would allow me to use XLR's to go to the Bose from the L output and send the exact same signal to a larger PA for outdoor gigs.  Thanks for the help.

                   

                  To be perfectly honest, if the cable from your HD500 to Bose system is short - ie standard instrument cable length, I'd stick with that as you won't lose too much in terms of top end and you have worked out your levels on the Bose to match, but the XLR signal level is lower so you'd have to do a bit of level matching.  If you are using long cable runs (which given you have a Bose L1 I don't think you'll be doing), then the better bet is to use a balanced XLR cable - but I know you know this already from your previous posts

                   

                  Nick

  • Pezza Just Startin'
    Pezza
    75 posts since
    Jun 18, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 30, 2011 7:44 AM (in response to John_J)
    Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

    I get a transparent (stereo) boost by toggling the volume pedal (post amp). Just assign the vol pedal to a FS and set the maximum volume to 80% (for example). You don't have to use the volume pedal, but when you turn it OFF you go from 80% to 100% volume. It does use an fx block but it's low DSP, transparent and stereo. I works perfectly for me.

  • aabicudo Just Startin'
    aabicudo
    11 posts since
    Jan 6, 2012
    Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 28, 2012 2:39 AM (in response to John_J)
    Re: Best Way To Implement Clean Boost for Solos in Stereo Chain while saving DSP?

    I would like to hear from Line 6 what's the "official" way of doing this volume boost keeping the sound quality.

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Incoming Links

Bookmarked By (0)

Legend

  • Correct Answers - 5 points
  • Helpful Answers - 3 points