Is there any benefit to L/R panning when blending 2 amp blocks in parallel A/B paths but going out mono to a physical speaker cabinet?

[W7KEF]

I can’t seem to find an answer to this specific question anywhere online. Maybe that means it’s a dumb question but I’ll risk it. 
 

I'm not wanting to run stereo live, but I do like the sound of 2 different amp blocks blended in parallel paths on the HX Stomp XL, sent mono out into a physical power amp and single 4x12 cab on stage. 
 

Is there any point/benefit to panning the A/B path “Y-split and merge” hard left and right to each amp respectively? I’ve seen some guys panning the dual amps left and right but then essentially summing to mono before the final output, or going out stereo,  but no one posting anything on just leaving the amps panned to center but on parallel paths. This is making me think there may be a reason for doing one over the other that I’m not aware of. 
 

Does the HX Stomp XL prefer dual amp blocks to be handled a certain way for optimal sound/processing results or does it not really matter?
 

School me. Please.  
 

 

 

 

[silverhead]

On 9/24/2024 at 1:37 AM, W7KEF said:

…

Is there any point/benefit to panning the A/B path “Y-split and merge” hard left and right to each amp respectively? …

…

I think it depends on whether the signal at the split point is actually stereo or simply dual mono. If it’s stereo with different L/R components (e.g. a ping pong delay FX block immediately before the split) then the resulting blended mono output tone could be different than if the split signal was dual mono.

[W7KEF]

In my case, no stereo effects are being used prior to or after the split. This is purely a mono signal from start to finish where I want to blend the sound of 2 different amp blocks. 

[silverhead]

Then I think the only difference would be how you choose to pan at the Merge block. You could emphasize one or the other of the A/B paths in the mono output signal.

[W7KEF]

On 9/24/2024 at 6:30 AM, silverhead said:

Then I think the only difference would be how you choose to pan at the Merge block. You could emphasize one or the other of the A/B paths in the mono output signal.

Okay. Sounds like there’s no real reason to not just leave everything panned center in my application. Thanks for the info. 
 

A follow on, and please forgive my ignorance. How would panning one amp or the other at the merge block help emphasize one of the A/B paths? When I tried panning at the merge block initially, it just sounds like the signal gets quieter so it does affect the signal but I can’t tell whether there’s any benefit to it. If I wanted to emphasize one amp or another, would it not make sense to just adjust the channel volume/level of the amps themselves? 

[silverhead]

Yes, I think adjusting the amp levels directly would generally have the same effect as adjusting the mix in the merge block. However it’s still possible that adjusting an amp level could have negative effects on the tone (e.g. unwanted distortion/clipping at the input of a downstream FX block). Those would then be present in the final mono mix, whereas you could keep the amp level lower to avoid those effects and still emphasize one path over the other in the merge Pan control. This all relates to ‘gain staging’ and it can get complicated.

[W7KEF]

That brings me full circle to my initial “…optimal sound/processing…” question. 
 

Okay, I’ll try make this my last follow up question (thank you for your patience and help here). 
 

So if I'm understanding this correctly, it might be more beneficial for me to pan the amps at the split and merge points if I’m running mono effects after the merge point of the 2 amps to avoid potential gain stage clipping? I can see how this may assist in not overloading the input of whatever mono effect is downstream or the final output signal. As I mentioned, I did notice an audible drop in overall volume when initially panning hard left and right (almost like the amps weren’t fighting for the same space in the signal path, even though its ultimately a mono signal). I wasn’t hearing any clipping artifacts but then again, I wasn’t running any effects after the amp blocks at the time, but I may want to in future. Am I understanding that correctly? 

I wish Line 6 had some definitive information on how the HX unit best handles this type of signal path and how it effects gain staging. 

 

 

[silverhead]

Yes I think your understanding is correct. Now you’ll just need to experiment with the options and see what you like best.

 

Regarding definitive information, you are assuming that there’s a ‘best’ approach to this. There isn’t. What’s ‘best’ is whatever sounds best to you, including downstream overloading of FX if you like how it sounds. The sound of a good overdrive pedal is often desirable, even though by definition something is being ‘over’driven.

 

The only thing you really want to avoid is digital clipping which I don’t think sounds good to anybody anywhere.  And you’ll know it when you hear it. But I’m sure there’s someone who will disagree with that. “Nothin’ I likes better in me mix than a good whack of digital clipping!”

[W7KEF]

Point taken. Everything is subjective so I'm definitely speaking of “typical/normal/general best practice” terms here. 
 

I very much appreciate your time and the info. Digital modeling has always been a mix of blessing and curse all wound into one. On the upside… so many options. On the downside… so many options!! 
 

I’ve got a date with a rabbit hole tonight! 
 

Thanks!