banner

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Running effects AFTER the mic'd signal?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Running effects AFTER the mic'd signal?

    Anyone have experience with running some effects after your mic on the guitar cab? Like going from your sm-57 to a chorus then the board? I know standard guitar pedals don't usually work well, but is there a unit I can use to put a bit of chorus on my mic'd signal incase the board at the venue doesn't have on board effects?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Running effects AFTER the mic'd signal?

    tc helicon makes numerous fx units for voice/xlr .

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Running effects AFTER the mic'd signal?

      If you're running FX after the mic'd signal in order to get clean, clear delays, reverb, modulation (chorus falls into that category), you may want to consider slaving.

      While slaving is before the mic, it works fantastic if your goal is as stated above (clean, clear FX). And of course, you'd have full control over your FX.

      A cheap method to slaving is to substitute a 2nd full-sized amp with a portable power amp such as the EHX .44 Caliber (stomp box sized 44 watts).

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Running effects AFTER the mic'd signal?

        If the point is to add the effect of the speaker and cabinet into the tone before processing, and if want to control the signal going to the sound man, it seems like you'd have to have another good mixer with quality preamps and effects sends and returns with an XLR out to the house. Really I am clueless. It just seems like that would work and I've wanted to try it but have never been able to find a mixer with only those few capabilities. Really, I'd want a mixer with only two channels so I could blend two amps and have the option to add post amp effects to either or both.
        I am so close to retirement that I could play in a band full time. All I have to do is figure out what to use instead of money, improve my playing, learn some songs, and find some other musicians more talented than me who will do exactly as they're told. .

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Running effects AFTER the mic'd signal?

          I've done the wet dry setup, sounds great, but too much to setup on some of the local stages. I have had success using a speaker sim into a fx unit, but mics are trickiet


          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
          Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Running effects AFTER the mic'd signal?

            I think you are asking for trouble. Every live venue is different and you never know how much time it will take to set up, how it will sound with the house system and if it will work with the house system Once you start playing around with funky setups you will piss off the house guy in most cases. I would suggest if you want Chorus then put it in your signal chain. You want your live setup to be as simple as possible.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Running effects AFTER the mic'd signal?

              IN the studio for sure. Also i tried something last year that was cool too, i ran a mic off my main (non reverb) amp thru a DI that changed the impedance to instrument level, then into the front of my twin reverb. It was a pretty awesome live sound, the touch sensetivity on my main amp combined with huge spread and reverb.

              BUt i agree with the guys above mainly because hauling two amps is PITA at gigs, and noone will notice the difference but you. ALso, sound engineers generally prefer simple and fast.

              Check out Larry Carltons rig. He goes dry into his dumble then a mic sends his signal thru all his fx processors and to the FOH as well as his own PA system for monitoring.
              "Technique is really the elimination of the unneccessary ... it is a constant effort to avoid any personal impediment or obstacle to acheive the smooth flow of energy and intent"
              Yehudi Menuhin

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Running effects AFTER the mic'd signal?

                Here's a very simple setup I use all the time when playing out.

                guitar
                |
                tube amp (your main amp)
                [speaker out 1] -> dummy load (hotplate set to load for ex)
                [speaker out 2] -> line out box (converts to line level signal)
                |
                FX (chorus, delay, reverb, etc)
                |
                EHX .44 Magnum power amp (stompbox sized & fits on pedalboard easily)
                |
                speaker cab

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Running effects AFTER the mic'd signal?

                  redundant post...gibson175 has it covered
                  Last edited by guitfiddle; 03-05-2015, 08:39 PM.
                  - Tom

                  Originally posted by Frankly
                  Some people make the wine. Some people drink the wine. And some people sniff the cork and wonder what might have been.
                  The Eagle never lost so much time as when he submitted to learn of the Crow.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Running effects AFTER the mic'd signal?

                    It depends if you want the cabs tone added to the effect. As effects often add (or take away if filter effects) some frequencies to the signal having them after the mic makes them more transparent. For example a bright plate reverb will have a lot more sizzle when after the mic then in the FX Loop cos the high end created in the plate algoritm isnt reduced by the cabs tonal effect. I like reverb delay and sometimes chorus (depending on the effect your after) after the cab but other modulation is often too seperate sounding from the amp tone if post mic. Reverb is easy for a sound engineer to add post and so is delay most often, sometimes EQ and compression is an option especially on newer digital desks. This is all assuming the majority of signal for the audience is throught the FOH not your speaker cab which is quite common these days with better PAs and smaller amps. That said do this all at desk level having on stage effects you turn on and off going through the PA can be a nightmare, get a good sound engineer with rack gear who knows your songs, if you arent at a level to do that then keep it before the amp on a pedalboard.
                    Last edited by James Rock; 03-15-2015, 08:43 AM.
                    Gondola Kid
                    Bandcamp
                    Facebook
                    JimijaymesGuitarist
                    Youtube

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Running effects AFTER the mic'd signal?

                      I guess you will need a mic preamp in order to drive the fx processor. Or maybe you could just insert your processor on the mixer track (same thing really). Perhaps that solves the "trickier" bit.

                      Comment

                      Previous template Next
                      Working...
                      X