Stereo Effecting

[theAeronought]

I've had an idea. I was thinking about wet-dry rigs and how it seems like it would be simple enough to get a cable-splitter, split your guitar's signal into to and run that into two seperate amps. This leads me to my first question: After you've split your signal and run one half through your pedals and one half around them, could you not simply plug the two into dual inputs on a single amplifier? The effect would end up mono instead of stereo, but you'd get basically the same sound, right?

Now my second question: As long as you've split your signal, could you add some different effects in your second half? For example, maybe you've got two fuzz pedals (a cleaner, transparent fuzz and a muff clone), and you want to use both of them, but not together, so that you can have one more in the background and one more in the foreground. And maybe you don't want reverb on your fuzzy half, just on the cleaner half, but you do want a phaser on the fuzzy half.

Now, after all that, you'd probably have to plug the two signals into separate amps. But what would happen if you just summed it up at the end with a backwards splitter and put it in the one amp? Would it be too much?

These are wild and crazy ideas. If you tell me it's impossible, I'll probably do it anyway. Give me your thoughts!

 

[ericmeyer4]

Re: Stereo Effecting

It can be possible depending on your gear, but it won't sound exactly like having a stereo rig. It will be like the regular effect, but less of it. YMMV on if it sounds good or not.

The idea isn't that crazy though. Voodoo Labs did something similar in their Sparkle Drive. Splits the signal between dirty and clean and you can blend between them.


Edit: you may get some ground loop hum with a Y cable. With the extra cable you are adding capacitance and it could also kill your high end. Typically with splitting you are better served using some type of splitter box.

 

[theAeronought]

Stereo Effecting

Edit: you may get some ground loop hum with a Y cable. With the extra cable you are adding capacitance and it could also kill your high end. Typically with splitting you are better served using some type of splitter box.

I heard about a splitter box very minutes after posting this. I was doing a bit of research on the kinds of effects Dan Auerbach uses, and his rig includes a Lehle P-Split. How does it work and what does it do?

Furthermore, is there a way to get/make a functional splitter box that isn't half as costly?

 

[ericmeyer4]

Re: Stereo Effecting

I heard about a splitter box very minutes after posting this. I was doing a bit of research on the kinds of effects Dan Auerbach uses, and his rig includes a Lehle P-Split. How does it work and what does it do?

Splitter are essentially Y cables in box form. The benefit is that they can remove ground loop hum and keep your signal from degrading.

Furthermore, is there a way to get/make a functional splitter box that isn't half as costly?

Yes, you could wire 1 input jacks to 2 output jacks, but this would be the same as a Y cable and the cheapest option. Typically, the more you spend the more features and fidelity you will get. Some passive units will have resistors or a transformer to help control ground loops. Active units can help prevent signal loss.

What is your ultimate goal? What gear do you currently have? What is your budget?

 

[uOpt]

Re: Stereo Effecting

You can't really do this all passive, because then the impedance of the input stages is off and might influence each other. Cable capacitance is also an issue (which you can fix by keeping one side of the Y short). Might not matter much if both amps are 1 Mohm exactly but in practice it probably will.

I start such a chain by using one of the ART tube 19" preamps as the first stage and then go to the various things I want to drive.

I usually don't want to drive multiple amps, but I like to record the guitar with as many different pickup points as I can get my claws on:
- dry (lcean tube preamp only)
- after amp but before speaker simulator
- then I split into a red box and a palmer speaker simulator

for a total of 4 points. Works well. Just be prepared to lift a ground here and there.

 

[Little Pigbacon]

Re: Stereo Effecting

Be aware that after you've derived two separate signals and processed them independently, you have to consider how their phases are going to line up. A bad phase situation can have the two signals nearly cancelling each other out, or leaving you with the difference between them. The scenario where you send the signals to separate amps is a lot more forgiving, since you're combining them acoustically.

 

[theAeronought]

Stereo Effecting

What is your ultimate goal? What gear do you currently have? What is your budget?

Thanks for your idea with the splitter box. I think I'm going to do it. The gear I currently have is pretty small and insignificant. I have three relatively inexpensive guitars, two relatively inexpensive fuzz pedals, and one little Marshall mini amp. The thing that I really need to do first is upgrade my amp (another thread somewhere in the Amplifier Central board will tell you that I'm seriously interested in that Fender Hot Rod Deluxe), but after that, I'm interested in getting a couple more pedals and a couple more guitars. I like old crappy stuff on that end - I'd like to have a good quality amp, but I want everything else to sound like a garage band.

Now, 'Bacon brought up a good point on phase, which would definitely apply if you were to sum up the two signals into one input. But what if (as on a HRD, as it happens) your amp has two inputs? In this case, you're still keeping the signals separate, just putting them through the same speaker(s), am I right? Would that work similarly to putting the signals through separate amps? Much as I'd like to be rich enough to buy two amps for my one guitar, I just don't have that kind of money, probably never will.

 

[ericmeyer4]

Re: Stereo Effecting

Be aware that after you've derived two separate signals and processed them independently, you have to consider how their phases are going to line up. A bad phase situation can have the two signals nearly cancelling each other out, or leaving you with the difference between them. The scenario where you send the signals to separate amps is a lot more forgiving, since you're combining them acoustically.

Good call. I totally forgot about phasing issues.

Now, 'Bacon brought up a good point on phase, which would definitely apply if you were to sum up the two signals into one input. But what if (as on a HRD, as it happens) your amp has two inputs? In this case, you're still keeping the signals separate, just putting them through the same speaker(s), am I right? Would that work similarly to putting the signals through separate amps? Much as I'd like to be rich enough to buy two amps for my one guitar, I just don't have that kind of money, probably never will.

No, they are still being summed to one mono signal path. Doing this you could end up with phase issues. If you had a stereo amp, like the Roland JC series, you could utilize both inputs and sending each their own signal. Stereo amps are two separate amps and speakers housed in a single cabinet.

 

[Mincer]

Re: Stereo Effecting

Steve Morse sort of does this with an extra amp, a splitter, volume pedals so he can add in as much effect as he needs. You can sort of do this with something like the Vapor Trail Analog Delay, as it has a separate jack for the echoes only- you can send them to a separate source. You at least need a splitter box and some effect to give the stereo image. A Y cable won't work.

 

[theAeronought]

Re: Stereo Effecting

If you had a stereo amp, like the Roland JC series, you could utilize both inputs and sending each their own signal. Stereo amps are two separate amps and speakers housed in a single cabinet.

OH MY GOD, I'M SO GLAD YOU POINTED ME TO STEREO AMPS. I was going to upgrade to a Fender, but now I think not (somebody please talk me down - I'm sure a Fender has much better sound than a Roland). Do you know of any others besides Roland that make stereo amps?

 

[ericmeyer4]

Re: Stereo Effecting

OH MY GOD, I'M SO GLAD YOU POINTED ME TO STEREO AMPS. I was going to upgrade to a Fender, but now I think not (somebody please talk me down - I'm sure a Fender has much better sound than a Roland). Do you know of any others besides Roland that make stereo amps?

Google will be your friend on this one. I think Tech 21 has a stereo powered cabinet that would be like having a power amp and speakers in one unit. You would need to supply your power preamp sections.

Most people with stereo setups use multiple amps.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Stereo Effecting

Be aware that after you've derived two separate signals and processed them independently, you have to consider how their phases are going to line up. A bad phase situation can have the two signals nearly cancelling each other out, or leaving you with the difference between them. The scenario where you send the signals to separate amps is a lot more forgiving, since you're combining them acoustically.

It's an excellent point. If you have two natural amps running in a room, or send the two signals to the two different speakers of a stereo monitoring or PA system things are fine - because the delay from the low speed of sound "messes up" the phase anyway. If you were to munch them together electronically you can get "perfect" cancellations which you don't want.

If you want to use both amp's signals on a recording, a recording not done via microphone, I would funnel the whole thing through a room processor/reverb to get the same effect.

Don't forget that you can, by accident, build up things that sound fine to you on stereo speakers but are very odd in headphones, or die a flaming death when somebody listens to them in mono for whatever reason.

 

[ericmeyer4]

Re: Stereo Effecting

It's an excellent point. If you have two natural amps running in a room, or send the two signals to the two different speakers of a stereo monitoring or PA system things are fine - because the delay from the low speed of sound "messes up" the phase anyway. If you were to munch them together electronically you can get "perfect" cancellations which you don't want.

If you want to use both amp's signals on a recording, a recording not done via microphone, I would funnel the whole thing through a room processor/reverb to get the same effect.

Don't forget that you can, by accident, build up things that sound fine to you on stereo speakers but are very odd in headphones, or die a flaming death when somebody listens to them in mono for whatever reason.

+1. Moving from mono to stereo can get tricky and expensive using traditional effect pedals and amps. The simplest way to do it is a box to split the signal then fed into two amp.

Another way to do it is with modelers and powered speakers or a power amp/cab setup. Many modelers will let you have dedicated stereo paths and a lot of flexibility in combining effects. Plus if you want to have a stereo path that gets summed to a mono output typically you can do that in a modeler and keep from running into the previously mentioned issues.

What will you mainly be using this for? Are you planing on playing for yourself in your garage, with a band, recording?

 

[theAeronought]

Re: Stereo Effecting

What will you mainly be using this for? Are you planing on playing for yourself in your garage, with a band, recording?

Someday, hopefully all three. Right now though, I'm just building up a store of knowledge that I can do whatever I want with when I have the funds.

Take a look at this:

This "Joiner" piece would, in theory, give you loads of versatility with stereo setups. The Balance on the Joiner would let you switch between loop 1 and loop 2, or a custom blend of the two. My partner in crime also recommended using a sweep pedal for the pan, which would be REALLY cool.

 

[devastone]

Re: Stereo Effecting

My <$0.02 on this, seems like a lot of trouble for minimal no real gain. Stereo is cool if you have separated cabinets where you can get a real stereo "feel", but out of one cabinet you probably won't even notice that the effects are stereo. Mixing it into a mono amp, definitely more trouble than it's worth (not to mention the potential phase and impedance issues as have been noted). Of course, YMMV.

 

[ehdwuld]

Re: Stereo Effecting

I have a pair of sansamp type pedals
One a Fenderish thing
One is a Marshallish thing

I use a Morley ABY switch to send a guitar signal to either of these or both
These pedals then feed into a stereo reverb
Then into separate powered PA speakers
When playing just one
the reverb washes over the other speaker

When playing both it sounds huge
I have tried delay on one side and not the other
And some distortions on either one
The distortion overwhelms the clean channel always

 

[PFDarkside]

Re: Stereo Effecting

I find Stereo to be really fun playing in my house and murderously difficult playing with a band.

It almost sound like you are looking for a mix control more than a stereo setup (as you describe wet/dry). Maybe something like the Boss LS-2 would let you mix two chains of effects, keep them in phase and buffered and deliver them to your mono amp.

One other thing I probably shouldn't tell you.... The big pros that use these types of rigs use Wet/Dry/Wet frequently. Dry signal up the middle with stereo ambience left and right.

 

[Mincer]

Re: Stereo Effecting

Actually, you could accomplish this by using a good stereo effects/amp modeller like a Fractal AX8, and go direct to the PA (I do this). I still think stereo is difficult live, as you kinda have to sit in the middle of the room to hear it well. But if you were going to spend money on a JC-120 and all those cables and routers, you might get something that is more elegant and easier to carry.