Would this work?

stuey222

New member
Could I place an effects unit that usually goes in the effects loop between the speaker out and the speaker cab? Would this blow the output transformer or harm the amp or speakers in any way?
 
Re: Would this work?

If it's a tube amp, you could fry both the amp and effects unit. The effects unit is not designed to take the kind of voltage that a power stage puts out, and the amp is not designed to drive the type of load an effects unit represents.
 
Re: Would this work?

Then how does Eddie Van Halen do it? I heard he places his effects after the tube amp, but before the power amp and speakers.
 
Re: Would this work?

You'll fry the effects unit in a flash (literally).

In the old days, when Eddie used the Marshall Super Lead, his amp fed a dummy load that dropped the output voltage of the amp to a line level signal. That signal then fed the effects and then to an EQ, then poweramps and speakers.
 
Re: Would this work?

ya Eddie's real early stage set up had the flanger, phaser, delays all before the amp i believe... later on he used the heads as preamps basicly, run the signal to the FX's, then to a power amp and to the cabs.... then later he started to add stereo/mono type set ups.... center cab mono with the 2 outside cabs in stereo.... plus he used a harmonizer to DETUNE the stereo signal very slightly for a deaper space-ish tone....

in the studio in the early days i believe it was just the famous Marshall in a sound booth for his basic sound... He did use many amps in the studio, not just the one Marshall.... he may of used his phaser and flangers before the amp.... but the reverb and delay heard on most of the tracks were done after the recording was done during mixing

Ed had some of the best techs working for him.... if he wanted something done there was a ton of guys and companies tripping over themselves to get it done for him...

I could not figure out how Eric Johnson was using delays and Chorus's with his Deluxe Reverbs when there was no FX loops... turns out he was using the microphones in front of the amps to a small mixer... then was adding the fx's in the mixer before it went to the PA
 
Last edited:
Re: Would this work?

Eddie used a speaker sim in the 90's, set up the same way as the dummy load with the Marshall. Outboard power amps hit the 5150 cabs. Even though there's an effects loop in the amp, he didn't use it. Also, there's always one head in the live setup that feeds to Alex directly, no effects, just the dry signal.

But, since at least the first major tour in '78, he ran through a dummy load to put the effects after the amp.

I've got one of the guitar mags from the 90's that has his full rig setup in there during the For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge tour. The Balance tour was pretty much the same.
 
Re: Would this work?

so wait, you're saying eddie went:

Amp head (pre and power)-->dummie load--->effects-->different power Amp-->Speaker?!?!?!?!?!?
 
Re: Would this work?

so wait, you're saying eddie went:

Amp head (pre and power)-->dummie load--->effects-->different power Amp-->Speaker?!?!?!?!?!?

that's the part i don't get either.... i figured always they split the signal at the Preamp and went out to FX's then into more power amps.... the main amp that is used for the preamp is sent to a cab, or so i was lead to believe... I never heard of dummy loads back in 1982....
 
Last edited:
Re: Would this work?

so wait, you're saying eddie went:

Amp head (pre and power)-->dummie load--->effects-->different power Amp-->Speaker?!?!?!?!?!?

Yep. That's exactly it. His amp back then (the Marshall) didn't have a pre out or anything.

Even though the 5150 has a pre out and effects loop, he used it in a very similar fashion except the dummy load was a different unit.

I bet his current setup is done much the same way, just substitute the amp.
 
Re: Would this work?

so would I be able to go amp>mike>mixer>mixer aux out>effects>mixer aux in>pa?

You could do that. Your effects would only be heard through the PA and not through your guitar amp cabinet though. If you want it that way that's fine. There's certainly nothing wrong with doing it that way. That's actually the preferred method of doing things in the studio, record it all dry and apply effects afterwards.
 
Re: Would this work?

You could do that. Your effects would only be heard through the PA and not through your guitar amp cabinet though. If you want it that way that's fine. There's certainly nothing wrong with doing it that way. That's actually the preferred method of doing things in the studio, record it all dry and apply effects afterwards.

That seems like it would be hard to play that way. Most of the time you react to the sound you are creating.
 
Re: Would this work?

That seems like it would be hard to play that way. Most of the time you react to the sound you are creating.

Yes, but if you're mic'ing your amp to being with then chances are it's in the stage monitors so you'll hear it. Like I said (though differently), that's not the norm for live use but for studio use. Live, use the effects loop if you got it. If not, then the "EVH" solution would do the trick, just requires a little more gear. ;)
 
Re: Would this work?

If I was going to do that, I would do the Eric Johnson type thing where I have the mixer for my gear and moniters for my gear, so I would always be able to hear myself! You don't know how many times I've been through a gig not being able to hear my guitar!
 
Back
Top