Why does a "side" Reverb block at the end of a chain, right before the output so different/great?

[zif5150]

Ie - not inline with the rest of the blocks like below. It sounds way more "open" and organic.

Just got my Axe FX III a few days ago.. I am like a mad scientist with this incredible device.

 

[iaresee]

It's no different, sonically, than placing it in line and setting the mix below 100%. If you're experiencing better results with it running in parallel, it's just that your series and parallel settings aren't matched and you like the settings you've got in parallel better. They can be made to sound 100% identical.

 

[ChrisHooker]

It's no different, sonically, than placing it in line and setting the mix below 100%.

BUT, the manual states that the mix control uses either a linear or a constant power mix law (doesn't really specify which), meaning that dry signal is reduced further and further as the mix knob moves away from 0% (full dry). In other words: in series, you can't mix in reverb without reducing dry volume. This dry volume difference may be what zif is hearing. In parallel, he's not reducing the dry level. ...And louder usually sounds better, right? Plus, the dry volume being higher would give more separation from the reverb, making it sound less swamped-out, and more clear/open.

All that being said, if you go the series route, and increase the level knob after mixing, you should still be able to make it sound 100% identical to a parallel configuration, as Ian said.

 

[iaresee]

BUT, the manual states that the mix control uses either a linear or a constant power mix law (doesn't really specify which), meaning that dry signal is reduced further and further as the mix knob moves away from 0% (full dry). In other words: in series, you can't mix in reverb without reducing dry volume. This dry volume difference may be what zif is hearing. In parallel, he's not reducing the dry level. ...And louder usually sounds better, right? Plus, the dry volume being higher would give more separation from the reverb, making it sound less swamped-out, and more clear/open.

All that being said, if you go the series route, and increase the level knob after mixing, you should still be able to make it sound 100% identical to a parallel configuration, as Ian said.

Only the delay block uses "mix law" on the mix knob. If you'd like to make the series reverb mix equivalent to mixing in parallel set the mix on the block to 50%, set the level to +3 dB and then use the input gain to adjust the amount of reverb in the signal.

It is entirely possible the parallel path's naturally louder output is what the OP thinks is "more open and organic". It is, in fact, only louder.

 

[unix-guy]

In other words: in series, you can't mix in reverb without reducing dry volume.

Not actually correct.

If you set Mix to 50% and Level to +3dB you can use Input Gain as your actual mix control, you can achieve (with serial routing) identical results to parallel with 100% mix.

Edit:

Ian beat me to the punch!

 

[iaresee]

Ian beat me to the punch!

Pew pew

 

[shatteredsquare]

Because the internal audio gets routed differently somehow. Lol FAS don't even know why. Do whatever sounds better, if you find a trick that works, don't mention it, they'll "fix" it and it won't do it anymore.

 

[ChrisHooker]

Not actually correct.

If you set Mix to 50% and Level to +3dB you can use Input Gain as your actual mix control, you can achieve (with serial routing) identical results to parallel with 100% mix.

I just meant that the mix knob in itself reduces dry volume, IF not adjusting other parameters.
But yes, that's a good way to quickly reproduce the parallel sound. (Though without trying it, I believe it should be Level set to +6dB... see below.)

Only the delay block uses "mix law" on the mix knob.

Technically, any change in volume between 2 or more options implements a "mix law", whether it is linear, constant power, exponential, etc.
Per the manual (pg 55):
"Mix – Determines the balance of wet and dry signals. In most cases, setting the mix by ear is best. With the exception of a few blocks that use a constant power algorithm, Mix controls the dB levels of wet and dry signals in an inverse linear relationship. A mix setting of 50% results in both wet and dry being at -6 db in comparison to their maximum output levels. A diagram (right) illustrates this "mix law". [Shows a linear "crossfade"] Note: See “The Delay Block” for details on how its Mix control works differently."

It is entirely possible the parallel path's naturally louder output is what the OP thinks is "more open and organic". It is, in fact, only louder.

Agreed... again.

 

[iaresee]

Though without trying it, I believe it should be Level set to +6dB... see below.

Nope. Just +3 dB to compensate.

 

[GreatGreen]

Wait a minute. I thought all the time-based effects (delay, reverb, flanger, phaser, etc) Mix laws were changed so that 50% mix is 100% dry, 100% wet.

It really should be this way, shouldn't it? Adjusting the Mix between 0-50% should basically be keeping the dry signal the same level while adjusting the wet signal from infinitely quiet at 0% to "as loud as the dry signal" at 50%. Then from 50-100%, the wet effect should remain at max volume while the dry signal gets quieter and quieter as you approach 100% Mix.

 

[unix-guy]

Wait a minute. I thought all the time-based effects (delay, reverb, flanger, phaser, etc) Mix laws were changed so that 50% mix is 100% dry, 100% wet.

It really should be this way, shouldn't it? Adjusting the Mix between 0-50% should basically be keeping the dry signal the same level while adjusting the wet signal from infinitely quiet at 0% to "as loud as the dry signal" at 50%. Then from 50-100%, the wet effect should remain at max volume while the dry signal gets quieter and quieter as you approach 100% Mix.

I don't remember the details but this changed a long time back on the Axe Fx II and carried over to the Axe Fx III.

The Delay Mix Law is (I believe) different from the Mix law for other effects.

Also, unfortunately both the Axe Fx III manual and the Fractal Audio Blocks Guide appear to have a loop in the documentation.

@Admin M@ - both manuals section for Delay Mix refers you to the Common Mix section which then refers you to the Delay Block for differences... Repeat

Unless I'm just missing it?

 

[shatteredsquare]

Clear as mud

 

[iaresee]

Wait a minute. I thought all the time-based effects (delay, reverb, flanger, phaser, etc) Mix laws were changed so that 50% mix is 100% dry, 100% wet.

It really should be this way, shouldn't it? Adjusting the Mix between 0-50% should basically be keeping the dry signal the same level while adjusting the wet signal from infinitely quiet at 0% to "as loud as the dry signal" at 50%. Then from 50-100%, the wet effect should remain at max volume while the dry signal gets quieter and quieter as you approach 100% Mix.

On the delay block, the dry signal stays constant from 0-50 and then decreases from 50-100. The wet signal increases from 0-50 and then stays constant from 50-100.

On the reverb block, and every other block AFAIK, the wet signal increases from 0-100 and the dry signal decreases from 0-100.

 

[camilovelandiamusic]

Ie - not inline with the rest of the blocks like below. It sounds way more "open" and organic.

Just got my Axe FX III a few days ago.. I am like a mad scientist with this incredible device.

View attachment 65984

Because your dry signal is still untouched. I amplify this concept for my studio setup. I split to two parallels, one runs delay, and one runs reverb. I find that when you run delay INTO reverb, you lose some of the delay pronunciation.

 

[Tommy Tempest]

Because your dry signal is still untouched. I amplify this concept for my studio setup. I split to two parallels, one runs delay, and one runs reverb. I find that when you run delay INTO reverb, you lose some of the delay pronunciation.

Losing some of the delay pronunciation, by running delay before reverb, is a normal anomaly. The more reverb you add, the less pronounced the delay becomes. There is a great balance when you make the reverb time length the same, or a little less than delay. I use this technique with great success.

 

[yek]

I place my verbs in a parallel chain. Because:

• I like my delays to not be reverberated (see above)
• In my workflow this makes it easier to set levels without affecting dry level
• It makes my signal chain shorter
• It prevents undesirable reverb "bursts" when switching between presets.

 

[Knaggster]

I place my verbs in a parallel chain. Because:

• I like my delays to not be reverberated (see above)
• In my workflow this makes it easier to set levels without affecting dry level
• It makes my signal chain shorter
• It prevents undesirable reverb "bursts" when switching between presets.

Finally . . . something my feeble brain can understand!

 

[GreatGreen]

On the delay block, the dry signal stays constant from 0-50 and then decreases from 50-100. The wet signal increases from 0-50 and then stays constant from 50-100.

On the reverb block, and every other block AFAIK, the wet signal increases from 0-100 and the dry signal decreases from 0-100.

Anybody know why it was designed like this? Seems like it would be really hard to balance your levels if you're the kind of player who switches individual effects off and on. Why design for the extra step of having to set the Level to compensate for the loss of volume?

Is it a case where the combination of wet and dry signals actually increase the overall output, so the mix naturally compensates the two signals to keep overall output the same as when the effect is bypassed?

 

[flcmcya]

I place my verbs in a parallel chain. Because:

• I like my delays to not be reverberated (see above)
• In my workflow this makes it easier to set levels without affecting dry level
• It makes my signal chain shorter
• It prevents undesirable reverb "bursts" when switching between presets.

Great info as I have been getting some popping when swapping scenes on one of my presets...... but it may be a "burst of something"
I realized I was doing parallel delays but without the empty block between them so still have some work to do!

 

[Bakerman]

Is it a case where the combination of wet and dry signals actually increase the overall output

This generally happens when you add any different signal to the original. What varies is the amount of volume increase. The block settings influence this e.g. (very) short delay times or more voices in a chorus will be louder. For some blocks that lose volume at 50%/0dB the delay mix law might often be too loud, and you'd still need to adjust level.