not sure about the new delay mix law

[Rex]

I'm using wah / distortion etc earlier in the chain. So, do I drop a line down after these fx to the parallel (delay only) chain? And after the two delays should I return the link to the upper row, or run the 2nd row to the end?

Depends on what you're trying to do. If you want the delay to apply to your distorted or wah sounds, there's no need to run wah or distortion in parallel. Most folks keep them in series, because those are usually used as all-or-nothing—either they're off or they're on at full mix.

With both the ingain and mix of the first delay set at 100% - if I want that to be the very quiet delay do I just reduce the ingain of the 2nd delay to say, 8%?

Good question. I'm going to revise my earlier advice, and suggest you use the second delay's Mix and Level controls for these adjustments:

1. Use the second delay's MIX to balance the levels between the two delays. Don't worry (yet) about whether the delays overall are too loud or too quiet. Just tweak MIX until you're getting the kind of delays you want.
2. Now use the second delay's LEVEL as a volume control for the overall delay, to balance it against your dry tone.

If you're running your delay string parallel to your dry signal—and you've set the first delay's bypass mode to something like "Mute In"—your dry level will remain unchanged when you kick in your delays.

 

[theedge269]

Rex, much appreciated. Just 2 final Q's. Then I'll set this up tomorrow eve. Is the 2nd delay ingain 100%? And will my 2nd delay 'hear' the original note in order to produce a 'normal' dot 8th repeat?

To recap:

Take a parallel path from after the wah / drive fx, and run it to the end.

quiet (first) delay: ingain 100%, mix 100%, level 0, bypass mode 'mute in'

main (second) delay: ingain ???, mix (to balance with quieter delay), level (overall vol / compared to dry signal)

 

[Bakerman]

Rex, much appreciated. Just 2 final Q's. Then I'll set this up tomorrow eve. Is the 2nd delay ingain 100%? And will my 2nd delay 'hear' the original note in order to produce a 'normal' dot 8th repeat?

To recap:

Take a parallel path from after the wah / drive fx, and run it to the end.

quiet (first) delay: ingain 100%, mix 100%, level 0, bypass mode 'mute in'

main (second) delay: ingain ???, mix (to balance with quieter delay), level (overall vol / compared to dry signal)

The 2nd delay won't be producing a dot 8th delay, only passing the one from the 1st delay due to non-100% mix. Ingain at 100% is fine although you could use it to adjust that delay's level without affecting the first one, maybe setting to 50% to have room for adjustment either way.

As Rex mentioned/hinted, one delay block in dual mode could probably do exactly what you want more efficiently. At most you'd need one delay plus a vol/pan or filter block in parallel, and that's only if running stereo due to the way this works, balancing dry to one side before delay to get the correct sort of signal flow in the delay block.

 

[Rex]

Rex, much appreciated. Just 2 final Q's. Then I'll set this up tomorrow eve. Is the 2nd delay ingain 100%?

Yep.

And will my 2nd delay 'hear' the original note in order to produce a 'normal' dot 8th repeat?

Now I'm not clear on what you're trying to do. Do you want to apply dotted-eighth notes to your dry signal, your first delay, or a combination of those?

Take a parallel path from after the wah / drive fx, and run it to the end....

Nope. Put your delays after the amp and cab (you want to delay your amped tone, right?). Run the delay string in parallel to your dry signal.

 

[Noriuky73]

Rex, much appreciated. Just 2 final Q's. Then I'll set this up tomorrow eve. Is the 2nd delay ingain 100%? And will my 2nd delay 'hear' the original note in order to produce a 'normal' dot 8th repeat?

Short answer... No

Larger answer , you need to put a second parallel path for "another second" delay in order to track the original note and let the first parallel path processing the first delay by the second

The parallel path with only the second delay is very simple to take in the right Shape with 100% mix and input and adjusting the volume of the block

You can process all this with the serial mode but IMHO is a pain in the ass to find the levels that fit your desires

 

[Rex]

The 2nd delay won't be producing a dot 8th delay, only passing the one from the 1st delay due to non-100% mix.

The way I understand it, there should still be some dotted-eighth delay, as long as Mix is non-zero. That second Mix should act like a balance control between the two delays.

 

[armyguyenglish]

I do not have an Axe FX II yet, but have been studying this forum daily to get ahead of the learning curve as much as possible.

Rex,
if the signal is as follows:
Main (direct) signal goes from Cab > shunts > output
Then a parallel line branches off after cab, going to delay 1 which is 100% wet making 1/8 note delays > feeds into delay 2 making dotted 1/8 note delays, then the mix on delay 2 could be used for mix between the delays.

But theedge269 wants delay 2 to also "key off dotted 1/8 notes" from the direct sound from what I gather.

If you allow delay 1 to let through direct sound then direct sound would also have to come out of delay 2, which won't work (for his purposes). Direct sound could be paralleled again to hit delay 2 but then delay 2 would be letting direct sound through when using delay 2's mix to mix delay 1's sound. So that won't work.

The solution, as I understand it, would be branch off direct to delay 1 (1/8 note 100% wet) then branch back into the direct line using delay 1's level to mix in delay 1.After delay 1's input branch but before it's output branch, branch again to the input of delay 2 (dotted 1/8 notes, 100% wet) then branch back into the direct line. Then connect delay 1 to delay 2. The result would be that delay 1 produces 1/8 note delays based off of main signal and is mixed with it's level, and delay 2 produces dotted 1/8 notes from the direct signal and delay 1's separate signal. Delay 2 is then mixed with it's level knob.

I see no logical way to use delay 2's mix to determine the mix between itself and delay 1 if delay 2 needs to also feed from the direct signal while also not putting out direct signal.

 

[Bakerman]

But theedge269 wants delay 2 to also "key off dotted 1/8 notes" from the direct sound from what I gather.

I misread his post and didn't notice he said 8th, not dotted 8th for the first delay.

The setup you're describing (I think) doesn't actually do anything different from a one-row series routing of two delays, but I guess that's what he wants. A good question for theedge269 now is, which firmware are you using? The volume drop you described earlier shouldn't happen with delay mix below 50% with the new mix law.

Dual delay is still a nice efficient way to do this. You get control over the direct level to each delay (balance of previous block), output level (level L & R), individual feedback and pans for both delays plus amount of delay "1" sent to delay "2" (feedback L>R). If you're running stereo, set delay mix to 100% and use a parallel volume or filter block to bring the dry sound back to center.

 

[Rex]

But theedge269 wants delay 2 to also "key off dotted 1/8 notes" from the direct sound from what I gather.

The way I read it, he wants to send his eighth-note delayed signal into a dotted-eighth-note delay. I'm still waiting for clarification from him about that.

If you allow delay 1 to let through direct sound then direct sound would also have to come out of delay 2, which won't work (for his purposes). Direct sound could be paralleled again to hit delay 2 but then delay 2 would be letting direct sound through when using delay 2's mix to mix delay 1's sound. So that won't work.

If you set Delay 1's mix to 100%, no direct signal will get through to Delay 2.

The solution, as I understand it, would be branch off direct to delay 1 (1/8 note 100% wet) then branch back into the directs following line using delay 1's level to mix in delay 1.After delay 1's input branch but before it's output branch, branch again to the input of delay 2 (dotted 1/8 notes, 100% wet) then branch back into the direct line. Then connect delay 1 to delay 2. The result would be that delay 1 produces 1/8 note delays based off of main signal and is mixed with it's level, and delay 2 produces dotted 1/8 notes from the direct signal and delay 1's separate signal. Delay 2 is then mixed with it's level knob.

Sorry, I'm not following what you wrote here. Part of it ("after delay 1's input branch but before it's output branch") is physically impossible.

 

[armyguyenglish]

I'm talking about where the signal path splits from the main direct line. There is a branch off from the main line that goes to delay 1's input. Then a shunt under delay one. Then the signal from the output of delay 1 merged back into the direct line.
I was trying to say to split off again from the direct line "from under delay 1" so as to feed direct signal into delay 2. I guess my wording or terms seem weird, lol.

 

[Noriuky73]

Split another row from the main "amp cab " row jumping the first delay and entering directly in the second ... You should put a GEQ or a Filter with the purpose of level adjusting ( sorry for my poor English) ... Working as a volume fader for the amount of direct signal feed to delay 2 ... I think is a good way ...
To be clear ... At the Dly 1 point of the layout you must have 3row ...row 1 filter row 2 Dly1 and row 3 direct

 

[theedge269]

What is this new mix law? I've a standard Axe, with fw v11, may 8th 2011. Would updating the fw solve the volume drop? That would be excellent!

Long story short - I used to have main signal, then separate branch to a dot 8th path (lots repeats), and another row with the 8th (single repeat). Both delays 100% wet (levels set by ingain), all sounding great, UNTIL I decided I wanted a 'galloping' effect with the 8th feeding into the dot 8th.

So I simply shifted them both onto the main chain, and set the ingains to 100% and set the levels by using the mix controls.

I was initially in some doubt about whether it was the series approach that became quieter, or the parallel approach that became louder! I guess in theory the parallel approach won't add volume level as such, simply more sounds at the same level.

As I see it, the more you mix a delay towards 50%, the more it reduces volume. With both in series and 100% ingain I used the level control on each to achieve unity gain. With the 8th on a low 8% mix I only needed a +1db level gain, but with my main 47% mixed dotted 8th it needed +3.5db level gain.

I know it all seems a lot of fuss, but my band have about 35 songs we play regularly, and the levels have been hard work to set up. All the levels were great when I used the parallel approach, but now I want to go in series.

Once again, your views much appreciated. So, will a fw update solve it? Would the Axe II be better?

 

[Rex]

I'm talking about where the signal path splits from the main direct line. There is a branch off from the main line that goes to delay 1's input. Then a shunt under delay one. Then the signal from the output of delay 1 merged back into the direct line.

So much messing around with stuff.

A single Dual Delay block would do it all. It has all that routing built in.

 

[Rex]

What is this new mix law?

Open a copy of the Axe II release notes and search for "law."

I've a standard Axe, with fw v11, may 8th 2011. Would updating the fw solve the volume drop?

Nope. It's an Axe II thing.

I guess in theory the parallel approach won't add volume level as such, simply more sounds at the same level.

In theory, when you add two signals of the same level, you get a higher level. In practice, too.

I know it all seems a lot of fuss, but my band have about 35 songs we play regularly, and the levels have been hard work to set up. All the levels were great when I used the parallel approach, but now I want to go in series.

One Dual Delay in parallel with your dry signal would do it all and simplify everything.

 

[theedge269]

Rex, I tried the dual delay. It's a lot harder to get it all set up, but not impossible. What is impossible is the level issue. It's the same as putting the delays anywhere. It's odd. I have a parallel chain just for the dual delay. As I increase the mix level from o to 100%, the dry signal actually drops from full volume to... i'm guessing here - a 6 to 8 db drop. Why a parallel chained delay should (or even could!) affect the dry chain I don't know. It's not great.

Very grateful for your help with all this though.

There is only one solution. Move out of my flat so I can wheel my 2290s to shows. The big rig doesn't like steps

 

[Rex]

When you're running your delays in parallel, set your mix at 100%. Problem solved.