Ok....Delay and Reverb.....Series or Parallel?

[R.D.]

For my main sound I go series. Within this strand, I have both delay and reverb.

When I wish to ADD some additional efx, including delay I do so in parallel.

Once upon a time in the late 1980s I had a monster rig with two 24 space racks, four multichannel amp heads slaved to line level and three 4x12s on stage. Back then we wanted to preserve the dry tone from becoming digitized, so we ran all efx in parallel. The Axe Fx is digital so the point is moot.

I've attached a photo of a typical strand with an additional couple of efx that I add together via one button push on my MFC to give a jet chamber effect, similar to that I use to employ using a PCM-80. It just adds a subtle grease to single note lines.

Really ... ? VAN HALEN w/a Recto Orange Modern ... ? I've got to get a closer look at that patch ? WOW !

Any chance you could share it ?

THANKS !

 

[GreatGreen]

If you just want less of the same reverb sound on delay repeats you could also reduce the level of delay feeding reverb w/ a vol/filter like this (use 100% mix on delay & reverb):

Or save a column by turning delay down and boosting the non-reverb path:

This is really clever. It's got all the advantages of my idea but with less CPU usage and only about two thirds as much tweaking needed.

 

[Tremonti]

Bump!

 

[paulmapp8306]

Always series for reverb - and always last in the chain. I reason this because reverb is supposed to simulate playing in a room - and all the signal gets that, be it a dry amp, with delays or any other FX. Of course using reverb for more creative purposes could change its placement.

For Delay - I also tend to stay in series, as using the Mix control is pretty much the same as using a parallel delay at 100% wet - then mixed back in to the main chain at less than 100%. For real pedals that dont have a mix, Id put delays in parallel - but if it does it really doesn't make that much difference. In a purly technical way It should be used in parallel I guess - but (as I say) at 100% mix, then using the level to control how much comes back to the main signal.

 

[theedge269]

I'm using 2 delays in series (100% in gain; 20-48% mix), and finding the output volume drops compared to using just a single delay. Half my presets are single, half are dual delays. What is the best way to equal the two volumes? I don't want to use a null filter - I already use one at the start of the chains to compensate for the different output levels of my guitars, and one at the end as a solo boost. Similarly I don't want to raise the overall mix volume as I need that available to match each preset to the overall volume of the rest of the band, and that particular song. What I'm hoping for is a way to alter how I'm setting the delay levels somehow, but still keep them in one chain with the other effects. Any ideas much appreciated!

 

[Bakerman]

I'm using 2 delays in series (100% in gain; 20-48% mix), and finding the output volume drops compared to using just a single delay.

Which firmware are you using? Since 11.00 the dry level won't be affected from 0 to 50% delay mix. If you're on 11.00 or later, check if both delay block levels are at 0 dB.

In any case, if it sounds to you like more volume is needed, you could turn up the level of either delay block. Or the amp block, or anything post-amp usually.

 

[smcrosby]

You wouldn't hear a difference because there is no difference. The primary difference between series and parallel is when you have multiple effects. Delay in series with reverb sounds different than the two in parallel.

Guitar-centric mentality is series. Classic mixing board approach is parallel.

Ahh - gotta love the Fractal Forum - nothing like a little dash of context and perspective to get aspiring tone meisters thinking creatively.

 

[Rotti]

Delay: Parallel behind the amp, sometimes series if before a gain stage. I don't think I use a single preset without reverb AND delay at least tucked away in a scene.

I like what endgroove is saying about W/D. I've begun to toy with this in a stereo FRFR setup / poor man's W/D/W. Results were not initially pleasing, but I have yet begun to fight! I think there's a lot of potential this way, and I will probably end up running the wet side with a series delay... too early to say for sure.

EDIT: I usually run reverb in series, sometimes parallel for wacky stuff... that is often followed by a reverb in series

 

[clarky]

under most circumstances I'd opt for a parallel path for the delay and another for the reverb..
this way you have the greatest amount of control when sculpting your tone

this has changed in my latest generation of presets..

delay in series and reverb in parallel
I like the reverb to be added both my dry tone and my delay tails..
I found that having the delay in parallel left the delay tails dry and to my ears, don't sound quite as pretty..
the reason my reverb is in parallel these days is more about saving grid space so I can cram more stuff in there

 

[Sixstring]

I like my delays and verbs in stacked Parallel.

 

[electronpirate]

You wouldn't hear a difference because there is no difference. The primary difference between series and parallel is when you have multiple effects. Delay in series with reverb sounds different than the two in parallel.

Guitar-centric mentality is series. Classic mixing board approach is parallel.

I will state that this completely changed my thinking on this whole deal. I was sort of programmed into parallel mindset, but the more I listened to it, the more I felt a 'sameness' in the approach. Once I started thinking 'serial' and the benefits on (for lack of a better term), gainstaging my FX, I found so many cool tones that I've used it for awhile now.

R