Running Stereo and Mono external Pedals with Axe III

D

DAnton

Member
Question:

I just started running some external pedals with my Axe. When I hook up stereo pedals, they work perfectly. L and R returns are split as needed.

However, when I run a mono pedal, the return from the pedal is only coming out of the left speaker or right speaker whichever I plug into. So I did some research and the ONLY place I can find how to change that is in the Global Settings. There has to be another place to change that within the standard programing. Going from patch to patch.

For example, on my QC and previous Helix, you can select either a stereo or mono effects loop in your patch.

How can I specify in my patch that I want this to run a mono or stereo loop in my patch. I have OUT 3 to INPUT 3 and it just does stereo within the patch unless I change it in Global settings.
 
Put a Vol/Pan block right after the INPUT 3 block. Put the 'Pan Left' and Pan Right' parameters dead center (0.0). This will make the Left and/or Right signals coming into that Vol/Pan block mono.
 
If you're only connecting one mono pedal it's better to use the vol/pan's input select parameter, unless you expect to randomly connect it to either the left or right input channel sometimes. Just set it to left or right, no need to adjust any balance/pan settings. Otherwise you'll potentially add a bit of noise from the side with nothing plugged in.
 
Bakerman said:
If you're only connecting one mono pedal it's better to use the vol/pan's input select parameter, unless you expect to randomly connect it to either the left or right input channel sometimes. Just set it to left or right, no need to adjust any balance/pan settings. Otherwise you'll potentially add a bit of noise from the side with nothing plugged in.
Click to expand...
Good point. The input select was my first thought and preferred method, but thought that the other way would be more foolproof. didn't think about the possible noise issue.
 
Bakerman said:
If you're only connecting one mono pedal it's better to use the vol/pan's input select parameter, unless you expect to randomly connect it to either the left or right input channel sometimes. Just set it to left or right, no need to adjust any balance/pan settings. Otherwise you'll potentially add a bit of noise from the side with nothing plugged in.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I'll give this a try.

Just a lite vent though, why is this even a thing? This has to be a common issue. Why is there not a simple effects loop block in Fractal like just about every other modeler? One type for a mono fx loop and one option for stereo. That would be so simple. Is there so "pro" level reason for that? Seems like an oversight?

Don't flame me, I like my Fractal better than my QC :tearsofjoy:.
 
DAnton said:
Just a lite vent though, why is this even a thing? This has to be a common issue. Why is there not a simple effects loop block in Fractal like just about every other modeler? One type for a mono fx loop and one option for stereo. That would be so simple. Is there so "pro" level reason for that? Seems like an oversight?
Click to expand...
Older-generation Fractal products have an FX loop block. Users requested that the loop block be broken up into separate input and output blocks, because that makes those ins and outs more versatile; now they can be used for more than just an FX loop. That’s why the current generation of Fractal mod lets have separate In and Out blocks.
 
Rex said:
Older-generation Fractal products have an FX loop block. Users requested that the loop block be broken up into separate input and output blocks, because that makes those ins and outs more versatile; now they can be used for more than just an FX loop. That’s why the current generation of Fractal mod lets have separate In and Out blocks.
Click to expand...
Fair point. Perhaps they could add in the block to treat it as stereo or mono that could obviously be edited per preset/snapshots etc.
 
Last edited:
Select L/R/L+R on the input blocks would be great, but no way I'd want to go back to the old single loop block type setup. Personally though, I like to use mixer blocks to control what comes back from various loops:
1672170123712.png
 
Last edited:
sprint said:
Select L/R/L+R on the input blocks would be great, but no way I'd want to go back to the old single loop block type setup. Personally though, I like to use mixer blocks to control what comes back from various loops:
View attachment 113395
Click to expand...
Uhh.. Wow!
Yeah, I realize the way it's set up now allows for a bit more advanced routing, but let me say, this is overcomplicated for a regular guy like me. I'll give it a go.

Where's this wish list at? I'd like to add something along what we've been discussing. Not a deal breaker atm though. After selling a bunch of stuff once I got the Fractal, what's primarily left is some awesome stereo pedals. Microcosm, Volante (got for christmas), Bunch of big box stereo reverbs.
 
Moke said:
maybe a wish for a 'Stereo, Left Only, Right Only, L+R Sum' option in the Input 2, 3 (FM9), and 4 (Axe-Fx III), blocks is in order.
Click to expand...

I'm not too sure the arguments against also including just a simple FX Effects loop block like that in other modelers. Choose one for a mono loop another for a stereo loop.

Edit: actually what you say pretty much encompasses exactly that.
 
Is there a reason you don't want to adjust the input mode in global settings? Set it to stereo when a stereo pedal is connected. Set it to left only when a mono pedal is connected.

An input select option in the input block could have some uses but I'm not really seeing why you feel it's needed for the scenarios you described here.
 
Bakerman said:
Is there a reason you don't want to adjust the input mode in global settings? Set it to stereo when a stereo pedal is connected. Set it to left only when a mono pedal is connected.

An input select option in the input block could have some uses but I'm not really seeing why you feel it's needed for the scenarios you described here.
Click to expand...
Not sure about OP but for me, I have some presets using stereo, and some using mono L to a switcher that houses both stereo (ie TC Mimic, Iridium) and mono (od) pedals, so I wouldn't want to have to change global settings when switching back and forth between the two presets. But as mentioned above, vol or mixer blocks are a solution - though having an input select function in the Input blocks would be more convenient / efficient so a good wish imo
 
Last edited:
Bakerman said:
Is there a reason you don't want to adjust the input mode in global settings? Set it to stereo when a stereo pedal is connected. Set it to left only when a mono pedal is connected.

An input select option in the input block could have some uses but I'm not really seeing why you feel it's needed for the scenarios you described here.
Click to expand...
To be frank about it, it's absolutely bonkers that such a basic feature is not there in a direct way. I was hoping I was overlooking something but it seems to be a work around, of sorts as described by users here thus far.

I mean, there are tons of people out there that run stereo and/or mono pedals in their setup. It's also VERY common with today's modelers and the amazing boutique pedal market that users might want to run external pedals. The Axe does it of course, but to me, this seems convoluted. To require a user to adjust their global settings every time they want to alternate an external device from mono to stereo seems wild for the most advanced modeler on the market. This is a basic and standard feature on Helix and QC, as I'm sure it is on others too.
 
sprint said:
- though having an input select function in the Input blocks would be more convenient / efficient so a good wish imo
Click to expand...
Yes. One of the big gripes about Fractal, as everyone here is acutely aware of, is that they are more complicated than the competition to use. On my QC or a Line 6 product, I could build up a preset in less than a minute that would include an external effects loop, place it wherever I like, along with other effects etc.
I can say though, this is the first and only time with my Fractal stuff in the past year where I just kind of thought.... "huh, this seems a bit off".
 
well, just to be clear, though I think having the input select feature in the input blocks would be useful and is a good suggestion, I don't consider just using a volume or mixer block as convoluted, super complex, or a work around to a terribly inconvenient situation. It's not a big deal really. As far as "everyone here being acutely aware" of how "complicated" Axefx is compared to the competition, I am personally not aware of it since I think it's nonsense as I've expressed in other threads. Axfx is quite straight forward given its capability. I can build loopout presets on Axfx just as fast as on the L6 modellers I've owned in the past - in many cases faster, or only possible on Axfx not possible on L6.
 
sprint said:
well, just to be clear, though I think having the input select feature in the input blocks would be useful and is a good suggestion, I don't consider just using a volume or mixer block as convoluted, super complex, or a work around to a terribly inconvenient situation. It's not a big deal really. As far as "everyone here being acutely aware" of how "complicated" Axefx is compared to the competition, I am personally not aware of it since I think it's nonsense as I've expressed in other threads. Axfx is quite straight forward given its capability. I can build loopout presets on Axfx just as fast as on the L6 modellers I've owned in the past - in many cases faster, or only possible on Axfx not possible on L6.
Click to expand...
We disagree on the additional steps required to create a mono block in a send/return. As a consumer, that's my take. If it can be done with a single block on other modelers, then perhaps that's something that can be done here. I am in a forum, asking how to do something that is done with a single block on multiple competitors. That is my point.

I'm sorry, but as for the complexity of Fractal over some of the others, there is plenty of supporting evidence to make the argument either way, but it is a common sentement that I have anecdotally seen on YouTube, Facebook, Reddit, The Gear Page, etc. It is also my experince. Like I said though, I personally am very happy with my Axe 3.

Thanks everyone for the help.
 
DAnton said:
We disagree on the additional steps required to create a mono block in a send/return
Click to expand...
Not sure what's to disagree on as the options I suggested above (vol, mixer) are what works in the current design, and I've agreed that your suggestion / wish is a good one.

DAnton said:
t is a common sentement that I have anecdotally seen on YouTube, Facebook, Reddit, The Gear Page, etc.
Click to expand...
sentiment and anecdotes on the internet can often be far from fact

DAnton said:
there is plenty of supporting evidence to make the argument either way,
Click to expand...
I don't think there's much supporting evidence for the argument that Axefx is overly complex - which is why I kind of have a pet peeve about it (not a fan boy thing as there are other aspects of Axfx I think truly could still evolve which I've been vocal about here to others' annoyance I'm sure lol). But I do think there is evidence to support competing products being less intuitive than Axefx. I'm reminded of the often pointed out suggestion that L6 users do the necessary clicks to join signal path 1A into signal path 2A in order to get both internal processors contributing - what!!! - a UI design aspect that's shaped around how processors are internally arranged ?? - leaving users to move blocks around from one path to another to balance out internal processing across processors?? Big no no where I came from. I had both Hd and HX (can't speak for QC) - Axfx waaaaay more intuitive imo if that's what all the sentiment is on about. But regardless of which product - they're all pretty simple once you've taken a bit of time to learn them and their idiosyncrisies.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom