Startling discovery... for me at least...

The reverb/patch always sounds better when the reverb is in parallel @ 100% mix, rev level adjusted for mix. For FRFR I think it sounds a little fatter when you then bleed in some dry thru the rev on the rev mix and back off the amp level.
 
It's just louder. The 2nd path adds up to 6dB of signal. Reverb mix is 5.8%, so it's a 100% dry signal mixed with a 94.2% dry signal, making it even louder.

At certain volumes - like bedroom volume or with headphones - volume increases like that aren't as obvious and things just sound "more" and "better."
 
Well - like I said- it was an epiphany for me.. Not sure if it will work for everyone....
It really seemed to open up whatever amp I threw at it- not just in volume...
I will be doing this on all my patches going forward.

No cab block- I typically globally bypass cab modeling because I go right to a matrix and real 2x12 cab...
 
Try removing that extra row and turn up the amp block level by 8 dB. Does it sound similar?
 
Chris@AxeFxTutorials said:
It's just louder. The 2nd path adds up to 6dB of signal. Reverb mix is 5.8%, so it's a 100% dry signal mixed with a 94.2% dry signal, making it even louder.

At certain volumes - like bedroom volume or with headphones - volume increases like that aren't as obvious and things just sound "more" and "better."
Click to expand...

Thanks Chris- it seems like it's more to me than just volume. If I remove the reverb block, or put it back in series with the amp and increase the volume 6 db, it does not seem to have the same effect - to my ears at least.
And I thank you for all your informative videos - I have learned a lot from you!
 
It just increases dry level when you have a path of shunts parallel to reverb.

Note that if you place reverb in series and increase amp level by ~6 dB, you'd also need to lower reverb mix by about half, to ~3%. That will sound the same as the other parallel routing.
 
Yeh - just tried it. Its no different.

You need to match signals and mix levels to test. Try putting an amp, and cab then split the chain and put a reverb in each line. The one running straight to the OP, set the reverb to +6db and 50% mix and the other set to 0db at 100% mix. Then bypass the block at +6db and play. Now un-bypass that and take the link from the other away (ie dont just bypass) and play. They are identical. You have the same relative mix levels and the same relative signal strength. Any other setting will not be a like for like.

Just spend an hour doing this - and I really cant hear any difference either way.
 
Has anyone tried using the reverb of direct guitar signal? I just tried it on a IIc+ patch and its actually not bad - the reverb sounds more realistic to me. There is a compressor in front of the reverb block. Ratio at 5 and level at 20dB. Adjusted the reverb block mix to 100%, low cut to 200, time to 1.3 sec, early level -40dB, all else at default, either continue the row of shunts to the end or join it up to the main signal chain after the cab block.

This doesnt impact on the feel or tone of the amp at all, but it just seems like the reverb I hear is kind of more like what I would expect to hear in a room. Putting reverb on a highly distorted tone - I don't know.. I can always tell its an effect.Anyway, it would be good if more people could try something like this and compare notes. I dont use reverb that much.
 
I saw this on a preset months ago and have been using it ever since... actually it might have been Mark Day's HBE Preset? can't remember...

anyway - it does sound good. The reverb doesn't wash out the tone as much and I think the direct signal cuts through the mix more, which means you can hear the amp character more.

I actually do the same thing with my delay, for the same effect.
 
Does the Mix parameter "see" and mix in dry signal? Otherwise, how does putting it after the Amp and manipulating it turn out the same result as the parallel option in OP, given it "sees" the dry signal in parallel?

Edit: I've since seen the screenshot where the parallel row begins post-amp. Yeah, that's definitely just louder.
 
Last edited:
Wolfenstein98k said:
Does the Mix parameter "see" and mix in dry signal? Otherwise, how does putting it after the Amp and manipulating it turn out the same result as the parallel option in OP, given it "sees" the dry signal in parallel?
Click to expand...

See routing in post #23. It seems the OP was comparing that to a single-row series routing.
 
This is just a routing mistake that's increasing the volume. The only reason it may sound different by turning the amp level up to match the scenario where the reverb block is at less than 100% mix is because your feeding more signal to the reverb block effectively increasing the amount of reverb.

Ps... Reverbs and delays are almost always in parallel after the amp block in my patches. The only time I put a delay before the amp block is if I want to smear my tone a bit by hitting the amps input stage with lots of repeats.
 
This is a 'Human Interface' tweak rather that a processing tweak. There's no difference internally. The parallel reverb tapped before the amp is an interesting variation however...
 
FractalAudio said:
It's just louder. You are falling victim to the classic Fletcher-Munson effect where "louder sounds better". Putting the reverb in parallel like that just adds volume. It has NO effect on the actual tone.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't you be combining a dry signal with a wet signal , thus changing the sound (tone)?

Or are you saying it has no effect because the 'mix' is nearly zero?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom