Tape Delay Hold Isn't Infinite

The delay's EQ is in the loop; it fades faster with more high/low cut. None of the types will actually repeat infinitely. It would be nice to have that option.
 
The tape delay algorithm is authentic right down to the deteriorating quality if you were to set it to infinite hold.

The other delay types bypass any loop processing when hold is on so there is no degradation.
 
Bakerman said:
The delay's EQ is in the loop; it fades faster with more high/low cut. None of the types will actually repeat infinitely. It would be nice to have that option.
Click to expand...

If you set the master feedback over 100% it will :) - Well it will go until it clips out.
Hold should cycle the buffer infinitely. Its been a while since I've used that though.
 
Last edited:
I realized what I was noticing. It wasn't decaying with the other modes, but hold takes over 1 second to increase feedback to 100%. So the lower you set the time, the quieter the held loop is, and there's always a swell effect.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/28651/axefx/delayhold.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/28651/axefx/delayhold.mp3

This can't be intended, can it? The input gets cut quickly enough, it's the rise of the start of the loop that's slow. I'd expect those to be done together at the same rate to get a quick crossfade on restart. Drop the fade-in time to something like 20 ms and this should be much better.

Right now the only way to get constant level w/ infinite repeats is to use a modifier that lowers input gain while increasing feedback, then switches on repeat hold.
 
Bakerman said:
I realized what I was noticing. It wasn't decaying with the other modes, but hold takes over 1 second to increase feedback to 100%. So the lower you set the time, the quieter the held loop is, and there's always a swell effect.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/28651/axefx/delayhold.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/28651/axefx/delayhold.mp3

This can't be intended, can it? The input gets cut quickly enough, it's the rise of the start of the loop that's slow. I'd expect those to be done together at the same rate to get a quick crossfade on restart. Drop the fade-in time to something like 20 ms and this should be much better.

Right now the only way to get constant level w/ infinite repeats is to use a modifier that lowers input gain while increasing feedback, then switches on repeat hold.
Click to expand...

I'll have to try this. For what I am intending to do with the tape delay, this may throw some sand in my coffee.
 
Bakerman said:
The delay's EQ is in the loop; it fades faster with more high/low cut. None of the types will actually repeat infinitely. It would be nice to have that option.
Click to expand...

why is this? on other machines hold delay always means that it repeats infinitely....hence the name hold
 
Bodde said:
why is this? on other machines hold delay always means that it repeats infinitely....hence the name hold
Click to expand...

As Cliff mentioned, processing (EQ/drive) isn't actually active w/ hold on. What I noticed was related to the slow feedback % increase, which gives a lower average hold level with lower delay times.
 
Andrew Male said:
Because it models a real tape delay, that doesn't hold forever.
Click to expand...

They way the hold function works doesn't really have anything to do with the type. It merely recycles the delay buffer while not allowing more input into it.
Yes, you can hold a tape forever, but its quality has a tendency to degrade on every echo, the axe-fx does the same thing in this regard.
 
javajunkie said:
They way the hold function works doesn't really have anything to do with the type. It merely recycles the delay buffer while not allowing more input into it.
Yes, you can hold a tape forever, but its quality has a tendency to degrade on every echo, the axe-fx does the same thing in this regard.
Click to expand...

When I say hold I mean has the exact same repeat forever, hold is just a term for infinite repeats.

My point was tapes degrade with every repeat, so does the Axe, regardless whether it's on "hold" function.
 
Andrew Male said:
When I say hold I mean has the exact same repeat forever, hold is just a term for infinite repeats.

My point was tapes degrade with every repeat, so does the Axe, regardless whether it's on "hold" function.
Click to expand...

It will degrade untiil you hit the hold function, not while you have it engaged. If you use the hold function, it should not degrade further than when you engage the hold function. It repeats what is in the buffer and does not send it through eq (or back to the input)
 
javajunkie said:
It will degrade untiil you hit the hold function, not while you have it engaged. If you use the hold function, it should not degrade further than when you engage the hold function. It repeats what is in the buffer and does not send it through eq (or back to the input)
Click to expand...


I think you're right that other delays do that, according to Cliff above though the tape delay is different, I'm not at my axe so can't test

FractalAudio "The tape delay algorithm is authentic right down to the deteriorating quality if you were to set it to infinite hold.

The other delay types bypass any loop processing when hold is on so there is no degradation."
 
Last edited:
Andrew Male said:
I think you're right that other delays do that, according to Cliff above though the tape delay is different, I'm not at my axe so can't test

FractalAudio "The tape delay algorithm is authentic right down to the deteriorating quality if you were to set it to infinite hold.

The other delay types bypass any loop processing when hold is on so there is no degradation."
Click to expand...

ahh i see, its been a while since I've used the hold function. I encountered the same drop in volume the bakerman stated. I generally just cut the input to the delay and increase the feedback. I like setting the master feedback a little over 100% and you get that supersaturated tape delay effect.
 
Andrew Male said:
I think you're right that other delays do that, according to Cliff above though the tape delay is different,
Click to expand...

Yes just checked it. The mono tape is indeed slowing fading when hold is engaged. Other delay types don't fade with hold.
Also tried the hold function on the stereo tape delay. This generates some nice constant changing poly rhythmic hold loops!
 
I actually find this pretty UNrealistic. My point in doing this in the first place comes from that fact that I've been tasked with reproducing sounds off of an artist's record that were created using an Echoplex. The guitarist set the feedback on the Echoplex very high and layered several parts over each other, almost as if it was a looper. This churning loop is the intro of the song, and it comes back in other places.

On the Echoplex, each cycle may degrade slightly, but not enough to mask the rhythmic clarity of the overall loop. With the Axe, the Tape hold 1) don't hold for very long at all, and 2) with the feedback set to 100%, the repeats degrade into a wash of churning harmonics very quickly. That's neat, but it's not what the Echoplex on the album does, and it's not what I'm trying to reproduce. I think Fractal should consider refining this a little bit.

Also, repeat degradation when Hold is engaged happens on every delay block. The Tape block is the only one that seems to get softer, but a held repeat tends to lose its luster after several seconds on all the blocks (even digital). The degradation doesn't sound like it correlates to EQ settings, so this is in line with what Fractal said above regarding loop processing.
 
not sure what you mean with this post. I think you are confusing two things: the hold function (the hold 'button') and the feedback. I think you are talking about setting the feedback to 100% instead of using the hold button?
Just checked it again. When pressing hold button in digital delay it repeats forever but after that the delay input is bypassed.

What bothers me is that when using the hold function only a very short part of the sound is repeated. Even when you set the delay time to higher settings like say 2000ms the hold function only repeats a short excerpt of the sound. Would be more usable if could also repeat and hold a long sustained chord or so.

One more question about hold: Can I also attach the hold function to one of the MFC reveal switches when I am in Axe Fx mode? I have the reveal buttons set to scenes 1-5 now. But I would like to swap scenes 5 for the hold engage function. Not sure if that is possible or if I need an external pedal for this.
 
Bodde said:
What bothers me is that when using the hold function only a very short part of the sound is repeated. Even when you set the delay time to higher settings like say 2000ms the hold function only repeats a short excerpt of the sound. Would be more usable if could also repeat and hold a long sustained chord or so.
Click to expand...

If the delay time is 2000 ms it should repeat the last 2000 ms when hold is switched on. Maybe you're noticing the slow fade-in I mentioned earlier.

Bodde said:
One more question about hold: Can I also attach the hold function to one of the MFC reveal switches when I am in Axe Fx mode? I have the reveal buttons set to scenes 1-5 now. But I would like to swap scenes 5 for the hold engage function. Not sure if that is possible or if I need an external pedal for this.
Click to expand...

Yes, with the IA set for general use (Axe-FX function = none), CC# of an Ext Ctrl assigned as hold modifier.
 
ok, thanks. Would be nice to have general/global hold function so that you don't have to set it for each preset.

Bakerman said:
If the delay time is 2000 ms it should repeat the last 2000 ms when hold is switched on. Maybe you're noticing the slow fade-in I mentioned earlier.
Click to expand...

just checked it again setting delay time to 2000ms. Hitting a chord and then immediately press 'hold'. But I only hear a very short (staccato like) section of the sound repeated with the hold engaged. Not the long repeat that you would expect. I am doing something wrong? Maybe some modifier or midi settings are wrong (I am using the default modifier settings)? Can someone check this on their machine?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom