WDW (Wet-Dry-Wet) Setup(s) with Axe-FX

Markom

Markom

Member
After spending 30 minutes searching every conceivable way on the forum here, I cannot find any reference to anyone using the Axe-FX in a Wet-Dry-Wet setup scenario. I've researched it a bit and it looks interesting; anyone have direct experience with this setup approach. From my basic understanding, it's essentially using two separate amps to drive three cabs - the middle cab is primarily a dry single and the outer two cabs are run in stereo through a another amp. I'm certain it's more complicated than I understand. Just curious at this point ... Thoughts/opinions?
 
I think you have the basic idea down.

W/D/W is three channels of output.

The preset is designed around the outputs such that the dry channel, D, doesn't have any ambience or modulation efx.

But besides the three discrete channels of output, you do have to design your preset with this in mind too.

W/D is also interesting to me. It sounds pretty cool and only requires two channels of output. A little less complicated.

Richard
 
It's pointless unless you are using the AXE FX for effects only and an amp head you want to keep dry.
 
I always wonder if W/D/W rigs are unnecessary if you have a stereo rig and a mixer giving a greater emphasis on the dry signal. (parallel wet signal)
 
The entire point of tri-amping was to have a clear unaltered analog signal.

You have a 100 watt Marshall, but you want to add stereo effects. To avoid an analog to digital conversion, you run the head into a dry cabinet that has had not been digitized.

You take a line out of the Marshall, feed the effects and run them in stereo, wet left and wet right.

Now you have three signals, the efx left, the dry middle, and the efx right.

When you generate your tone from the Axe Fx IT IS ALREADY 100% DIGITAL, so adding a third element is pointless.

Just reduce you MIX if you wish to hear more dry signal.

I use to play out with four slaved heads, two 24 space racks and three 4x12 cabinets in a tri-amp arrangement. I use to also build such systems for people.
 
Funeral,

Using an AxeFx, do you feel the benefit to a w/d/w setup is that you have a FULL stereo field filled with sound then? Left, center and right? That's the only advantage that I can imagine over a regular axefx stereo rig with the internal mixers being used.

Funeral said:
Im going to have to disagree with luke and guess that he has not heard an Axe-fx in a w/d/w setup.
Jay Mitchell brought 3 of the CLR's with an Axe-fx Standard to the first Dallas Axe-fx meeting and it was AMAZING.
Sorry, but a w/d/w setup with an Axe is frigging powerful.

Here's an explanation.
http://forum.fractalaudio.com/ultra-std-discussion/25470-wet-dry-wet-rigs.html
Click to expand...
 
I've also demo'ed the Axe in a w/d/w setup with the Axe providing the amp sounds into a standard 4x12 (no cab sims) and then using the FX loop in the Axe's chain, run stereo FX into two powered FRFR cabs with cab sims on those. Sounded huge! I think the benefit is that you get the clarity of the dry cab and the effected cabs don't mush up the sound.
 
I also think W/D/W and W/D gives a kick @ss stage sound. Very relevant to the AxeFx for me.

For small gigs where the backline provides the guitar amplification, the audience gets to hear it too.

Where the FOH supplies the guitars to the audience, I'm not sure of the usefullness to the audience. But still amazing and kick butt on stage sound.

Richard
 
I also used to run a W/D/W rig and will attest to it's monstrous sound. But it is a wast of time and effort if your having to run it through a typical mono or stereo PA to get it to the audience.
 
I wouldn't say a waste of time, but certainly a labor of love :)

Just when you jetisoned your 4x12's and 100watt brains, you end up packing back in three powered speakers and off you go :)

Richard
 
claxor said:
I always wonder if W/D/W rigs are unnecessary if you have a stereo rig and a mixer giving a greater emphasis on the dry signal. (parallel wet signal)
Click to expand...

Although having a middle channel carrying just the dry amp sound keeps it powerful and as Lightening Boy says "uncluttered" , has anyone tried doing the same thing using Axe mixers, and having the middle dry amp channel in the middle of the stereo picture, and the wet effects panned hard left and right to emulate the outside two channels? I wonder how this might compare to the full tri-phonic rig (which requires extra of everything)?
 
Hugomack said:
Although having a middle channel carrying just the dry amp sound keeps it powerful and as Lightening Boy says "uncluttered" , has anyone tried doing the same thing using Axe mixers, and having the middle dry amp channel in the middle of the stereo picture, and the wet effects panned hard left and right to emulate the outside two channels? I wonder how this might compare to the full tri-phonic rig (which requires extra of everything)?
Click to expand...

I haven't tried that. But my thinking is, the spaciousnees the player gets is from the lack of intermodulation from the separate amps in the W/D/W rig?

The physically separate amp/speakers contribute to the aural experience.

For example, I've recorded lots of tracks with panned ambience and dry center, but listening to the stereo mix of these tracks is definitely not the same as playing a W/D/W stage rig.

Richard
 
Hugomack said:
Although having a middle channel carrying just the dry amp sound keeps it powerful and as Lightening Boy says "uncluttered" , has anyone tried doing the same thing using Axe mixers, and having the middle dry amp channel in the middle of the stereo picture, and the wet effects panned hard left and right to emulate the outside two channels? I wonder how this might compare to the full tri-phonic rig (which requires extra of everything)?
Click to expand...

When monitoring in stereo this won't be any different from centering the dry sound (via amp or cab balance) and adding whatever stereo effects you want after that point. The dry sound reaches L & R outputs in equal amounts.
 
claxor said:
I always wonder if W/D/W rigs are unnecessary if you have a stereo rig and a mixer giving a greater emphasis on the dry signal. (parallel wet signal)
Click to expand...

Although having a middle channel carrying just the dry amp sound keeps it powerful and as Lightening Boy says "uncluttered" , has anyone tried doing the same thing using Axe mixers, and having the middle dry amp channel in the middle of the stereo picture, and the wet effects panned hard left and right to emulate the outside two channels? (Edit - Sorry I missed Bakerman's post) I wonder how this might compare to the full W/D/W rig (which requires an extra speaker and amp)? A side point - the new one channel Matrix amp would be ideal for the Dry channel - built into a speaker cab - as with Yek and his Scumback 1x12....
 
Im going to have to disagree with luke and guess that he has not heard an Axe-fx in a w/d/w setup.
Jay Mitchell brought 3 of the CLR's with an Axe-fx Standard to the first Dallas Axe-fx meeting and it was AMAZING.
Sorry, but a w/d/w setup with an Axe is frigging powerful.

Here's an explanation.
Wet/Dry/Wet Rigs?


Thanks, Funeral ... I did not search on the term "wet/dry/wet" - I found that thread very informative, just as I do this one. More interest swirling around this subject than I first believed. I like the idea of using the Axe's output mixer, wet/dry mix, and balance control for each preset as an alternative/interim approach (as Hugomack has suggested here). Thanks again.
 
Last edited:
barhrecords said:
I haven't tried that. But my thinking is, the spaciousnees the player gets is from the lack of intermodulation from the separate amps in the W/D/W rig?

The physically separate amp/speakers contribute to the aural experience.

For example, I've recorded lots of tracks with panned ambience and dry center, but listening to the stereo mix of these tracks is definitely not the same as playing a W/D/W stage rig.

Richard
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong I love the sound of a W/D/W rig, it's just to the audience they won't get to appreciate as much as you will but then again I guess it's their loss :lol. I would like to build one All I would need is a powered speaker and I'm set.
 
Sixstring said:
Don't get me wrong I love the sound of a W/D/W rig, it's just to the audience they won't get to appreciate as much as you will but then again I guess it's their loss :lol. I would like to build one All I would need is a powered speaker and I'm set.
Click to expand...

+1

(I said the same bout the FOH in post #10, but for small clubs using the backline only for guitars, it works for the audience too, or if you have the guitar chair in Cirque or Transiberean Orchestra :) )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom