Wet/dry/wet

[SonVolt]

Time based effects (delay, reverb, pitch, chorus, flanger) run 100% wet don't really suffer from phase issues since delay is inherent in their sound.

That's true but running delay 100% wet doesn't sound as good to me (too jarring) as opposed to having some dry signal mixed along with it (EVH style). No free lunch I guess.

Can you run the JP2C through the FM9 but keep it digitally "dry" so it time-aligns with the Wets? My FX8 doesn't have that capability.

 

[strabes]

That's true but running delay 100% wet doesn't sound as good to me (too jarring) as opposed to having some dry signal mixed along with it (EVH style). No free lunch I guess.

Can you run the JP2C through the FM9 but keep it digitally "dry" so it time-aligns with the Wets? My FX8 doesn't have that capability.

In a wet/dry/wet setup, the center is 100% dry and the sides are 100% wet i.e. no dry signal. There can be no phasing of the dry signal because it's coming from a single source.

 

[mr_fender]

This ↑. You control the mix via the level of the 100% wet signal. The amp in the center provides all the dry. If you're not running your effects at 100% wet, then you're not using true Wet/Dry or Wet/Dry/Wet. The whole point is that the wet and dry signals mix in the air instead of electronically.

 

[SonVolt]

In a wet/dry/wet setup, the center is 100% dry and the sides are 100% wet i.e. no dry signal. There can be no phasing of the dry signal because it's coming from a single source.

No, in a wet/dry/wet setup there is at minimum 3 speakers with a center dry and 2 wets. That's it, that's the definition.

The amount of dry signal mixed into the wet speakers is neither here nor there. We can be more specific and call it mix/dry/mix but at the end of the day it still falls under the generic umbrella of wet/dry/wet.

I'd wager most people that have been down this route prefer some dry mixed into the wet speakers.

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

This ↑. You control the mix via the level of the 100% wet signal. The amp in the center provides all the dry. If you're not running your effects at 100% wet, then you're not using true Wet/Dry or Wet/Dry/Wet. The whole point is that the wet and dry signals mix in the air instead of electronically.

Aguably, rotary is a stereo point source - one cab with speakers, but throwing sound around at all angles via the horn and rotor, so a setup like the Spacestation XL as the middle "dry" speaker would allow the dry to do that and still be "dry" in the overall scheme of things....

 

[mr_fender]

Rotary is a whole different beast. Phase interaction and the doppler effect are desired in that case. In the case of a real leslie cab, there is no "dry" unless it has a brake setting to stop the rotor and horn completely.

 

[Joe Bfstplk]

Rotary is a whole different beast. Phase interaction and the doppler effect are desired in that case. In the case of a real leslie cab, there is no "dry" unless it has a brake setting to stop the rotor and horn completely.

Perhaps, but it doesn't really work as well in the Wet cabs in WDW, in my experience doing just that (caveat: late '90s experience), even with W, D, and W all side-by-side. My 2x12 MixL/MixR Bandmaster 2x12 worked far better for rotary (you could close your eyes and hear the rotor and horn spinning back at you from room reflections), at the expense of stereo width of the stuff you wanted to be stereo wide. The Spacestation XL lives and breathes phase interaction, being more or less mid/side mic technique in reverse. A Leslie cab is a localized point source emitting stereoness into the environment, and the Spacestation really does it well.

 

[Deadpool_25]

This ↑. You control the mix via the level of the 100% wet signal. The amp in the center provides all the dry. If you're not running your effects at 100% wet, then you're not using true Wet/Dry or Wet/Dry/Wet. The whole point is that the wet and dry signals mix in the air instead of electronically.

No, in a wet/dry/wet setup there is at minimum 3 speakers with a center dry and 2 wets. That's it, that's the definition.

The amount of dry signal mixed into the wet speakers is neither here nor there. We can be more specific and call it mix/dry/mix but at the end of the day it still falls under the generic umbrella of wet/dry/wet.

I'd wager most people that have been down this route prefer some dry mixed into the wet speakers.

I agree with SonVolt here.

If someone asks who were some users of wdw, one of the main examples would be EVH. There's no "official" definition. There's the way it was originally done and there are some adaptations and they all fall under the wdw umbrella imo.

That's true but running delay 100% wet doesn't sound as good to me (too jarring) as opposed to having some dry signal mixed along with it (EVH style). No free lunch I guess.

Can you run the JP2C through the FM9 but keep it digitally "dry" so it time-aligns with the Wets? My FX8 doesn't have that capability.

You can use 4CM, split the paths on the grid, send the dry output to the JP2C return and the wet output to a stereo power amp. You don't get the JP2C power section in the wet amps but it'll work fine and should sound great. I've done that with my EVH head.

Before I moved to using FRFRs (a recent change), I was doing the wdw thing using the amp models in the FM9. I was using the EVH head as just a power amp for the dry cab; I used a Powerstage 700 for the wet cabs. You might spend some time dialing in the JP2C amp models to sound like your real JP2C. That can make wdw a lot simpler to deal with both physically and mentally.

 

[SonVolt]

You can use 4CM, split the paths on the grid, send the dry output to the JP2C return and the wet output to a stereo power amp. You don't get the JP2C power section in the wet amps but it'll work fine and should sound great. I've done that with my EVH head.

Before I moved to using FRFRs (a recent change), I was doing the wdw thing using the amp models in the FM9. I was using the EVH head as just a power amp for the dry cab; I used a Powerstage 700 for the wet cabs. You might spend some time dialing in the JP2C amp models to sound like your real JP2C. That can make wdw a lot simpler to deal with both physically and mentally.

How do you like the Powerstage? I've got a Matrix GT800FX, but have been curious about Seymour Duncan and Fryette's power amps lately.

Only downside to bypassing the power section of a Mesa Mark amp is that it also eliminates the GEQ from the signal path (I think).

 

[sprint]

w/d/w? didn't do much for me as I only have 2 ears.

Edit: But seriously - I've tried a few times in music my room. I found it a pita to get the levels right between the dry and wets. I tried varying amount of dry in the sides but just kept coming back to "why bother@ when I can quite comfortably manipulate a stereo field. Maybe next time I'll hit the sweet spot as i go after it every few months.

 

[SonVolt]

w/d/w? didn't do much for me as I only have 2 ears.

Edit: But seriously - I've tried a few times in music my room. I found it a pita to get the levels right between the dry and wets. I tried varying amount of dry in the sides but just kept coming back to "why bother@ when I can quite comfortably manipulate a stereo field. Maybe next time I'll hit the sweet spot as i go after it every few months.

Huge improvement in feel and attack between Stereo and W/D/W in my experience when using real amps and cabs w/digital FX. You're right though, it is a huge pain in the ass.

 

[FPFL]

Would you do w/d instead?

Stereo.

A lot of W/D/W was driven by how awful the bypass and signal path was on the old school, complex rigs. Your core tone was getting so stomped on you wanted one clean signal path for that sweet amp tone to sing.

We don't have that problem today in Fractal.

 

[sprint]

Huge improvement in feel and attack between Stereo and W/D/W in my experience when using real amps and cabs w/digital FX. You're right though, it is a huge pain in the ass.

Thanks - been using 3 studio monitors for my experiments - will move my real cabs around and try it that way.

 

[SonVolt]

Stereo.

A lot of W/D/W was driven by how awful the bypass and signal path was on the old school, complex rigs. Your core tone was getting so stomped on you wanted one clean signal path for that sweet amp tone to sing.

We don't have that problem today in Fractal.

You certainly don't have the signal loss when stacking effects with Fractal vs the old physical rack systems as long as you're using Fractal the way it was designed. Once you start integrating digital effects with real tube amps & cabs then the discussion of W/D/W suddenly becomes relevant again.

 

[Deadpool_25]

How do you like the Powerstage? I've got a Matrix GT800FX, but have been curious about Seymour Duncan and Fryette's power amps lately.

Only downside to bypassing the power section of a Mesa Mark amp is that it also eliminates the GEQ from the signal path (I think).

I like the PS a lot. As is the case with my FR-12, I think the onboard tone controls can be handy.

The GEQ is after the gain but I'm sure it's before the effects send. Interestingly the JP2C also has a slave out which is a tap off the speaker output (so it includes the power section).

Stereo.

A lot of W/D/W was driven by how awful the bypass and signal path was on the old school, complex rigs. Your core tone was getting so stomped on you wanted one clean signal path for that sweet amp tone to sing.

We don't have that problem today in Fractal.

w/d/w? didn't do much for me as I only have 2 ears.

Edit: But seriously - I've tried a few times in music my room. I found it a pita to get the levels right between the dry and wets. I tried varying amount of dry in the sides but just kept coming back to "why bother@ when I can quite comfortably manipulate a stereo field. Maybe next time I'll hit the sweet spot as i go after it every few months.

Running wdw with just a fractal is very easy (assuming you have three cabs and three channels of power). It definitely gets more complex if adding a real* amp into the mix.

I've done mono and I've done stereo. I've done wd and wdw (both with 100% wet effects and with dry signal mixed into the wet cabs). I've done all of that with real* amps and effects, with real* amps + fractal, and with fractal only. In all cases, I absolutely love wdw (mix/dry/mix). Note that I've used real* cabs (and lately FRFRs) in all of those; I've only used studio monitors in stereo.

I sometimes see the argument that wdw isn't any different than modern stereo because you can blend the effects in with the dry signal in ways you couldn't back in the day. I'm generally not one to take such a strong stance on such things but wdw vs stereo can be such a huge difference I can't figure out how people can't hear it. It's huge. Like going from stereo on your home theater to adding a center channel.

* Side note: It annoys me saying "real" about amps and effects. As if the Fractal amps and effects are any less real (think about that carefully before you say they actually are less real). Granted, everyone understands what you mean when you say that but it still irks me a little lol.

 

[FPFL]

@Deadpool_25 I 100% agree stereo vs d/m/d is clearly, audibly different. It's fun at a practice space or at home.

I also don't think it's worth it (or even wise) for shows unless you are at the Van Halen level of roadies and sound engineers to support your habit.

Stereo for guitars is a big ask at a lot of the shows humble me plays. It's great when you can get it, but I don't expect it - and nothing is worse than a stereo rig mono mic'd without a proper sum and the FX get weird thru the PA.

Murphy's Law is such a reliable friend at shows I tend to err on the side of mono unless I know it's going to be someone we've worked with before at the board.

 

[sprint]

It annoys me saying "real" about amps and effects. As if the Fractal amps and effects are any less real (think about that carefully before you say they actually are less real). Granted, everyone understands what you mean when you say that but it still irks me a little lol.

wow, took whole a lot of imagination to get to that l'il lecture from my, yes, clearly intended "real cab" reference above.

 

[Deadpool_25]

wow, took whole a lot of imagination to get to that l'il lecture from my, yes, clearly intended "real cab" reference above.

Dude I wasn't referencing your post at all. I didn't even register your comment as it has zero to do with that side note. I was referring to my own post and just talking about the phrase in general as it gets applied to modeling vs non-modeling gear.

Asterisks added in original post for clarity.

 

[Deadpool_25]

@Deadpool_25 I 100% agree stereo vs d/m/d is clearly, audibly different. It's fun at a practice space or at home.

I also don't think it's worth it (or even wise) for shows unless you are at the Van Halen level of roadies and sound engineers to support your habit.

Stereo for guitars is a big ask at a lot of the shows humble me plays. It's great when you can get it, but I don't expect it - and nothing is worse than a stereo rig mono mic'd without a proper sum and the FX get weird thru the PA.

Murphy's Law is such a reliable friend at shows I tend to err on the side of mono unless I know it's going to be someone we've worked with before at the board.

Oh I love it at home but no way I'd gig it like that. I'd definitely want stereo but I know mono is probably more realistic in most situations. That's IF I was gigging...which I'm not so I get to spoil myself lol

 

[Deadpool_25]

Thanks - been using 3 studio monitors for my experiments - will move my real cabs around and try it that way.

I had to scroll up to figure out what you meant with that previous comment. I clicked like on that because I think it'll be cool to do it with real cabs vs monitors. I use real cabs (or 12" FRFRs) most of the time and think it's glorious for wdw. I haven't tried wdw on stiludio monitors but I feel like it wouldn't be the same experience. I could be wrong.