Compressor Questions [Archive]

Brian Running

05-01-2007, 11:42 AM

> I have an RNC 1773 compressor. I also have an SWR SM 400S amp and an SWR
> Interstellar Overdrive pre-amp. When I try to run the RNC through the
> effects loop of the SM 400S, I get nothing. When I run the RNC through the
> Interstellar then into the SM 400S, it works fine. Anyone know why I'm
> getting nothing out of the RNC unless I run it through the pre-amp?

When it's in the effects loop, are you getting signal at the compressor?
Do the lights light up at all? If so, then the problem is the input.
Is there a level control for the input of the loop? A knob labeled
"mix" or a switch labeled "wet" or "dry" or something like that? If so,
fiddle with that until you get something. If you're not getting signal
at the compressor, then you'd better check the connections. Does the
effects loop use TRS send-and-return? Are you following the amp
manual's instructions regarding the effects loop to the letter? We'll
get it to work!

Derek Homsberg

05-01-2007, 11:16 PM

"Brian Running" <brunning@XXameritechXX.net> wrote in message
news:gmIZh.2563$tp5.993@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net ...
>> I have an RNC 1773 compressor. I also have an SWR SM 400S amp and an SWR
>> Interstellar Overdrive pre-amp. When I try to run the RNC through the
>> effects loop of the SM 400S, I get nothing. When I run the RNC through
>> the Interstellar then into the SM 400S, it works fine. Anyone know why
>> I'm getting nothing out of the RNC unless I run it through the pre-amp?
>
> When it's in the effects loop, are you getting signal at the compressor?
> Do the lights light up at all? If so, then the problem is the input.

The lights do not light up other than the power light. The only thing on
the compressor that has any effect when put through the effects loop is its
volume control.

> Is there a level control for the input of the loop? A knob labeled "mix"
> or a switch labeled "wet" or "dry" or something like that? If so, fiddle
> with that until you get something.

No, just send and return inputs

> If you're not getting signal at the compressor, then you'd better check
> the connections. Does the effects loop use TRS send-and-return? Are you
> following the amp manual's instructions regarding the effects loop to the
> letter? We'll get it to work!

Don't know what TRS means. Here's all that's in the manual:

EFFECTS LOOP
The Effects Loop is provided for use with any external effect such as a
Chorus or Stereo Flanger, etc. Using the Effects Loop lowers the noise heard
at the speakers generated by the effects unit. The output and input
impedances seen at the "Send" an "Receive" jacks were designed to give
optimum performance from effects units both new and old.

If you have a mono effect, run a shielded cable from the "Send" jack to the
input of the effects unit and another from the output to the "Return Mono"
jack. If a stereo effects unit is used, run separate cables from the left
and right outs of the effects to the "Left" and "Right" return jacks on the
SM-400.

The patching capabilities incorporated in the SM-400 are nearly limitless.
However, in some cases, wiring should be done by a qualified technician. If
you have any definite needs or questions, please call the factory for
assistance.

[As I mentioned, the compressor works fine through the Interstellar
Overdrive preamp. Could the effects loop just be dead?]

Mike Rieves

05-01-2007, 11:21 PM

Derek Homsberg

05-01-2007, 11:37 PM

> The problem with running a compressor in the effects loop is that you're
> blending the compressed signal with the non-compressed signal, in effect,
> defeating the purpose of using a compressor. If the amp or preamp doesn't
> have an insert jack, the best place to put the compressor is either
> between the guitar and pre or between the pre and the power amp if they
> are split. Bass guitars generally have plenty of signal level to drive a
> compressor, so there's usually no problem with running the compressor
> between the guitar and the preamp.

The RNC 1773 compressor works fine through the pre-amp then into the amp,
but the compressor doesn't do anything when I run the guitar directly into
it then into the amp.

Mike Rieves

05-01-2007, 11:59 PM

"Derek Homsberg" <dhomsb32@wbc.com> wrote in message
news:JPSZh.2793$296.2026@newsread4.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
>> The problem with running a compressor in the effects loop is that you're
>> blending the compressed signal with the non-compressed signal, in effect,
>> defeating the purpose of using a compressor. If the amp or preamp doesn't
>> have an insert jack, the best place to put the compressor is either
>> between the guitar and pre or between the pre and the power amp if they
>> are split. Bass guitars generally have plenty of signal level to drive a
>> compressor, so there's usually no problem with running the compressor
>> between the guitar and the preamp.
>
> The RNC 1773 compressor works fine through the pre-amp then into the amp,
> but the compressor doesn't do anything when I run the guitar directly into
> it then into the amp.

That's most likely because your bass isn't puting out enough signal to
activate the compressor. Try turning the threshold lower (toward the larger
negative dB markings), and the ratio control up. If your compressor has gain
reduction meters, you should see them moving when you play harder, and hear
the effect as well. If you have your bass guitar volume control wide open,
the threshold all the way down and the ratio all the way up and you still
don't see any meter movement, your bass guitar signal isn't strong enough to
drive that particular compressor. I have a DBX 266XL, and my basses have
plenty of signal to drive it.

Jim Carr

05-02-2007, 12:23 AM

"Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
news:U7TZh.20467$vD4.4472@bigfe9...
>
> "Derek Homsberg" <dhomsb32@wbc.com> wrote in message
> news:JPSZh.2793$296.2026@newsread4.news.pas.earthl ink.net...

>> The RNC 1773 compressor works fine through the pre-amp then into the amp,
>> but the compressor doesn't do anything when I run the guitar directly
>> into it then into the amp.
>
> That's most likely because your bass isn't puting out enough signal to
> activate the compressor.

> Try turning the threshold lower (toward the larger negative dB markings),
> and the ratio control up. If your compressor has gain reduction meters,
> you should see them moving when you play harder, and hear the effect as
> well. If you have your bass guitar volume control wide open, the threshold
> all the way down and the ratio all the way up and you still don't see any
> meter movement, your bass guitar signal isn't strong enough to drive that
> particular compressor. I have a DBX 266XL, and my basses have plenty of
> signal to drive it.

The RNC 1773 operates at 0.775 Vrms (0 dBu) nominal. The dbx 266XL has
switches on the back for each channel to run at either +4dBu or -10dBv
(which is like -7.7dBu, right?).

Jim Carr

05-02-2007, 12:39 AM

"Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
news:rASZh.20464$vD4.5285@bigfe9...

>
> The problem with running a compressor in the effects loop is that you're
> blending the compressed signal with the non-compressed signal, in effect,

It depends on whether the effects loop is series or parallel. A large
percentage of bass amps run it in series such as my GK-800RB. If there is no
Blend or Mix control, it's series. That means it is just fine for a
compressor. The SWR SM 400S has a series effects loop.

If you have a rackmount compressor, it's probably running at a nominal level
of +4dBu, 0dBu or -10dBv whereas a pedal compressor is probably running
at -20dBu. So, if you want to compress *before* your preamp, use a pedal. If
you are going to compress after the preamp, use a rackmount compressor. If
you have a separate preamp and the amp has a series effects loop, just
connect the compressor output right to the Effects Return. If you're using
the onboard preamp, take the Effects Send into the rack compressor and use
the Effects return.

It's possible the effects loop on that amp is hinky. It's also possible that
his onboard preamp gain is extremely low while the power amp gain is high. I
suggest that the OP try adjusting the Gain Control and using the Hi Gain
input to make sure it's sending a hot enough signal to the compressor.

Mike Rieves

05-02-2007, 12:43 AM

"Jim Carr" <newsgroups@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
news:dvTZh.110795$s8.58465@newsfe21.lga...
> "Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
> news:U7TZh.20467$vD4.4472@bigfe9...
>>
>> "Derek Homsberg" <dhomsb32@wbc.com> wrote in message
>> news:JPSZh.2793$296.2026@newsread4.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
>
>>> The RNC 1773 compressor works fine through the pre-amp then into the
>>> amp, but the compressor doesn't do anything when I run the guitar
>>> directly into it then into the amp.
>>
>> That's most likely because your bass isn't puting out enough signal to
>> activate the compressor.
>
>> Try turning the threshold lower (toward the larger negative dB markings),
>> and the ratio control up. If your compressor has gain reduction meters,
>> you should see them moving when you play harder, and hear the effect as
>> well. If you have your bass guitar volume control wide open, the
>> threshold all the way down and the ratio all the way up and you still
>> don't see any meter movement, your bass guitar signal isn't strong enough
>> to drive that particular compressor. I have a DBX 266XL, and my basses
>> have plenty of signal to drive it.
>
> The RNC 1773 operates at 0.775 Vrms (0 dBu) nominal. The dbx 266XL has
> switches on the back for each channel to run at either +4dBu or -10dBv
> (which is like -7.7dBu, right?).

You're right about the -10dB/+4dB switch on my 266XL. I run my bass channel
in the -10 dB mode and the bass guitar has plaenty of signal at that
setting. At the +4 dB setting the signal is not sufficient to adequately
drive the compressor, though there is some effect (barely audible). I tried
it with my Squier Bronco bass now with a Duncan Strat Scorcher pickup, which
is much hotter than the original. With the original pickup, I probably would
have gotten no effect at all at +4.
With the RNC 1773, most basses probably wouldn't have enough signal to
effectively drive the compressor enough to get a useful effect, so the OP
will need to either run the compressor between the preamp and the power amp,
or in a channel insert if his setup has one.

Derek Homsberg

05-02-2007, 01:09 AM

> That's most likely because your bass isn't puting out enough signal to
> activate the compressor. Try turning the threshold lower (toward the
> larger negative dB markings), and the ratio control up. If your compressor
> has gain reduction meters, you should see them moving when you play
> harder, and hear the effect as well. If you have your bass guitar volume
> control wide open, the threshold all the way down and the ratio all the
> way up and you still don't see any meter movement, your bass guitar signal
> isn't strong enough to drive that particular compressor. I have a DBX
> 266XL, and my basses have plenty of signal to drive it.

OK. Plugged the RNC back into the SM400S effects loop and cranked up the
volume and gain on the amp and the bass, and yes, the compressor does work
through the effects loop! So thanks everyone for your advice. It does
require much more volume than when I run it through the pre-amp (I guess
that's why they call it a pre-amp!), but it definitely is doing its thing
directly through the effects loop.

My bass is a ~1971 Fender Precision that I've had since 1972 and sounds
great, so I knew it wasn't the bass.

Thanks again.

BTW, what does OP stand for?

Derek Homsberg

05-02-2007, 01:13 AM

"> It's possible the effects loop on that amp is hinky. It's also possible
that
> his onboard preamp gain is extremely low while the power amp gain is high.
> I suggest that the OP try adjusting the Gain Control and using the Hi Gain
> input to make sure it's sending a hot enough signal to the compressor.

Thanks for the good info. Yes, that worked!

Mike Rieves

05-02-2007, 01:17 AM

"Jim Carr" <newsgroups@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
news:5KTZh.305039$Pi4.88855@newsfe14.lga...
> "Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
> news:rASZh.20464$vD4.5285@bigfe9...
>
>>
>> The problem with running a compressor in the effects loop is that you're
>> blending the compressed signal with the non-compressed signal, in effect,
>
> It depends on whether the effects loop is series or parallel. A large
> percentage of bass amps run it in series such as my GK-800RB. If there is
> no Blend or Mix control, it's series. That means it is just fine for a
> compressor. The SWR SM 400S has a series effects loop.

If it is in series, it is an insert, it isn't a loop. Effects loops are
parallel and blend the effects signal with the original or "dry" signal. The
fact that the signal has two parallel paths is why they call them loops. In
a series arrangement, there is an input and an output, there is no parallel
path and no loops. Inserts are series Effects loops are parallel. The
terminology is sometimes confused, but they are two entirely different
animals and it's misleading to call an insert a loop or vice versa. Not
knowing the difference is why musicians plug a compressor into an effects
loop and wonder why they can't get it to work.

> If you have a rackmount compressor, it's probably running at a nominal
> level of +4dBu, 0dBu or -10dBv whereas a pedal compressor is probably
> running at -20dBu. So, if you want to compress *before* your preamp, use a
> pedal. If you are going to compress after the preamp, use a rackmount
> compressor. If you have a separate preamp and the amp has a series effects
> loop, just connect the compressor output right to the Effects Return. If
> you're using the onboard preamp, take the Effects Send into the rack
> compressor and use the Effects return.
>
> It's possible the effects loop on that amp is hinky. It's also possible
> that his onboard preamp gain is extremely low while the power amp gain is
> high. I suggest that the OP try adjusting the Gain Control and using the
> Hi Gain input to make sure it's sending a hot enough signal to the
> compressor.
>

Derek Homsberg

05-02-2007, 01:26 AM

>> It depends on whether the effects loop is series or parallel. A large
>> percentage of bass amps run it in series such as my GK-800RB. If there is
>> no Blend or Mix control, it's series. That means it is just fine for a
>> compressor. The SWR SM 400S has a series effects loop.
>
> If it is in series, it is an insert, it isn't a loop. Effects loops are
> parallel and blend the effects signal with the original or "dry" signal.
> The fact that the signal has two parallel paths is why they call them
> loops. In a series arrangement, there is an input and an output, there is
> no parallel path and no loops. Inserts are series Effects loops are
> parallel. The terminology is sometimes confused, but they are two entirely
> different animals and it's misleading to call an insert a loop or vice
> versa. Not knowing the difference is why musicians plug a compressor into
> an effects loop and wonder why they can't get it to work.

It sounds like SWR mis-named its insert as an Effects Loop, but that's what
they call it.

Mike Rieves

05-02-2007, 01:36 AM

"Derek Homsberg" <dhomsb32@wbc.com> wrote in message
news:QpUZh.6039$Ut6.280@newsread1.news.pas.earthli nk.net...
>>> It depends on whether the effects loop is series or parallel. A large
>>> percentage of bass amps run it in series such as my GK-800RB. If there
>>> is no Blend or Mix control, it's series. That means it is just fine for
>>> a compressor. The SWR SM 400S has a series effects loop.
>>
>> If it is in series, it is an insert, it isn't a loop. Effects loops are
>> parallel and blend the effects signal with the original or "dry" signal.
>> The fact that the signal has two parallel paths is why they call them
>> loops. In a series arrangement, there is an input and an output, there is
>> no parallel path and no loops. Inserts are series Effects loops are
>> parallel. The terminology is sometimes confused, but they are two
>> entirely different animals and it's misleading to call an insert a loop
>> or vice versa. Not knowing the difference is why musicians plug a
>> compressor into an effects loop and wonder why they can't get it to work.
>
> It sounds like SWR mis-named its insert as an Effects Loop, but that's
> what they call it.

That's entirely possible, I've met lots of people, some of them music
professionals, who didn't know the difference. I'm really not surprised.
Anyone who worked studios in the old analog days with patchbays, etc
wouldn't make that mistake. :-)

Jim Carr

05-02-2007, 02:48 AM

"Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
news:zhUZh.20474$vD4.960@bigfe9...

> If it is in series, it is an insert, it isn't a loop. Effects loops are
> parallel and blend the effects signal with the original or "dry" signal.

You're arguing semantics and losing. In the world of bass and guitar amps,
the term effects loop is used whether it is series or parallel. Some of the
more expensive heads like Trace Elliot and Aguilar allow you to switch
between series and parallel.

Some other models such as the Ampeg B4R have a blend knob that doesn't work
like a normal parallel return blend. In one direction it is 100% dry and the
other direction it is 100% wet rather than it just varying the amount of wet
signal returned. So, if you have a blend knob, you still might be able to
use it as an insert.

And many other amps call it an Effects Loop even though it really is just an
insert. Check out the manuals for the Ashdown amps. They call it a "serial
effects loop." These models never have a blend knob.

When all else fails, read the manual.

Jim Carr

05-02-2007, 02:51 AM

"Derek Homsberg" <dhomsb32@wbc.com> wrote in message
news:eaUZh.10801$3P3.9205@newsread3.news.pas.earth link.net...

> My bass is a ~1971 Fender Precision that I've had since 1972 and sounds
> great, so I knew it wasn't the bass.

Well, you can never be sure. Tell you what: How about you ship it over to
me. I'll check it out and send it right back. I promise.

> Thanks again.

Glad to help.

> BTW, what does OP stand for?

Original Poster - the person who started the thread.

Tony Risotto

05-02-2007, 04:36 AM

Hi, Derek.

In advance: I'm sorry if this is redundant.

I use RNC 1773's and I used to use an SWR SM 400.

RNC's are not balanced, as far as I know; use guitar leads when using them,
not TRS cables. TRS cables have two bands across the metal schlong.

Unbalanced guitar leads have ONE band across the schlong.

The SCHLONG is the thing that sticks into the hole.

Use ONE-BANDED schlongs when plugging into and out of the RNC.

What are your RNC's knobs set at? Is the threshold high or low? 7am is low,
5pm is high.

Regards,
Tony

Brian Running

05-02-2007, 11:39 AM

Les Cargill

05-02-2007, 09:13 PM

Mike Rieves wrote:

> "Jim Carr" <newsgroups@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
> news:5KTZh.305039$Pi4.88855@newsfe14.lga...
>
>>"Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
>>news:rASZh.20464$vD4.5285@bigfe9...
>>
>>
>>> The problem with running a compressor in the effects loop is that you're
>>>blending the compressed signal with the non-compressed signal, in effect,
>>
>>It depends on whether the effects loop is series or parallel. A large
>>percentage of bass amps run it in series such as my GK-800RB. If there is
>>no Blend or Mix control, it's series. That means it is just fine for a
>>compressor. The SWR SM 400S has a series effects loop.
>
>
> If it is in series, it is an insert, it isn't a loop. Effects loops are
> parallel and blend the effects signal with the original or "dry" signal. The
> fact that the signal has two parallel paths is why they call them loops. In
> a series arrangement, there is an input and an output, there is no parallel
> path and no loops. Inserts are series Effects loops are parallel. The
> terminology is sometimes confused, but they are two entirely different
> animals and it's misleading to call an insert a loop or vice versa. Not
> knowing the difference is why musicians plug a compressor into an effects
> loop and wonder why they can't get it to work.
>

Manufacturers call series F/X loops "F/X loops" all the
time. Yes, it's just a "2 TS jack" insert as opposed
to a "1 TRS jack insert"

I have specifically seen the terms "series/parallel" as
Jim uses it in product literature.

<snip>

--
Les Cragill

Mike Rieves

05-03-2007, 12:28 AM

"Jim Carr" <newsgroups@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
news:ICVZh.69526$NK5.35272@newsfe23.lga...
> "Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
> news:zhUZh.20474$vD4.960@bigfe9...
>
>> If it is in series, it is an insert, it isn't a loop. Effects loops are
>> parallel and blend the effects signal with the original or "dry" signal.
>
> You're arguing semantics and losing. In the world of bass and guitar amps,
> the term effects loop is used whether it is series or parallel. Some of
> the more expensive heads like Trace Elliot and Aguilar allow you to switch
> between series and parallel.
_________
If it isn't parallel, it isn't a loop. Parallel: ___/
\____ See the loop?
\_________/

Series ____ ______ No loop! Some of the more expensive heads let you
switch between inserts and effect loops, regardless of what they call it.

> Some other models such as the Ampeg B4R have a blend knob that doesn't
> work like a normal parallel return blend. In one direction it is 100% dry
> and the other direction it is 100% wet rather than it just varying the
> amount of wet signal returned. So, if you have a blend knob, you still
> might be able to use it as an insert.

You could use it like an insert, but not as an insert. It's still a
parallel circuit, you just have the ability to vary the loop output signal
to either 100% wet or 100% dry. You can do the same thing with a regular
effects loop if it gives you the option of pre-volume-control loop input.

> And many other amps call it an Effects Loop even though it really is just
> an insert. Check out the manuals for the Ashdown amps. They call it a
> "serial effects loop." These models never have a blend knob.
>
> When all else fails, read the manual.

Again, if it isn't parallel, it isn't a loop, regardless of what they call
it. They are the ones making the semantic error. Semantic errors like this
are the reason for the confusion about the proper way to hook up EQs and
compressors. Simply put, EQs and compressors are designed to be used with
inserts in series, while delays, reverbs, phasors, flangers, etc will work
fine in an effects loop in parallel, and if that type of unit has a blend or
balance control it may be used with either.

Mike Rieves

05-03-2007, 12:29 AM

"Les Cargill" <lcargill@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4639293b$0$4899$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Mike Rieves wrote:
>
>> "Jim Carr" <newsgroups@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
>> news:5KTZh.305039$Pi4.88855@newsfe14.lga...
>>
>>>"Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
>>>news:rASZh.20464$vD4.5285@bigfe9...
>>>
>>>
>>>> The problem with running a compressor in the effects loop is that
>>>> you're blending the compressed signal with the non-compressed signal,
>>>> in effect,
>>>
>>>It depends on whether the effects loop is series or parallel. A large
>>>percentage of bass amps run it in series such as my GK-800RB. If there is
>>>no Blend or Mix control, it's series. That means it is just fine for a
>>>compressor. The SWR SM 400S has a series effects loop.
>>
>>
>> If it is in series, it is an insert, it isn't a loop. Effects loops are
>> parallel and blend the effects signal with the original or "dry" signal.
>> The fact that the signal has two parallel paths is why they call them
>> loops. In a series arrangement, there is an input and an output, there is
>> no parallel path and no loops. Inserts are series Effects loops are
>> parallel. The terminology is sometimes confused, but they are two
>> entirely different animals and it's misleading to call an insert a loop
>> or vice versa. Not knowing the difference is why musicians plug a
>> compressor into an effects loop and wonder why they can't get it to work.
>>
>
> Manufacturers call series F/X loops "F/X loops" all the
> time. Yes, it's just a "2 TS jack" insert as opposed
> to a "1 TRS jack insert"
>
> I have specifically seen the terms "series/parallel" as
> Jim uses it in product literature.
>
I have too, but that doesn't make it right. It just makes it confusing.

Mike Rieves

05-03-2007, 12:31 AM

"Brian Running" <brunning@XXameritechXX.net> wrote in message
news:co1_h.6733$2v1.3148@newssvr14.news.prodigy.ne t...
>> The problem with running a compressor in the effects loop is that
>> you're blending the compressed signal with the non-compressed signal, in
>> effect, defeating the purpose of using a compressor.
>
> No.

Yes, assuming that the effects loop is properly labeled, and not a
mis-labeled insert.

Jim Carr

05-03-2007, 03:49 AM

"Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
news:uFc_h.7302$TD3.2461@bignews5.bellsouth.net...

>> the term effects loop is used whether it is series or parallel. Some of
>> the more expensive heads like Trace Elliot and Aguilar allow you to
>> switch between series and parallel.
>
> _________
> If it isn't parallel, it isn't a loop. Parallel: ___/ \____ See the
> loop?
>
> \_________/
>
> Series ____ ______ No loop! Some of the more expensive heads let
> you switch between inserts and effect loops, regardless of what they call
> it.

I thought you came here to learn, Mike, so learn. They call it an effects
loop. They could call it cottage cheese for all I care. I can't recall
seeing a guitar or bass head that called it an insert, though some call it a
Send/Return, which is close enough.

As for it being a loop, it *looks* like a loop. A cable comes out, goes into
some effects, and another connects back in. The head, cables, and effects
form the shape of a loop. I don't think it's as glaringly incorrect as
cottage cheese.

Since you just *love* to argue this kind of stupid point, technically
speaking what you call a loop is *not* a loop. The definition is "a portion
of a cord, ribbon, etc., folded or doubled upon itself so as to leave an
opening between the parts" or "anything shaped more or less like a loop."
When a plane flies a loop, it doesn't also stay on a straight path they way
a parallel effects loop does. The loop at the end of a railroad track for
turning around doesn't also have a straight path. No mention is made of
anything relating to effects loops.

I'm sorry this doesn't fit into your neat little world, but it is what it
is. Search Google with ["effects loop" series parallel], and you will get
31,000 hits from sites like Gibson, CrateAmps, LondonPower, KashaAmplifiers,
ProSoundCommunications and many more.

> You could use it like an insert, but not as an insert.

Which is why I wrote, "you could use it like an insert." Are you really
bored or something?

> Again, if it isn't parallel, it isn't a loop, regardless of what they
> call it.

If everybody calls it that, then that's what it is. According to the
dictionary, a "buss" is a kiss, but lots of people use that spelling when
referring to mixers. The dictionary doesn't recognize "head" as an
amplifier, but we musicians all know what it means. They don't recognize
"combo" as being an amp and speaker combined into a single unit, but we all
know what it means. And they surely don't recognize "insert" to be what you
and I understand it to be.

Just because *you* didn't know the terminology doesn't make it wrong. But if
you want to make a fuss about how all of these amp makers are using the
wrong terms, go right ahead. I'm sure you'll have a good time.

Brian Running

05-03-2007, 08:23 AM

>>> The problem with running a compressor in the effects loop is that
>>> you're blending the compressed signal with the non-compressed signal, in
>>> effect, defeating the purpose of using a compressor.
>> No.
>
> Yes, assuming that the effects loop is properly labeled, and not a
> mis-labeled insert.

No.

Mike Rieves

05-04-2007, 12:19 AM

"Jim Carr" <newsgroups@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
news:zBf_h.150359$nh4.54556@newsfe20.lga...
> "Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
> news:uFc_h.7302$TD3.2461@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>
>>> the term effects loop is used whether it is series or parallel. Some of
>>> the more expensive heads like Trace Elliot and Aguilar allow you to
>>> switch between series and parallel.
>>
>> _________
>> If it isn't parallel, it isn't a loop. Parallel: ___/ \____ See the
>> loop?
>>
>> \_________/
>>
>> Series ____ ______ No loop! Some of the more expensive heads let
>> you switch between inserts and effect loops, regardless of what they call
>> it.
>
> I thought you came here to learn, Mike, so learn. They call it an effects
> loop. They could call it cottage cheese for all I care. I can't recall
> seeing a guitar or bass head that called it an insert, though some call it
> a Send/Return, which is close enough.

> As for it being a loop, it *looks* like a loop. A cable comes out, goes
> into some effects, and another connects back in. The head, cables, and
> effects form the shape of a loop. I don't think it's as glaringly
> incorrect as cottage cheese.
>
> Since you just *love* to argue this kind of stupid point, technically
> speaking what you call a loop is *not* a loop. The definition is "a
> portion of a cord, ribbon, etc., folded or doubled upon itself so as to
> leave an opening between the parts" or "anything shaped more or less like
> a loop." When a plane flies a loop, it doesn't also stay on a straight
> path they way a parallel effects loop does. The loop at the end of a
> railroad track for turning around doesn't also have a straight path. No
> mention is made of anything relating to effects loops.

> I'm sorry this doesn't fit into your neat little world, but it is what it
> is. Search Google with ["effects loop" series parallel], and you will get
> 31,000 hits from sites like Gibson, CrateAmps, LondonPower,
> KashaAmplifiers, ProSoundCommunications and many more.
>
>> You could use it like an insert, but not as an insert.
>
> Which is why I wrote, "you could use it like an insert." Are you really
> bored or something?
>
>> Again, if it isn't parallel, it isn't a loop, regardless of what they
>> call it.
>
> If everybody calls it that, then that's what it is. According to the
> dictionary, a "buss" is a kiss, but lots of people use that spelling when
> referring to mixers. The dictionary doesn't recognize "head" as an
> amplifier, but we musicians all know what it means. They don't recognize
> "combo" as being an amp and speaker combined into a single unit, but we
> all know what it means. And they surely don't recognize "insert" to be
> what you and I understand it to be.
>
> Just because *you* didn't know the terminology doesn't make it wrong. But
> if you want to make a fuss about how all of these amp makers are using the
> wrong terms, go right ahead. I'm sure you'll have a good time.

The reason I brought it up and am arguing is that calling both an insert
and a parallel circuit an effects loop is misleading and confusing to all
the poor musicians who don't know the difference. You've been around music
for a while, how many times have you heard, "I hooked my new compressor up
in the effects loop and I can't hear any difference!". Then you have to
explain that an effect has to be hooked up in series, not in parallel. If
you go with some companies calling both an insert and a parallel loop an
"effects loop", then you have to explain by saying, "You can't hook it up
through an effects loop, you have to hook it up through an effects loop.",
that makes no sense, and neither does an insert being labeled as an effects
loop. You have a logical mind, Jim and I think the only reason you're
arguing is because it's me. I'll accept a company labeling an insert as a
"series effects loop" and using the term "parallel effects loop" for a
parallel send/receive circuit, as long as it differentiates between the two,
but just labeling an insert as an effects loop is confusing and misleading.
I'll drop it because I've made my point, but just think about it the next
time you hear, or the next time someone posts, "I hooked my compressor up to
the effects loop and I can't hear the difference no matter how I set it.".

Mike Rieves

05-04-2007, 12:22 AM

"Brian Running" <brunning@xxtdsxx.net> wrote in message
news:GCj_h.34125$G23.13046@newsreading01.news.tds. net...
>>>> The problem with running a compressor in the effects loop is that
>>>> you're blending the compressed signal with the non-compressed signal,
>>>> in effect, defeating the purpose of using a compressor.
>>> No.
>>
>> Yes, assuming that the effects loop is properly labeled, and not a
>> mis-labeled insert.
>
> No.

Yes! Try hooking a compressor up through a parallel effects loop without
a mix or blend control that you can use to eliminate the dry signal and see
how much effect you can hear, no matter how you set it. Sure, you know
better, but how many newbies do?

Jim Carr

05-04-2007, 01:42 AM

"Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
news:tDx_h.7570$TD3.1680@bignews5.bellsouth.net...

> The reason I brought it up and am arguing is that calling both an insert
> and a parallel circuit an effects loop is misleading and confusing to all
> the poor musicians who don't know the difference.

Where do you think musicians get their information? Mostly from the product
literature, be it the description of the product or the manual. That's the
terminology they use. You're coming from a sound guy perspective where
having Inserts is very common and having a "wet only" effects return is the
norm.

In the world of guitar and bass players, we just don't see inserts like you
do on a mixer. And unless you're using a rack setup, your effects are *not*
returning a "wet-only" signal. Pedals, by far the most common effects for
guitarists and bassists, return a blended signal.

>You've been around music for a while, how many times have you heard, "I
>hooked my new compressor up in the effects loop and I can't hear any
>difference!".

I have *never* heard anyone say that because on probably half the amps I've
seen the effects loop acts like an insert but is still called either an
effects loop or send/return. A quick glance at Musician's Friend shows me
that Gallien-Krueger, Behringer, Ashdown, Eden, Peavey, and Marshall all
have series effects loops but do not call them inserts. Other big names like
Ampeg, SWR, Eden, and Trace Elliot call them effects loops but have some
method of making them either series or parallel. Having the choice on how to
use it forces the user understand the difference.

So, if anything the confusion YOU had in thinking that parallel is the norm
would be more common. At least it would in somebody coming from the world of
mixers.

Brian Running

05-04-2007, 11:37 AM

> Yes! Try hooking a compressor up through a parallel effects loop without
> a mix or blend control that you can use to eliminate the dry signal and see
> how much effect you can hear, no matter how you set it.

Okey dokey, I will do that -- as soon as you can show me a bass amp that
has such an effects loop -- an effects loop that renders the inserted
effect inaudible. I'll bet that's a big-selling feature.

I eagerly await your response. It's Friday, I've got all weekend to
find one of the amps you name, and try it out.

Mike Fleming

05-05-2007, 11:08 AM

In article <lwSZh.2790$296.140@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.ne t>,
"Derek Homsberg" <dhomsb32@wbc.com> writes:

> Don't know what TRS means.

TRS means Tip-Ring-Sleeve and in this case is a way of effectively
making two mono connections (in and out) witb a single stereo plug.
Stereo plugs have a tip connection, a ring connection (which is the
band under the tip), then a long sleeve connection. When used for
stereo, IIRC tip is left and Ring is Right (sleeve is always earth).
When used for an effects insert (or loop, just to make Mike happy),
the tip is output to the effect, and the ring is input from the
effect. With no plug inserted, the two are connected together. With a
plug inserted, the signal is fed out from the tip and comes back to
the ring.

--
Mike Fleming

Mike Rieves

05-06-2007, 03:03 AM

"Jim Carr" <newsgroups@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
news:aRy_h.20237$ZD3.15221@newsfe01.lga...
> "Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
> news:tDx_h.7570$TD3.1680@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>
>> The reason I brought it up and am arguing is that calling both an insert
>> and a parallel circuit an effects loop is misleading and confusing to
>> all the poor musicians who don't know the difference.
>
> Where do you think musicians get their information? Mostly from the
> product literature, be it the description of the product or the manual.
> That's the terminology they use. You're coming from a sound guy
> perspective where having Inserts is very common and having a "wet only"
> effects return is the norm.

Musicians apparently don't get the right information, I'm constantly
hearing the, "I hooked my compressor up in the effects loop and I can't hear
it working no matter how I set it." thing from musicians. A big part of that
is mis-labeling by the amp manufacturers. You know how musicians are about
reading manuals, if compressors and EQs were labeled "Use only in Inserts or
series effects circuits" and amps' effects circuits were properly labeled, I
wouldn't hear this complaint all the time. Providing an insert jack in an
amp is a very simple, easy, and cheap thing, all good amps should have them,
but many don't.

> In the world of guitar and bass players, we just don't see inserts like
> you do on a mixer. And unless you're using a rack setup, your effects are
> *not* returning a "wet-only" signal. Pedals, by far the most common
> effects for guitarists and bassists, return a blended signal.

Right, and there is usually a blend or wet/dry control on every effect,
except compressors and EQ's.
However, in a parallel effects loop, you should run the effect with wet only
signal, it makes it much easier to get a proper blend using the amp's
effects send and receive controls, especially when you're using more than
one effect in the loop.

>>You've been around music for a while, how many times have you heard, "I
>>hooked my new compressor up in the effects loop and I can't hear any
>>difference!".
>
> I have *never* heard anyone say that because on probably half the amps
> I've seen the effects loop acts like an insert but is still called either
> an effects loop or send/return. A quick glance at Musician's Friend shows
> me that Gallien-Krueger, Behringer, Ashdown, Eden, Peavey, and Marshall
> all have series effects loops but do not call them inserts. Other big
> names like Ampeg, SWR, Eden, and Trace Elliot call them effects loops but
> have some method of making them either series or parallel. Having the
> choice on how to use it forces the user understand the difference.
>
> So, if anything the confusion YOU had in thinking that parallel is the
> norm would be more common. At least it would in somebody coming from the
> world of mixers.
>

It isn't in thinking that parallel is the norm, it's that both series and
parallel circuits are often labeled "effects loop" without clarification.
Maybe I'm going overboard, but I've heard that problem at least three times
in the last month from newbies who were trying to hook up compressors or EQs
to a guitar or bass rig.

Mike Rieves

05-06-2007, 03:13 AM

"Brian Running" <brunning@XXameritechXX.net> wrote in message
news:CyH_h.116$sL7.86@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> Yes! Try hooking a compressor up through a parallel effects loop
>> without a mix or blend control that you can use to eliminate the dry
>> signal and see how much effect you can hear, no matter how you set it.
>
> Okey dokey, I will do that -- as soon as you can show me a bass amp that
> has such an effects loop -- an effects loop that renders the inserted
> effect inaudible. I'll bet that's a big-selling feature.
>
> I eagerly await your response. It's Friday, I've got all weekend to find
> one of the amps you name, and try it out.

Acoustic Image Clarus 1 and 2R
Traynor YCV80Q
I turned those two up in a two minute Google search, I'm sure there are
more.

Brian Running

05-06-2007, 11:01 AM

> Acoustic Image Clarus 1 and 2R

Have a return level control, so you can run 100% of the signal through
the loop.

> Traynor YCV80Q

Has both a parallel loop with level control and a series loop, so you
can run 100% of the signal through the loop.

Could you please explain how putting the compressor in these loops would
defeat the purpose of having the compressor? Before Jim shows up to argue?

Mike Rieves

05-07-2007, 12:16 AM

"Brian Running" <brunning@xxtdsxx.net> wrote in message
news:Pcl%h.34242$G23.9179@newsreading01.news.tds.n et...
>> Acoustic Image Clarus 1 and 2R
>
> Have a return level control, so you can run 100% of the signal through the
> loop.

A return level control generally won't let you run the signal 100% wet,
unless it's a balance or blend control.

>> Traynor YCV80Q
>
> Has both a parallel loop with level control and a series loop, so you can
> run 100% of the signal through the loop.
>
> Could you please explain how putting the compressor in these loops would
> defeat the purpose of having the compressor? Before Jim shows up to
> argue?

In most parallel loops, the send control is post-volume, not allowing you
to minimize the dry signal being sent through, unless there is a balance or
blend control that allows 100% wet or dry signal passage. If you have a
bunch of dry signal going through, the compressor output is lost in the mix.

Brian Running

05-07-2007, 09:38 AM

God help me, I don't know why I'm going into another one of these
pointless exercises...

> A return level control generally won't let you run the signal 100% wet,
> unless it's a balance or blend control.

What is a "return level control" if it's not a "balance" or "blend"
control? Please define each of those three terms.

> In most parallel loops, the send control is post-volume, not allowing you
> to minimize the dry signal being sent through, unless there is a balance or
> blend control that allows 100% wet or dry signal passage.

What does "post-volume" mean? How does it not allow you to minimize dry
signal? Using the controls on the SWR head that the OP is referring to,
describe what you mean.

> If you have a bunch of dry signal going through, the compressor output is lost in the mix.

Please describe how I am able to make it work, since according to your
argument, I cannot make it work.

ptooner

05-07-2007, 11:29 AM

With considerable trepidation, I think you guys are mostly arguing semantics
here. I do see the point Mike is trying to make (I think) in that it is
confusing at best. I looked at my GK since it's the only bass amp at my
home at the moment. It has a line out as well as a regular output and a
headphone out. It also has an input labeled mix. One would think you could
put an effect in from the line out to the mix in, but that is NOT the case.
The mix in is before the line out. Now I have several power mixers that I
sometimes use for PA heads or bass heads. The first two I looked at have an
aux loop. That is, there is for each input an aux level which controls the
amount of signal going to the effects out. Then there is an aux in which
accepts the effect return and there is a main level and an aux level on the
outputs. In short, you can run 100% wet just by turning up the aux output
and down the main output. Or you can control the amount of effects by the
aux and main input levels on each channel. Now I run the sound for our band
and have run my own solo for many years, and I find the bass amp setup a bit
confusing or at least not intuitive. I think some of the stuff you guys
have been arguing is a bit silly, like I would never call an insert an
effect loop but I do see why you might. To me, if it is an effect loop it
is parallel. If it is serial or inline then it is an insert. In fact, I'd
call that the definition of an insert. Now a compressor is a bit different
from most effects in that you want all the signal to go through it.
(Assuming it isn't being used for ducking) So, I always run my bass
compressor between the bass and the amp input. I run my vocal compressors
on a channel insert. So, if you put a compressor in a normal effects loop
and didn't kill the bypassing signal (the main output or the main input in
the case I described above) it would certainly appear to do nothing at all.
Having said all that, most of the time my in line compressor doesn't appear
to do anything at all either since I don't use it for distortion - only to
balance the level a bit.

Gerry
"Brian Running" <brunning@XXameritechXX.net> wrote in message
news:85F%h.1425$SC4.627@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...
> God help me, I don't know why I'm going into another one of these
> pointless exercises...
>
>> A return level control generally won't let you run the signal 100% wet,
>> unless it's a balance or blend control.
>
> What is a "return level control" if it's not a "balance" or "blend"
> control? Please define each of those three terms.
>
>> In most parallel loops, the send control is post-volume, not allowing
>> you to minimize the dry signal being sent through, unless there is a
>> balance or blend control that allows 100% wet or dry signal passage.
>
> What does "post-volume" mean? How does it not allow you to minimize dry
> signal? Using the controls on the SWR head that the OP is referring to,
> describe what you mean.
>
>> If you have a bunch of dry signal going through, the compressor output is
>> lost in the mix.
>
> Please describe how I am able to make it work, since according to your
> argument, I cannot make it work.

Brian Running

05-07-2007, 12:15 PM

> With considerable trepidation, I think you guys are mostly arguing semantics
> here.

You are 100% correct, Gerry. That's the point I'm trying to arrive at,
though it's doubtful we'd ever get there, history being what it is...

Semantic arguments do nothing to help the OP. The OP has a bass head.
It's useless to talk about anything but bass heads, and it's useless to
point out that you really think it ought to be called an "insert" rather
than a "loop." Here in the real world, the manufacturers call it an
"effects loop," so that's what we're working with to help the OP. Some
of them have a blend control, some don't. Some allow you to select -10
or +4 voltage levels. But every single one of them that I've seen will
allow you run a compressor, effectively, through them. Those that don't
have blend controls are series inserts. Those that have blend controls
allow you to go 100% wet. Many have pre-out/main-in loops, too. Either
way, the compressor will work. And, the RNC 1773 compressor works
better if it's being fed a line-level signal, so the best place to put
it is in a line-level loop.

Mike Rieves

05-07-2007, 10:51 PM

"Brian Running" <brunning@XXameritechXX.net> wrote in message
news:85F%h.1425$SC4.627@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...
> God help me, I don't know why I'm going into another one of these
> pointless exercises...
>
>> A return level control generally won't let you run the signal 100% wet,
>> unless it's a balance or blend control.
>
> What is a "return level control" if it's not a "balance" or "blend"
> control? Please define each of those three terms.

An effects return level only lets you vary the amount of wet signal, it
won't attenuate or otherwise affect the dry signal passing through. A
balance or blend control affects both the wet and dry sugnal, giving you
100% dry at one extreme and 100% wet at the other. Effects send levels and
return levels are common on mixers, they're always parallel, inserts are
series circuits and usually have no send or return controls.

>> In most parallel loops, the send control is post-volume, not allowing
>> you to minimize the dry signal being sent through, unless there is a
>> balance or blend control that allows 100% wet or dry signal passage.
>
> What does "post-volume" mean? How does it not allow you to minimize dry
> signal? Using the controls on the SWR head that the OP is referring to,
> describe what you mean.

If the effects send is pre-volume control, you can set the channel volume
to minimum, killing the dry signal throughput, and allowing only the signal
to the effects loop to pass, giving you a 100% wet signal out. If it is
post-volume, setting the volume control to minimum also cuts out the signal
at the effects sent output, meaning no signal can get through, wet or dry.
Having a pre-volume effects send out is the only way you can get a 100% wet
signal through a parallel effects loop with no balance or blend control.

>> If you have a bunch of dry signal going through, the compressor output is
>> lost in the mix.
>
> Please describe how I am able to make it work, since according to your
> argument, I cannot make it work.

See my paragraph above. I'm beginning to realize that most modern guitar
and bass amps with parallel effects loops do have a balance/blend control so
one can use compressors and EQs effectively. However there are apparently
many older amps with parallel effects loops without balance/blend controls
and that's why I'm still hearing the newbies complain about compressors not
working in the effects loop.

Brian Running

05-08-2007, 09:07 AM

> I'm beginning to realize that most modern guitar
> and bass amps with parallel effects loops do have a balance/blend control so
> one can use compressors and EQs effectively.

No kidding?! Some of this is finally getting through?!

> However there are apparently
> many older amps with parallel effects loops without balance/blend controls
> and that's why I'm still hearing the newbies complain about compressors not
> working in the effects loop.

No, there aren't, and no, you're not. The reason they don't get their
compressors to work is they don't know how to work their compressors.
They don't set the threshold low enough, or set the gain high enough on
their pre-amps. The whole megillah was laid out for you in this thread,
all you have to do is read with an open mind.

Mike Rieves

05-09-2007, 12:59 AM

"Brian Running" <brunning@XXtds.netXX> wrote in message
news:qKZ%h.34317$G23.12219@newsreading01.news.tds. net...
>> I'm beginning to realize that most modern guitar and bass amps with
>> parallel effects loops do have a balance/blend control so one can use
>> compressors and EQs effectively.
>
> No kidding?! Some of this is finally getting through?!
>
>> However there are apparently many older amps with parallel effects loops
>> without balance/blend controls and that's why I'm still hearing the
>> newbies complain about compressors not working in the effects loop.
>
> No, there aren't, and no, you're not. The reason they don't get their
> compressors to work is they don't know how to work their compressors. They
> don't set the threshold low enough, or set the gain high enough on their
> pre-amps. The whole megillah was laid out for you in this thread, all you
> have to do is read with an open mind.

Uhhh, Yes, I am. As I said, I've had three people in the last month or so
trying to hook up compressors through an effects loop. Two of them had been
using the compressor between the instrument and the amp, and had, for
whatever reason decided to use the effect loop instead, in both cases the
compressor settings were okay, but they were trying to use a parallel
effects loop. In one, case the guy had preamp out and power amp in jacks he
could use, in the other he went back to between the guitar and the amp. The
third canse may have been not knowing how to use the compressor, when I
suggested settings to start with he said he already had it set that way, but
he called back later to say everything was working. As for an open mind, why
are you calling me a liar about having complaints?

Brian Running

05-09-2007, 10:22 AM

> As for an open mind, why are you calling me a liar about having complaints?

Is that what I said? You're not going to play the Alzheimer's card
again, are you?

Mike, you said that compressors won't work in an effects loop. That's
not true, they will work in an effects loop. That's the whole debate,
right there.

Derek Tearne

05-09-2007, 06:22 PM

He says potato, he says potato, lets call the whole thing off...

--- Derek

--
Derek Tearne - derek@url.co.nz
Many Hands - Trans Cultural Music from Aotearoa/New Zealand
http://www.manyhands.co.nz/

Mike Rieves

05-09-2007, 11:16 PM

"Brian Running" <brunning@XXameritechXX.net> wrote in message
news:aWj0i.1658$UU.676@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net. ..
>> As for an open mind, why are you calling me a liar about having
>> complaints?
>
> Is that what I said? You're not going to play the Alzheimer's card again,
> are you?
>
> Mike, you said that compressors won't work in an effects loop. That's not
> true, they will work in an effects loop. That's the whole debate, right
> there.

No, that is not what I said. I said they don't work in parallel effects
loops that don't have blend/balance controls, unless the effects send is
pre-volume control. In that case, the user can turn the channel volume down,
allowing only the wet signal to get through.

Brian Running

05-10-2007, 07:43 PM

> No, that is not what I said. I said they don't work in parallel effects
> loops that don't have blend/balance controls, unless the effects send is
> pre-volume control. In that case, the user can turn the channel volume down,
> allowing only the wet signal to get through.

Here's what you said, brought to you through the magic of direct
cut-and-paste:

"The problem with running a compressor in the effects loop is that you're
blending the compressed signal with the non-compressed signal, in effect,
defeating the purpose of using a compressor."

5 String

05-10-2007, 09:07 PM

Brian Running wrote:
>> No, that is not what I said. I said they don't work in parallel
>> effects loops that don't have blend/balance controls, unless the
>> effects send is pre-volume control. In that case, the user can turn
>> the channel volume down, allowing only the wet signal to get through.
>
> Here's what you said, brought to you through the magic of direct
> cut-and-paste:
>
> "The problem with running a compressor in the effects loop is that you're
> blending the compressed signal with the non-compressed signal, in effect,
> defeating the purpose of using a compressor."

So I'm going to stir the pot here and ask why, if my effects loop is
supposed to be parallel, "cause that's the way they are....", when I
send a signal out but forget to plug in the return don't I get sound out
of my amp? I mean you guys are on about how the "loop" is parallel and
blending the wet signal with a dry signal form the preamp, so if I don't
plug in my return then I should have sound, *right?*. Now through trial
and mostly error, I know my effects loop actually switches the signal
out of the preamp/post amp chain and inserts the effects into the chain
in the order I've got them plugged in (multi processor ----> compressor.
*Oh...* I there for have an effects insert not a loop.... semantics
schemantics. Bottom line, if you own an Ampeg SVTIIIpro as I do, a
compressor works just fine plugged into it.

--
> www.google.com <enter> <
> search<insert query here> <enter> <
> <
> avoiding newsgroup wiseasses.... PRICELESS. <
> <
> For some things there is usenet <
> For everything else there is google............. <

Brian Running

05-11-2007, 12:01 AM

> So I'm going to stir the pot here and ask why, if my effects loop is
> supposed to be parallel, "cause that's the way they are....", when I
> send a signal out but forget to plug in the return don't I get sound out
> of my amp?

They're not parallel! That's what I've been trying to say all along!

> Bottom line, if you own an Ampeg SVTIIIpro as I do, a
> compressor works just fine plugged into it.

Foggin' Eddie! I'm glad someone gets it!

!

Mike Rieves

05-11-2007, 01:09 AM

"Brian Running" <brunning@xxtdsxx.net> wrote in message
news:V%Q0i.34419$G23.15091@newsreading01.news.tds. net...
>> So I'm going to stir the pot here and ask why, if my effects loop is
>> supposed to be parallel, "cause that's the way they are....", when I send
>> a signal out but forget to plug in the return don't I get sound out of my
>> amp?
>
> They're not parallel! That's what I've been trying to say all along!
>
>> Bottom line, if you own an Ampeg SVTIIIpro as I do, a compressor works
>> just fine plugged into it.
>
> Foggin' Eddie! I'm glad someone gets it!
>
> !

First, I made it abundantly clear that I was talking about parallel
effects loops, second some are parallel, some are series, hopefully, those
that are aprallel have balance/blend controls, third, I'm through in this
thread. Brian, it's no wonder that you and Jim Carr don't get along, you're
too much alike.

Derek Tearne

05-11-2007, 01:46 AM

5 String <catdriver@gmail.com> wrote:

> *Oh...* I there for have an effects insert not a loop.... semantics
> schemantics. Bottom line, if you own an Ampeg SVTIIIpro as I do, a
> compressor works just fine plugged into it.

Bottom line. Read the manual for your amp and find out what the various
widgets do and are intended to do *regardless* of what they are
labelled.

At the end of the day, if it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck,
but everyone is calling it a chicken because it has a big label on it
that says "Chicken!" - yelling at everyone and telling them it is a duck
really isn't that helpful.

In an ideal world everything on our equipment would be labelled
correctly. However, this is an industry that calls several things
'tremelo' even though they aren't, has input labelled 'hi' and 'lo' that
may mean 'high impedance' or 'high gain' or 'high input level'.

Sometimes the things clearly marked as 'effects loops 'are parallel,
sometimes they are not, sometimes they're something in between.

Heck, somewhere there's probably a head with a 'effects send', 'effects
return', a multi position knob marked 'pre EQ/post EQ/pre DI/post DI/pre
menstrual/post partum', a centre weighted pot marked 'wet/dry' and
another button marked 'sym'.

Now, if I had a compressor I *could* test all this out with an SWR head
similar to the one the original poster has, and an acoustic image head
which is totally different.

Of course all that would prove is that Mike and Brian are both right, or
both wrong, amps designed for different situations work in slightly
different ways and that it really is truly important to read the manual
for your head before plugging anything in.

I feel the only solution to this discussion at this juncture is to
postulate a centre weighted knob marked 'Brian/Mike' and a button marked
'thread loop mute'.

--- Derek

--
Derek Tearne - derek@url.co.nz
Many Hands - Trans Cultural Music from Aotearoa/New Zealand
http://www.manyhands.co.nz/

5 String

05-11-2007, 10:24 AM

Brian Running wrote:
>> So I'm going to stir the pot here and ask why, if my effects loop is
>> supposed to be parallel, "cause that's the way they are....", when I
>> send a signal out but forget to plug in the return don't I get sound
>> out of my amp?
>
> They're not parallel! That's what I've been trying to say all along!
>
>> Bottom line, if you own an Ampeg SVTIIIpro as I do, a compressor works
>> just fine plugged into it.
>
> Foggin' Eddie! I'm glad someone gets it!
>
> !
Brian, as you've often pointed out real life action will usually trump
ethereal arm waving......

--
> www.google.com <enter> <
> search<insert query here> <enter> <
> <
> avoiding newsgroup wiseasses.... PRICELESS. <
> <
> For some things there is usenet <
> For everything else there is google............. <

5 String

05-11-2007, 10:32 AM

Derek Tearne wrote:
> 5 String <catdriver@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> *Oh...* I there for have an effects insert not a loop.... semantics
>> schemantics. Bottom line, if you own an Ampeg SVTIIIpro as I do, a
>> compressor works just fine plugged into it.
>
> Bottom line. Read the manual for your amp and find out what the various
> widgets do and are intended to do *regardless* of what they are
> labelled.

problem one, many manuals are dead useless. The SVTIIpro manual falls
into this abyss

>
> At the end of the day, if it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck,
> but everyone is calling it a chicken because it has a big label on it
> that says "Chicken!" - yelling at everyone and telling them it is a duck
> really isn't that helpful.

wait there's a chicken in my amp.... that thinks it's a duck? Duck why
is there a low beam in my path?
>
> In an ideal world everything on our equipment would be labelled
> correctly. However, this is an industry that calls several things
> 'tremelo' even though they aren't, has input labelled 'hi' and 'lo' that
> may mean 'high impedance' or 'high gain' or 'high input level'.

case in point, my second guitarist can't make his shiny new 4x12 B-52
amp sound good..... he's plugged into the high input, took the bass
player to point that out. To the other guitar player who was trying to
get it to work the way they both expected it..... See my comment above
re: Manuals. Besides if an effects loop were labeled an insert some
idiot would want to know where to plug in his effects.
>
> Sometimes the things clearly marked as 'effects loops 'are parallel,
> sometimes they are not, sometimes they're something in between.
>
> Heck, somewhere there's probably a head with a 'effects send', 'effects
> return', a multi position knob marked 'pre EQ/post EQ/pre DI/post DI/pre
> menstrual/post partum', a centre weighted pot marked 'wet/dry' and
> another button marked 'sym'.
>
> Now, if I had a compressor I *could* test all this out with an SWR head
> similar to the one the original poster has, and an acoustic image head
> which is totally different.
>
> Of course all that would prove is that Mike and Brian are both right, or
> both wrong, amps designed for different situations work in slightly
> different ways and that it really is truly important to read the manual
> for your head before plugging anything in.
>
> I feel the only solution to this discussion at this juncture is to
> postulate a centre weighted knob marked 'Brian/Mike' and a button marked
> 'thread loop mute'.
>
> --- Derek
>

5 - going back to his regularly scheduled daytime activities.....
including poking sticks in hornets nests.

--
> www.google.com <enter> <
> search<insert query here> <enter> <
> <
> avoiding newsgroup wiseasses.... PRICELESS. <
> <
> For some things there is usenet <
> For everything else there is google............. <

Brian Running

05-11-2007, 04:55 PM

> Of course all that would prove is that Mike and Brian are both right, or
> both wrong, amps designed for different situations work in slightly
> different ways and that it really is truly important to read the manual
> for your head before plugging anything in.

If you can show me any bass amp that has a parallel effects loop that
does not also have some kind of control that allows you to control the
amount of signal through the loop, than I will gladly admit that I am
wrong, wrong, wrong, and that you should not put a compressor in the
effects loop.

Brian Running

05-11-2007, 05:00 PM

> First, I made it abundantly clear that I was talking about parallel
> effects loops, second some are parallel, some are series, hopefully, those
> that are aprallel have balance/blend controls, third, I'm through in this
> thread. Brian, it's no wonder that you and Jim Carr don't get along, you're
> too much alike.

First, no, you didn't make it abundantly clear. You said that
compressors will be rendered useless if put in the effects loop. That
is wrong. After you said that, a lot of twisting, turning, wangling and
weaseling by you ensued, in an attempt to make it seem as though you
were not wrong.

Second, Jim Carr and I apparently both dislike it when people make
incorrect statements and then just won't admit that they're wrong.
That's not surprising. This newsgroup serves as a source of information
for newbies and less-experienced people. It's important that the
information given here is correct.

Derek Tearne

05-11-2007, 08:26 PM

Brian Running <brunning@XXameritechXX.net> wrote:

> > Of course all that would prove is that Mike and Brian are both right, or
> > both wrong, amps designed for different situations work in slightly
> > different ways and that it really is truly important to read the manual
> > for your head before plugging anything in.
>
> If you can show me any bass amp that has a parallel effects loop that
> does not also have some kind of control that allows you to control the
> amount of signal through the loop, than I will gladly admit that I am
> wrong, wrong, wrong, and that you should not put a compressor in the
> effects loop.

Actually, Mike pointed out the acoustic image series by (finally)
looking up some actual specifications of amps - unfortunately this isn't
the amp the original poster owns so we're actually no closer to
resolving that issue.

Anyway, I own an acoustic image combo. I don't have a compressor, but I
do have a few other things with which to test how the loop works.

The effects loop (and by now you guys have confused me so much I won't
even attempt to contemplate whether it is parallel or serial), has
send/return sockets and 'level'. Level adjusts the wet level only - the
'send' is at full level all the time - in fact I usually use it as a
'tuner out' - which is the one feature this amp lacks.

So. With effects level set to full it is 50/50 wet/dry.

Both signals are without question coming out of the main speaker with
effects levels on full - I've demonstrated this to my satisfaction by
putting different signals into the instrument input and the effects
return with the effects send going to another amplifier (just to be
sure).

My understanding is that a compressor wouldn't work optimally in this
situation. My understand is also that the original posters amp does not
work in this fashion.

I would also point out that the acoustic image really isn't the same as
other bass amps. For example, the inputs are marked 'high Z' and 'low
Z' and are (therefore) high impedance and low impedance - so you put
your active bass into the 'low' and your naked piezo into 'high'. That
could be a trap for someone who hasn't read the manual.

I also have an SWR combo, and I *could* drag it out from behind the pew
and performed the same tests, but I must confess I can't quite summon up
the enthusiasm to do so. I'm pretty sure it works in a completely
different fashion and probably *would* work with a compressor.

Which is why I say you're both wrong and both right. On a pedantic
level Mike is right in some circumstances, however on a practical level
and in most situations you (Brian) have a much stronger and generally
more useful point.

--- Derek

--
Derek Tearne - derek@url.co.nz
Many Hands - Trans Cultural Music from Aotearoa/New Zealand
http://www.manyhands.co.nz/

Mike Rieves

05-12-2007, 02:37 AM

"Derek Tearne" <derek@url.co.nz> wrote in message
news:1hxzvg3.bbhfe93f8a7bN%derek@url.co.nz...
> Brian Running <brunning@XXameritechXX.net> wrote:
>
>> > Of course all that would prove is that Mike and Brian are both right,
>> > or
>> > both wrong, amps designed for different situations work in slightly
>> > different ways and that it really is truly important to read the manual
>> > for your head before plugging anything in.
>>
>> If you can show me any bass amp that has a parallel effects loop that
>> does not also have some kind of control that allows you to control the
>> amount of signal through the loop, than I will gladly admit that I am
>> wrong, wrong, wrong, and that you should not put a compressor in the
>> effects loop.
>
> Actually, Mike pointed out the acoustic image series by (finally)
> looking up some actual specifications of amps - unfortunately this isn't
> the amp the original poster owns so we're actually no closer to
> resolving that issue.
>
> Anyway, I own an acoustic image combo. I don't have a compressor, but I
> do have a few other things with which to test how the loop works.
>
> The effects loop (and by now you guys have confused me so much I won't
> even attempt to contemplate whether it is parallel or serial), has
> send/return sockets and 'level'. Level adjusts the wet level only - the
> 'send' is at full level all the time - in fact I usually use it as a
> 'tuner out' - which is the one feature this amp lacks.
>
> So. With effects level set to full it is 50/50 wet/dry.

Well, I wasn't going to post in this thread, but....

There ya go Brian, you are wrong, wrong, WRONG!
If you go back and look at all my posts in this thread, I think you'll find
that I mentioned the phrase "parallel effects loops" more than times. If
that wasn't clear to you, then you didn't read my posts. To be completely
fair, though, there are a lot more amps with series effects loops and
parallel effects loops with blend/balance controls that I thought. However,
I was right that there are some with parallel loops that have no provision
for eliminating the dry signal and therefore can't be used for compressors.
Which was my point in the first place.

> Both signals are without question coming out of the main speaker with
> effects levels on full - I've demonstrated this to my satisfaction by
> putting different signals into the instrument input and the effects
> return with the effects send going to another amplifier (just to be
> sure).
>
> My understanding is that a compressor wouldn't work optimally in this
> situation. My understand is also that the original posters amp does not
> work in this fashion.
>
> I would also point out that the acoustic image really isn't the same as
> other bass amps. For example, the inputs are marked 'high Z' and 'low
> Z' and are (therefore) high impedance and low impedance - so you put
> your active bass into the 'low' and your naked piezo into 'high'. That
> could be a trap for someone who hasn't read the manual.
>
> I also have an SWR combo, and I *could* drag it out from behind the pew
> and performed the same tests, but I must confess I can't quite summon up
> the enthusiasm to do so. I'm pretty sure it works in a completely
> different fashion and probably *would* work with a compressor.
>
> Which is why I say you're both wrong and both right. On a pedantic
> level Mike is right in some circumstances, however on a practical level
> and in most situations you (Brian) have a much stronger and generally
> more useful point.

I do admit to going off without checking the newer amps out there, and
many of the newer models do either have series effects circuits or parallel
circuits that allow you to eliminate the dry signal from the putput, so I
was going a bit overboard. However, I still think that amps are often not
properly labeled and this is misleading to many folks who don't have much
technical background.

ptooner

05-12-2007, 10:29 AM

>>
>> So. With effects level set to full it is 50/50 wet/dry.
>
> Well, I wasn't going to post in this thread, but....
>
> There ya go Brian, you are wrong, wrong, WRONG!
> If you go back and look at all my posts in this thread, I think you'll
> find that I mentioned the phrase "parallel effects loops" more than times.
> If that wasn't clear to you, then you didn't read my posts. To be
> completely fair, though, there are a lot more amps with series effects
> loops and parallel effects loops with blend/balance controls that I
> thought. However, I was right that there are some with parallel loops that
> have no provision for eliminating the dry signal and therefore can't be
> used for compressors. Which was my point in the first place.

In regard to parallel loops with no provision for eliminating dry signal,
what would be the purpose of such a thing?

Gerry

Mike Fleming

05-12-2007, 12:58 PM

In article <1hxy8rz.79j3s61i3zfuN%derek@url.co.nz>, derek@url.co.nz
(Derek Tearne) writes:

> Bottom line. Read the manual for your amp and find out what the various
> widgets do and are intended to do *regardless* of what they are
> labelled.

Spot on. After all, the bit on a guitar amp labelled "vibrato" is
actually tremolo, and the bit that dangles off a guitar that's called
the tremolo arm is used to apply vibrato.

--
Mike Fleming

Les Cargill

05-12-2007, 01:59 PM

ptooner wrote:

>>>So. With effects level set to full it is 50/50 wet/dry.
>>
>>Well, I wasn't going to post in this thread, but....
>>
>> There ya go Brian, you are wrong, wrong, WRONG!
>>If you go back and look at all my posts in this thread, I think you'll
>>find that I mentioned the phrase "parallel effects loops" more than times.
>>If that wasn't clear to you, then you didn't read my posts. To be
>>completely fair, though, there are a lot more amps with series effects
>>loops and parallel effects loops with blend/balance controls that I
>>thought. However, I was right that there are some with parallel loops that
>>have no provision for eliminating the dry signal and therefore can't be
>>used for compressors. Which was my point in the first place.
>
>
> In regard to parallel loops with no provision for eliminating dry signal,
> what would be the purpose of such a thing?
>
> Gerry
>
>
>
>

A parallel loop without dry signal is a contradiction in terms.

--
Les Cargill

Mike Rieves

05-12-2007, 02:18 PM

"Les Cargill" <lcargill@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4645f25b$0$1360$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> ptooner wrote:
>>
>> In regard to parallel loops with no provision for eliminating dry signal,
>> what would be the purpose of such a thing?
>>
>> Gerry
>>

They're commonly used in mixing consoles for both live sound and
recording, and are quite effective for delay effects, reverb, etc, where a
blend of wet and dry signal is desirable. However, the send and return
controls don't have any effect on the level of the dry signal being passed
through, which mekes them unsuitable for compressors, EQ's, etc where only a
wet signal is desired. Mixing consoles typically often have channel inserts
that are series circuits. The effects loops usually have separate send and
return level controls for each channel, allowing one effects unit to be used
on several channels, whereas the channel inserts are separate for each
channel.

>>
>
> A parallel loop without dry signal is a contradiction in terms.
>

Some parallel effects loops, especially on instrument amps, have a
balance or blend control that allows one to change the balance between the
wet and dry signals to all dry, all wet, or any mix of the two.

ptooner

05-12-2007, 05:54 PM

"Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
news:6Fm1i.302$z45.196@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Les Cargill" <lcargill@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:4645f25b$0$1360$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>> ptooner wrote:
>>>
>>> In regard to parallel loops with no provision for eliminating dry
>>> signal, what would be the purpose of such a thing?
>>>
>>> Gerry
>>>
>
> They're commonly used in mixing consoles for both live sound and
> recording, and are quite effective for delay effects, reverb, etc, where a
> blend of wet and dry signal is desirable. However, the send and return
> controls don't have any effect on the level of the dry signal being passed
> through, which mekes them unsuitable for compressors, EQ's, etc where only
> a wet signal is desired. Mixing consoles typically often have channel
> inserts that are series circuits. The effects loops usually have separate
> send and return level controls for each channel, allowing one effects unit
> to be used on several channels, whereas the channel inserts are separate
> for each channel.
>

I have 4 mixers here at home. (By no means a huge sample, but all I have
available) They all have the possibility of using wet signal only in an
effects loop although each one would require different switchology. Not
something I would ever actually do, but the very fact that you can vary the
portion of the signal that is wet makes it intuitive that you can create a
situation with 100% wet. When I run a compressor on the whole signal (which
I sometimes do) I run it between the board and the amp.

Gerry
>>>
>>
>> A parallel loop without dry signal is a contradiction in terms.
>>
>
> Some parallel effects loops, especially on instrument amps, have a
> balance or blend control that allows one to change the balance between the
> wet and dry signals to all dry, all wet, or any mix of the two.
>

Mike Rieves

05-13-2007, 02:32 AM

"ptooner" <someguy@onthe.net> wrote in message
news:oQp1i.787$O9.734@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Mike Rieves" <mriev@hotspam.com> wrote in message
> news:6Fm1i.302$z45.196@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
>>
>> "Les Cargill" <lcargill@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:4645f25b$0$1360$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>> ptooner wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In regard to parallel loops with no provision for eliminating dry
>>>> signal, what would be the purpose of such a thing?
>>>>
>>>> Gerry
>>>>
>>
>> They're commonly used in mixing consoles for both live sound and
>> recording, and are quite effective for delay effects, reverb, etc, where
>> a blend of wet and dry signal is desirable. However, the send and return
>> controls don't have any effect on the level of the dry signal being
>> passed through, which mekes them unsuitable for compressors, EQ's, etc
>> where only a wet signal is desired. Mixing consoles typically often have
>> channel inserts that are series circuits. The effects loops usually have
>> separate send and return level controls for each channel, allowing one
>> effects unit to be used on several channels, whereas the channel inserts
>> are separate for each channel.
>>
>
> I have 4 mixers here at home. (By no means a huge sample, but all I have
> available) They all have the possibility of using wet signal only in an
> effects loop although each one would require different switchology. Not
> something I would ever actually do, but the very fact that you can vary
> the portion of the signal that is wet makes it intuitive that you can
> create a situation with 100% wet. When I run a compressor on the whole
> signal (which I sometimes do) I run it between the board and the amp.
>
> Gerry

I have one mixer at home and have used a bunch of them over the years.
Typically, those with dedicated effects loops don't have provisions for
running a 100% wet signal, or for selecting pre-volume on the send, but on
many of them, one can work around that by using an AUX circuit instead of
the dedicated effects circuit, setting the AUX input to pre-volume, and
running the channel volume all the way down, so that only the wet signal is
getting through. However, AUX circuits are often needed for other things,
like monitor sends, etc. I've rarely run a compressor on the whole mix, but
I've always placed the house EQ between the board and the crossover/power
amps.