Home › Forums › Help/Technical Questions › Q-Tron + effects loop bypass question
- This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 3 months ago by Donald Fletcher.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 6, 2010 at 2:02 am #80578Donald FletcherMember
I recently ordered a Q-Tron Plus from my local Guitar Center. Haven’t had the opportunity to experiment with it yet since my bass is there getting new pickups installed, but meanwhile I’ve been trying to remap my effects chain to include my new pedals. My goal here is to be able to use the effects within the Q-Tron Plus’s loop with or without the unit’s effect engaged since when bypassed the Plus skips the effects loop entirely.
Without a creative solution to this problem, I’d have to rewire my chain every time I wanted to turn off the effect, this course being completely impractical if necessary in the middle of a song!
The effects that would be in the loop would be a Metal Muff, Steel Leather, and an AMT Slap Bass compressor/overdrive. These the first two pedals would normally be routed into a Behringer mixer, EQ’d, then combined into the compressor.
(skip the following if you’d rather just see the diagram)
The best hypothetical solution I’ve invented so far that uses the fewest components involves running my original signal into the Q-Tron as normal, and then sending the Q-Tron’s FX loop signal through the Steel Leather into my mixer, where it would be combined with the Metal Muff’s signal and outputted to the Slap Bass compressor similar to how I’d normally set it up. It’s after this that things have to get weird.
The signal coming out of the compressor would be split with a Y adapter, running alternately to the Q-Tron’s FX return jack and to an output of my EHX Switchblade (which I’m logically assuming can be inverted). The other ‘output’ from the switchblade would be fed by the output from the Q-Tron.
This way, in theory, as long as I left the Q-Tron Plus on, I could switch between the “un-Q’d” signal from the effect chain and the Q-Tron-modified signal from the same chain by using the Switchblade as an on/off switch.Since I realized that’s a little complicated, here’s a hastily sketched MS Paint schematic of that side of my chain:
So my questions are:
#1. Will this work?
#2. Will it be safe for my Q-Tron Plus?
#3. If safe and functional, will this unduly affect my sound quality?And finally, I had a technical question about the Q-Tron Plus, which might open up some further creative avenues and possibly simpler solutions to the above problem. Does the signal coming into the FX return necessarily have to have anything to do with the input signal? For example, could I have nothing coming out of the FX send, but have an incoming signal to the return that would then be modulated by the unit’s input, and would this be safe for the Q-Tron?
Cheers
August 9, 2010 at 7:24 am #110783ExplorerMemberHmm. Alright, simplest thing first.
Yes, you can use the Q-tron plus to act as a gate on your loop return. There is no relationship needed between the loop send and return. The loop send leaves after the preamp, and the return comes back before the Q’s filter.
Secondly… what are you trying to do? Your drawing is a bit of a muddle. Are you trying use the same compressor for everything except the Q-tron output? You want to be able to run either the MM clean, or both the MM and the SL in parallel into the Q? What combinations do you want to get at the amp? MM both clean and mixed with the OM and SL going through the Q? Just alternating between (MM) or (OM->SL->Q)? (I’d probably put compression after the Q, for what it’s worth, and that means the easiest place to put it would be after the SW.)
Hopefully, the exercise of writing out precisely what combinations you want to achieve will make it easier to see how to get there, and for others to help. “No, that’s not what I want… try again! Nope, still not right… try again!” Unless you tell people your destination, they have to guess as best they can, and that puts an unnecessary burden on those who invest the time in trying to sketch out maps for you.
August 17, 2010 at 12:26 am #110916Donald FletcherMemberThanks for the feedback! Sorry for the response delay – I took a trip out to Pittsburgh to hook up with my old bandmate and didn’t have regular computer access.
You answered the biggest part of my question, which actually in the last paragraph since I figured so few people would have tested the Q in such a manner. Since it’s safe to run a dry signal into the input and functionally run a beefier fx chain into the Q’s own loop return I can basically route any sounds I need through my mixer into the return jack the Q, simplifying my wiring significantly and opening up an endless array of possibilities to adjust on the fly. Yes, I actually have tabletop mixers on my pedalboard!
The reason I wanted that compressor inside the loop is that the AMT Slap Bass has a tendency to take over the show via attack enhancement, and I wanted to be sure the signature Q effect came out more distinctly in the mix.
I needed the option to use all effects clean in addition to the option of having the Q Tron working its magic on them all at once. My goal was, since I’m playing Bass, to use the mixer as a sort of secondary blend knob for the OM, allowing me to remix in a secondary dry signal that would optionally be enhanced on the high end by the Metal Muff. Reason being that the muff is intended for guitar and sucks out my lower frequencies. I ran a few tests with blending the MM’s signal with my bass’s dry signal before Guitar Center took my instrument in, with beautiful results.
On a separate channel I was running a Bass Big Muff Pi, and the resulting sound can best be described as “huge.”Thanks again for the input!
August 18, 2010 at 2:58 pm #110941dnosMemberGood info. A bit of a topic change, but would you ever consider running the Q-Tron into and through the amp FX loop (i.e. after pre-amp and before power amp)?
Has anyone tried this configuration, and how does it affect the sound of the Q-tron?Thanks
August 20, 2010 at 7:06 pm #110996Donald FletcherMemberFrom what I understand that’s perfectly acceptable. I don’t know for sure what this would sound like, other than louder and possibly with a little ballsy distortion. I’ll be experimenting with something similar to this in the next couple weeks, since I’m fairly sure I’m going to be in need of a boost (probably from an LPB-1) thanks to all the signal splitting going on within my effects. I should be able to push it pretty far with the new EMGs I’m putting in, so if it happens anytime soon I’ll toss some feedback over here for you, unless someone beats me to it.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.