| Author |
Topic: Stereo -> Stereo -> Mono: Yes? No? Maybe? |
Chris Bauer
From:
Nashville, TN USA
|
Posted 20 Apr 2014 10:43 am |
|
Okay, yet another question I really ought to know the answer to but don't...
Any sonic compromises/problems running two or three effects pedals in stereo (two in/two out) and then just using the mono out of the last box in the chain? In other words, if running a mono rig, is there any need to wire a pedalboard all in mono or can the output of the last effect simply allow the choice of summed mono or stereo output without problems if prior effects in the chain are wired for stereo? |
|
|
|
Len Amaral
From:
Rehoboth,MA 02769
|
Posted 20 Apr 2014 11:00 am
|
|
Mono or stereo is a loaded question, IMO. I have used both and I consider what
venue are you playing and what sound are you looking for.
For a wide, full and blooming effect, the stereo rig is great for your ears but 20 feet away it morphs into mono. If you are playing at steel guitar show where the steel is the featured instrument for steel guitar tunes and solo rides then a huge vibe is fine.
What if you are playing with a few acoustic guitars, upright bass where you are backing up and coloring the sound? I like a mono setup where my bass notes are percussive and the high notes are sensitive and not ear piercing and a mono or smaller single amp delivers a warmer sound. If you play a single neck E/9 makes a difference and a C6 neck needs more headroom.
Just offering a few thoughts but I play mono in my studio and find stereo to overpowering in a small setting.
As for effects. it's more of a case of experimenting to see what works best.
Hope this helps?
Lenny |
|
|
|
Brad Sarno
From:
St. Louis, MO USA
|
Posted 20 Apr 2014 11:05 am
|
|
In general, this is a BAD idea. Not great harm, but if you take stereo reverb and then collapse it back to mono, you can introduce some unpleasant or less-than-ideal phase cancellations because what made the reverb "stereo" is not meant to be mono-ized.
I would say the better path would be to keep it mono the whole way thru, just the left or "mono" sides of the stereo effects, leaving the other channels empty.
Brad |
|
|
|
Chris Bauer
From:
Nashville, TN USA
|
Posted 20 Apr 2014 12:19 pm
|
|
| Thanks! It's really rare these days for me to use more than one amp so practically speaking, wiring in mono probably makes as much sense anyhow. Plus, I suppose that nothing prevents using mono in/stereo out on the last effect in line as a splitter in those rare cases where more than one amp is involved. |
|
|
|
Donny Hinson
From:
Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
|
Posted 20 Apr 2014 5:22 pm
|
|
I see no benefit in "stereo" unless you have two separate and discrete channels in the entire signal chain. If you look at the old stereo systems, you had a stereo record, a stereo cartridge, a stereo preamp, a stereo power amp, and stereo speakers.
Once you combine the two signals, at any point in the signal chain, it's no longer true "stereo". Players who run a stereo amp or even two amps from just one pickup are kidding themselves. That's not stereo!  |
|
|
|
Chris Bauer
From:
Nashville, TN USA
|
Posted 20 Apr 2014 5:44 pm
|
|
| Absolutely. I guess it's just laziness on most of our parts to say "stereo effect" or similar. Point well-taken, though. |
|
|
|
Stephen Cowell
From:
Round Rock, Texas, USA
|
Posted 20 Apr 2014 8:31 pm
|
|
Delay, reverb, and chorus effects can generate stereo... put a time-type multi-effect as the last effect in your chain and take your stereo send from there. No sense in generating it earlier in the chain and having to double other effects... get your tone, then 'verb it last thing, preferably between preamp and power-amps, that way you only need a mono preamp. It's the way most folks do it.
_________________
Too much junk to list... always getting more. |
|
|
|
