2 parallel ML10x's for 10 stereo loops?

I’ve got an all-stereo setup but more than 5 stereo pedals. It’s simple to just put two ML10X’s back to back for, or even insert one in the loop of the other, but I got to thinking: is there anything stopping me from having one ML10X handle the LEFT ins and outs of 10 pedals, while the second ML10x handles the RIGHT ins and outs of the same 10 pedals?

Other than the slight annoyance of matching the routing of the two units, is there any downside to doing this? With the option for “omni” messages from the MC6 Pro, it doesn’t even take up an extra command!

Non as long as the device ID is also set. I’m not sure Omni would work as both ML10X’s would receive the same ML10X messages.

1 Like

that part was just an afterthought, but I was just saying that if I programmed the two devices identically, I could just send them the same preset call. For example, if I want loop 1 to go into a parallel split of loops 2 and 3, I just program each ML10x with that layout into preset 1, for example, and then call preset 1 (via normal MIDI or the custom sysex commands in the morningstar software).

I guess my main question is whether anybody anticipates any issues, like grounding problems or anything like that?

Hi, I’m doing exactly this with two m4l switchers by glab. Didn’t have any issues regarding ground loops. As long as you are using a decent power source it will be fine. But you’ll need some sort of signal split in front of the ml10x or sacrifice a loop to do it

1 Like

Thanks! I think I’m gonna try it as soon as my funds recover a bit. I’m already running into my ML10X in stereo (Simplifier Dlx with separate left and right preamps) so that shouldn’t be a problem.

Is there a reason you want to do this instead of just using the stereo loops and putting the two ML10Xs in series? Sorry if I’m missing something obvious!

If you do two in series, you can’t put a pedal in Group 1 behind a pedal in Group 2. If you put the two ML10X’s in parallel, hooked to left and right of each pedal respectively, you have 10 stereo loops with complete freedom to reorder.

1 Like

ahhhh duh! I was indeed missing something obvious, haha!

1 Like

Even crazier is that you could get a magical 11th stereo loop in advanced mode if you hook up the rings of the inputs and outputs as sends and returns, respectively.

(In theory. Somebody want to go ahead and buy me another ML10X to test it out? lol)

This sounds like adding a lot of complexity for…hmm…I can’t figure out what you get out of doing it this way. There will be the same amount or more cables and a whole lot more to manage and think about. Even thinking about the layout of the ML10 on the board, having each one handle one side of the stereo image adds complexity in managing cable lengths too as opposed to having one on each side of the board for tighter cable mgmt.

I gotta ask, what’s the win here other than you had an idea that you are curious if it will work?

EDIT - I see you want to do this to be able to re-order all 10 effects…I guess that’s a viable use case. Just so you are aware - I am into pedal re-ordering and there is no way to re-order while maintaining what is engaged/disengaged which might make you reconsider this route.

1 Like

Yeah, it IS more complex, but not that much more complex than my current setup, which is a home studio rig for sound exploration sitting on my desk (there’s a secondary board on the floor with midi footswitches and expression).

I currently use the ML10X in the back half of my signal chain. It contains five loops:

  1. Walrus M1 modulation → Source Audio Nemesis delay → Source Audio Ventris reverb
  2. H90 with Chase Bliss Mood mk2 in the FX loop
  3. Hologram Microcosm
  4. Empress Zoia → Walrus Sloer
  5. Singular Sound Aeros looper

BUT, because a few pedals are grouped, there’s some rigidity here. For example I can’t put my main delay and reverb (Nemesis + Ventris) in parallel to each other, and the Mood can’t be fully separated from the H90.

If I ran 2 ML10x’s in parallel, I would just have everything in separate loops. Even the H90’s FX loop could be its own loop, letting me put any other pedal in there I wanted.

I use the ML10X as a big matrix mixer more than a normal loop switcher. I almost exclusively use advanced mode and do a lot of parallel effects. If I want to “disable” a pedal, I just disconnect that loop.

The benefits of using it instead of a desktop unit like Erica Synths Matrix Mixer is that I can squeeze it under my pedalboard. The whole thing is pretty self-contained and the whole pedalboard can go to another room if needed. I’d have to go up one pedalboard size to do two ML10Xs, but it’d still be one unit. By contrast, most other matrix mixers that could handle 10x10 stereo are either desktop like Erica Synths or rack mounts.

1 Like

Is this true? Only in Advanced Mode?

Please vote for this feature - [ML10X Feature Request] Keeping engaged loops on preset change - #7 by Franktree

hey @jrnguyen ! do you use a 2 ML10X parallel setup ? is it working properly (no ground loops) ? do you use the same midi channel, or do you make a routing for each device on the morningstar ml10x editor ?

This is genius and i hate that i didnt think of it

Have you tried this out?

Not yet. I’m waiting until later this year to do the full plunge and get a new pedalboard big enough to make the whole thing worth it. 'm currently running a pedal board with a MEGX switcher (6 stereo loops or 12 mono loops) taking care of my tone pedals (drive, amp sim, fuzz, etc.) and one ML10X handling the rest of the board. Both are under the board, but just barely :sweat_smile:

I don’t anticipate any problems when I do it though. I also think this is probably as far as I’m gonna want to take it, because past this point, I might as well build out a rack. lol

Which board fits an ML10X underneath ? I’m curious ! How do you carry the board (soft/hard case) ?
I’m selling my H90 to get different more experimental stereo pedals (Mood MkII is my new toy), I’ll sure get another ML10X for these stereo FX !

I have it under my XPND2, but it’s a tight fit and I had to raise it a little. For me, it’s okay, because I use this board for sound design on my desk. It’s definitely not wired up for travel.

In this thread, people show their ML5s (roughly the same size as ML10X I believe) under a variety of common boards: Morningstar ML5: under board fit? | The Gear Page

Later this year, I’m planning to mount two ML10x’s side by side under one of the large Pedaltrain boards (Terra 42, probably) to control 10 stereo pedals.

Thanks for the insight. Im strongly considering doing this (pending the sale of some items).

What is your plan for the MLX10 outputs. Obviously youll have 2x tip and 2x ring so.four channel total. Are you planning to use a mixer pedal do mix the tip and ring. Or do you have something else in mind?

Okay, so I finally did it! I bought a second ML10X, threw them both under my pedalboard, and started wiring everything together. The whole setup needs a TON of breakout and y-cables, of course, but so far it works gloriously. I don’t have enough cables to wire up all 10 slots yet, but I managed to Frankenstein together enough cables to wire up 7 of my 10 stereo pedals.


It’s worth it, but it’s definitely a commitment, lol.

Some observations:

  • The ML10X editor only shows one ML10X at a time, but you can access multiple using the “experimental” serial option. It’s worked just fine for me, and I just have the Left ML10X in one tab and the Right ML10X in the other tab.

  • When editing, you have to edit each device separately, but it’s not too bad. I make sure the presets parallel each other, and set both devices to “omni,” so a MIDI command to change loops automatically goes to both.

  • The sides can’t “hear” each other in this setup, meaning you can no longer do stuff like send Pedal 1’s left output to both L-R of Pedal 2 and its right output to both L-R of Pedal 3. Another application would be if L and R going into the ML10x’s were separate instruments, and you wanted to run parallel chains that would get merged before output. There are two possible solutions for this: (1) using a pedal like Duophony or Zoia that can direct the signal to the appropriate channel; or (2) use a split before the two ML10x’s so that both get L&R from the input. The latter can only do the split at the beginning of the chain, but that seems good enough to me if I’m just trying to route two parallel instruments through the board.

  • It’s easiest when you have pedals that take split L and R (the majority of stereo pedals). In that case, you can just split the tip and ring using a y-cable and send the tip to Pedal 1 and the ring to Pedal 2.

  • One problem is that you can’t always find long enough Y-cables. I have the two ML10x’s side-by-side, so for pedals that are further away, my normal 12-inch y-cables can reach one pedal but not the other (TourGearDesign makes an 18-inch one). If you have to reach further in your board, you probably need to use the bigger y-cables like the one Hosa makes or break it out (male TRS → 2 female TS) and then use normal cables to go the rest of the way. It can get messy, so I’ve actually been looking into wiring up a breakout box for this setup to keep things neater.

  • Pedals that take TRS (like stereo Chase Bliss pedals) are most annoying, because you have to breakout the Tip and Ring, then recombine the appropriate ones. You’re committing to a rat’s nest unless you’re just very good at tucking cables away.

So anyway, let me know if you have questions on this setup. I only have 7 pedals hooked up, but I’ve tried lots of variations on loops in both simple and advanced mode and they seem to work just fine. I’ve got more cables coming next week, so I’ll wire up all 10 then, and hopefully in a couple months, I can get someone to make a breakout box for me that rewires the tips and rings in a more manageable way.