Look I know this is ridiculous and this whole project has gotten out of control, but is this feasible and reliable at this point in time? Context is wet amp has the parallel loops dry has the series. I am a little worried about feedback loops and I will be gigging with this. Just wanted to get people’s thoughts on if this is a good idea or not with this product as I believe this is still in beta.
I’ve done stuff like that. It works just fine! The only thing to pay attention to is how you merge at the output. Merges on the ML10X average when they combine at one node. So if you merge 4 things together, it may sound like each of them is only 25% of its previous volume.
The exception is the summing nodes at the output. Each output has two nodes, and those two nodes sum with each other.
Interesting, so if I were to put all of them to 1 output node what does that get me 50% 25% 100%?
These are being ran 100% wet and don’t want to half to boost the output of the pedals by a ridiculous amount.
Ha, I’ve never tried sending two of the same signal to the two nodes of an output. It should technically work, though I’d probably try to simplify.
With the four output nodes, it means you can run up to four effects in parallel with no averaging (assuming you have a way to sum the two outputs of the ML10X). If I were to do more (up to 8) I’d probably combine them in sets of two (reducing volume by 50%), and if I had an odd number, I’d just make sure that last one was a pedal that can easily change volume via MIDI, so I could put it on its own node and just halve its output.
One of the output nodes averages the levels, so you may want to try your parallel wet effects going into the averaging node. As you add and remove effects from the signal path the overall level may automatically adjust. By contrast, the output nodes that sums the signals doesn’t try to do anything to automatically adjust any gain. A dry + wet parallel effects setup running to the same output is a good example for why you might want one vs the other.
Since you want your dry signal to remain unchanged, you’d connecting that to the summing node of the output, while running the parallel effects paths to the averaging node would potentially prevent your overall signal from becoming too loud/quiet as effects are added/removed.
I’d recommend enabling kill dry for any of your parallel effects that have that feature. MIDI controlling the bypass of the effects with kill dry enabled would help safeguard against feedback loops.
Yeah came to realization that turning off any loops would mess up the levels of others (assuming I could get it to be even at some point). Ended up just getting a ML5 to control some of my series effects and have another looper set up with a line mixer to control the wet effects. Was trying to find a way to do this with less, but ultimately one of those cases where more things makes it simpler (and cheaper).