A word on using a TRS output as a splitter...the tip and ring are 180 degrees out of phase. That's what balanced signals are - they're run over a length of cable phase flipped, then when the signals are recombined at the other end, they are flipped again and the em/rf component present in both ring and tip cables get's cancelled out. Not really a problem if one side is going to 100% wet time domain effects like delay/reverb etc. However, if any of that flipped signal is allowed back into the signal path dry...you MIGHT have problems.
I'm not sure this is completely accurate but I'm keen to discuss. I don't believe it's a balanced output at all - it is 'unbalanced stereo'. The reverb from the pedal is in stereo, so the tip and ring should be the same signal, with one side of a stereo reverb applied to each. I don't think it'll be inverted. I'll check it...
@@JonWrightMusicTV Ah! In that case, you're absolutely right. In my head it seemed 'obvious' that a TRS output would be balanced line level foregoing the need for a DI - but thinking about it more, if it's designed to live in a pedal board signal path it makes more sense that it'd be stereo unbalanced... I wonder if you have the option to choose one or the other?
An interesting point: Our ears actually *need* small latency differences to tell the direction of sound. So our brains don't mind having latency between two different sound sources (i.e. two cabs). However, if you combine those latencies into a single source (i.e. one cab) our brains don't like it.
@@JonWrightMusicTV I’ve been watching a lot of guitar related channels lately as I’m thinking of starting my own guitar/music channel, (a bit of a pivot from my current channel) I really enjoy the tone and production value of your videos. Also you have an easy voice to listen to.
I just watched some of your stuff - I know nothing of Blender except what it is so it was like this lovely chill ASMR 😀. Have you got an angle for the new channel?
@@JonWrightMusicTV Thanks, I don't think I've been described as ASMR before :) I've got a degree in music and have played guitar for 37 years. I've been thinking about doing a guitar method book for a long time, but I think maybe better to do it via RUclips after getting my feet wet with my Blender channel. I want to help people understand how theory can be really useful in their playing, but sneak it in so as not to scare people who hate theory. I really enjoy effects (I'm the guy who made pedalboardplanner from Pedaltrain back in 2009) so I would also do gear review, tutorials, etc. I've got some ideas about the overall flavor of the channel as well that I think would make it my own and not just a copy of every other guitar/gear channel out there. Would love to chat sometime.
I use two real tube amps and cabs, and went down the rabbit hole in pursuit of a great wet/dry setup, so a couple of thoughts that may apply if you substitute 2x Tonex Ones / other modellers for the amps: 1. Latency: Try using analog dry through pedals where possible, especially delays. I spent weeks tackling latency when doing a U2-style delay where the delay is only coming out of one amp. A splitter that allows a parallel dry signal through can get you there (try the GFI Duophony or GigRig Wetter Box, set the wet FX to kill dry). But in the end I sold the offender (H90) and use an analog dry-through dual delay instead (Free The tone Future Factory or UA Starlight will do the job). 2. Phase/Polarity: I run my gain pedals into a > GigRig Humdinger (Goodwood Audio has a similar box), which splits the signal: one straight to the dry amp (or perhaps to a ToneX One?), the other one onwards to the wet effects. It has a polarity switch, so you can reverse polarity it will. This is super useful for (a) checking whether a drive pedal has flipped phase or is just very mid-humpy (this happens a lot in a wet/dry rig!) and (b) because you are flipping JUST THE DRY AMP’s phase. I use a Matchless as a wet amp, and when you switch channels, it flips the phase. I imagine this would be handy for changing profiles / IRs on a Tonex etc. On the wet line, after the last wet effect, I sometimes run it into another box with a buffer and another phase switch, so I can flip either the wet or dry line. I appreciate that there are extra layers of potential phase reversal based on the amp model being used, and latency from mic placement, but at least the signal path above will get you as far as the IR / model with either no issues, or an easy way to correct. Jon - Another fantastic, relaxed and detailed video - this time with some great landscapes! - on a topic that doesn’t get enough attention. Hope you have a great break.
It's SUCH a relief for me personally to see all of the complications that come with running 2 sound sources simultaneously finally being discussed in granular detail. I still wish they could implement something like you mentioned that the kemper had which "standardized" the latency so that both sources hit the DAW simultaneously. It was something like that???
Great video. I like my reverb and delay before the amp, and I like stereo effects. Hence the limitation of using one tonex. I want stereo in as well as stereo out. Running mine In the loop of an hx stomp that allows for polarity changes.
This is the issue. I'm hoping to run a mini board with tuner, TC Plethora X3, and Tonex One. The X3 has stereo in and stereo out, and I'd love to run that into a stereo in on the amp emulator. The Boss IR-2 has a stereo effects loop, but I don't like the baked-in sims all that much. UAFX modelers have stereo in and sound brilliant, but do you want to take a $900 mini board to a bar gig? It's worth remembering that historically, we've nearly always run mono effects pedals into the front of a mono amp. So for live use, the simplicity of a mono signal chain might still have something going for it. Home studio is a different scenario, of course.
I think the easiest way to think of all this is: it is best to have each Tonex go to separate speakers/cabs, as your ears already understand any latency difference from two different locations. However, If you mix in any way the output from two Tonex into one speaker, you will probably encounter some issues with the partial phase "comb filtering" effect.
Thanks for making this. You're going through all the thoughts that I've been going through. In fact I laughed because I'm using a Flint to try a Wet-Dry-Wet right now with my Tonex One and I also just got a Y-splitter a couple days ago.
Cool video & topic man, hope you’re having a great holiday! Good idea about using the output with a Y-cable to split it. If I remember right it’s not a balanced output & can be used to split
If we could that would be cool, but as far as I can see we’d still run into polarity issues based on the polarity of the amps and pedals captured, and phase shift based on physical mic distances (among other things)
Thanks for sharing. Can you talk about the Tonex and drive pedals? I got mine and tested it a few times and had a friend listen to it and we could not get it to sound good with pedals in front of it. I'm sticking with my tried and true HX stomp. Any thoughts???
I can have a look at this. However I did run a Soul Food, Nobel ODR1 Mini and an OCD into them in an earlier video - it sounded good to me so long as that particular pedal/amp combo is a good one.
You know if you play a guitar part, and you just copy and paste it on another track, you're gonna end up with phasing issues. So if you're using dual amps it's essentially playing the exact same guitar part so why wouldn't it create phasing issues?
If you copy and paste it exactly, it’ll be in phase and louder. But maybe you mean copying the DI and running the two parts through different amp sims? In which case… sort of. You might run into ‘phase issues’, but the extent to which this is a problem is going to vary based on how the profiles interact and what sort of sound you like. Phase issues, comb filtering - it’s not all bad, it can be part of a sound.
@@JonWrightMusicTV You're right, I forgot to add panning the audio left and right and you get the Haas effect phase issues. That's what I was thinking of.
A word on using a TRS output as a splitter...the tip and ring are 180 degrees out of phase. That's what balanced signals are - they're run over a length of cable phase flipped, then when the signals are recombined at the other end, they are flipped again and the em/rf component present in both ring and tip cables get's cancelled out. Not really a problem if one side is going to 100% wet time domain effects like delay/reverb etc. However, if any of that flipped signal is allowed back into the signal path dry...you MIGHT have problems.
I'm not sure this is completely accurate but I'm keen to discuss. I don't believe it's a balanced output at all - it is 'unbalanced stereo'. The reverb from the pedal is in stereo, so the tip and ring should be the same signal, with one side of a stereo reverb applied to each. I don't think it'll be inverted. I'll check it...
@@JonWrightMusicTV Ah! In that case, you're absolutely right. In my head it seemed 'obvious' that a TRS output would be balanced line level foregoing the need for a DI - but thinking about it more, if it's designed to live in a pedal board signal path it makes more sense that it'd be stereo unbalanced...
I wonder if you have the option to choose one or the other?
Going to need to use two of the same captures in both ToneX One pedals to avoid phasing blunders
An interesting point: Our ears actually *need* small latency differences to tell the direction of sound. So our brains don't mind having latency between two different sound sources (i.e. two cabs). However, if you combine those latencies into a single source (i.e. one cab) our brains don't like it.
Yes well said. Agree!
Thanks for sharing your videos. I enjoy your takes. Nice to get out of the studio!
Ah thank you Johnny, I appreciate the encouragement. It really is!
@@JonWrightMusicTV I’ve been watching a lot of guitar related channels lately as I’m thinking of starting my own guitar/music channel, (a bit of a pivot from my current channel) I really enjoy the tone and production value of your videos. Also you have an easy voice to listen to.
I just watched some of your stuff - I know nothing of Blender except what it is so it was like this lovely chill ASMR 😀. Have you got an angle for the new channel?
@@JonWrightMusicTV Thanks, I don't think I've been described as ASMR before :)
I've got a degree in music and have played guitar for 37 years. I've been thinking about doing a guitar method book for a long time, but I think maybe better to do it via RUclips after getting my feet wet with my Blender channel. I want to help people understand how theory can be really useful in their playing, but sneak it in so as not to scare people who hate theory. I really enjoy effects (I'm the guy who made pedalboardplanner from Pedaltrain back in 2009) so I would also do gear review, tutorials, etc. I've got some ideas about the overall flavor of the channel as well that I think would make it my own and not just a copy of every other guitar/gear channel out there. Would love to chat sometime.
I use two real tube amps and cabs, and went down the rabbit hole in pursuit of a great wet/dry setup, so a couple of thoughts that may apply if you substitute 2x Tonex Ones / other modellers for the amps:
1. Latency: Try using analog dry through pedals where possible, especially delays. I spent weeks tackling latency when doing a U2-style delay where the delay is only coming out of one amp. A splitter that allows a parallel dry signal through can get you there (try the GFI Duophony or GigRig Wetter Box, set the wet FX to kill dry). But in the end I sold the offender (H90) and use an analog dry-through dual delay instead (Free The tone Future Factory or UA Starlight will do the job).
2. Phase/Polarity: I run my gain pedals into a > GigRig Humdinger (Goodwood Audio has a similar box), which splits the signal: one straight to the dry amp (or perhaps to a ToneX One?), the other one onwards to the wet effects. It has a polarity switch, so you can reverse polarity it will. This is super useful for (a) checking whether a drive pedal has flipped phase or is just very mid-humpy (this happens a lot in a wet/dry rig!) and (b) because you are flipping JUST THE DRY AMP’s phase. I use a Matchless as a wet amp, and when you switch channels, it flips the phase. I imagine this would be handy for changing profiles / IRs on a Tonex etc.
On the wet line, after the last wet effect, I sometimes run it into another box with a buffer and another phase switch, so I can flip either the wet or dry line.
I appreciate that there are extra layers of potential phase reversal based on the amp model being used, and latency from mic placement, but at least the signal path above will get you as far as the IR / model with either no issues, or an easy way to correct.
Jon - Another fantastic, relaxed and detailed video - this time with some great landscapes! - on a topic that doesn’t get enough attention. Hope you have a great break.
It's SUCH a relief for me personally to see all of the complications that come with running 2 sound sources simultaneously finally being discussed in granular detail. I still wish they could implement something like you mentioned that the kemper had which "standardized" the latency so that both sources hit the DAW simultaneously. It was something like that???
Great video. I like my reverb and delay before the amp, and I like stereo effects. Hence the limitation of using one tonex. I want stereo in as well as stereo out.
Running mine In the loop of an hx stomp that allows for polarity changes.
This is the issue. I'm hoping to run a mini board with tuner, TC Plethora X3, and Tonex One. The X3 has stereo in and stereo out, and I'd love to run that into a stereo in on the amp emulator.
The Boss IR-2 has a stereo effects loop, but I don't like the baked-in sims all that much. UAFX modelers have stereo in and sound brilliant, but do you want to take a $900 mini board to a bar gig?
It's worth remembering that historically, we've nearly always run mono effects pedals into the front of a mono amp. So for live use, the simplicity of a mono signal chain might still have something going for it. Home studio is a different scenario, of course.
I think the easiest way to think of all this is: it is best to have each Tonex go to separate speakers/cabs, as your ears already understand any latency difference from two different locations. However, If you mix in any way the output from two Tonex into one speaker, you will probably encounter some issues with the partial phase "comb filtering" effect.
Yep, that's a spot on way of looking at it. Just got to be really careful to let the sound guy know...!
Thanks for making this. You're going through all the thoughts that I've been going through. In fact I laughed because I'm using a Flint to try a Wet-Dry-Wet right now with my Tonex One and I also just got a Y-splitter a couple days ago.
I like this, hope it's useful or at least entertaining for you! How are you getting on the Y-splitter?
Cool video & topic man, hope you’re having a great holiday! Good idea about using the output with a Y-cable to split it. If I remember right it’s not a balanced output & can be used to split
All I am thinking is... is it really that warm in Norway right now? Enjoy your vacation!
Oh yes! Long winters, but the summers here can be really hot
I accidently tried to like twice, interesting video thanks, happy Norway day
You supposed to hit the DISLIKE button twice! Thanks, same to you!
What if we could combine two tone models into one preset with the Tonex software? Seems like a possibility in a future update.
If we could that would be cool, but as far as I can see we’d still run into polarity issues based on the polarity of the amps and pedals captured, and phase shift based on physical mic distances (among other things)
Wet/dry is what I do out of the OG Tonex.
Thanks for sharing. Can you talk about the Tonex and drive pedals? I got mine and tested it a few times and had a friend listen to it and we could not get it to sound good with pedals in front of it. I'm sticking with my tried and true HX stomp. Any thoughts???
Probably an input level "trim" issue. The models only sound good if the input level matches what the model expects.
I can have a look at this. However I did run a Soul Food, Nobel ODR1 Mini and an OCD into them in an earlier video - it sounded good to me so long as that particular pedal/amp combo is a good one.
Wet-dry-wet with one Tonex One 🤯
Am I missing something? Kind of epic if it works as hoped!
@@JonWrightMusicTV no no. My mind was blown by what you said 😂
@@Just-artist I know right! 🙂
@@JonWrightMusicTV Now the only thing missing is midi over usb :)
You know if you play a guitar part, and you just copy and paste it on another track, you're gonna end up with phasing issues. So if you're using dual amps it's essentially playing the exact same guitar part so why wouldn't it create phasing issues?
If you copy and paste it exactly, it’ll be in phase and louder. But maybe you mean copying the DI and running the two parts through different amp sims? In which case… sort of. You might run into ‘phase issues’, but the extent to which this is a problem is going to vary based on how the profiles interact and what sort of sound you like. Phase issues, comb filtering - it’s not all bad, it can be part of a sound.
@@JonWrightMusicTV You're right, I forgot to add panning the audio left and right and you get the Haas effect phase issues. That's what I was thinking of.