Let's Settle This Once And For All! | SERIES VS. PARALLEL REVERB...THE FINAL WORD!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 окт 2020
- Line 6 Marketplace Presets: bit.ly/line6marketplace-sadites
Tonex Tone Models: bit.ly/tonexpresets
ToneNet Profile: bit.ly/3JosdwY
7% Off Your First Year Subscription: distrokid.com/vip/sadites
T-Shirts & Merch: bit.ly/2sWXLCm
Paypal: bit.ly/2sYbUiM
Patreon: bit.ly/2B7aBmf
Facebook Music: bit.ly/2SgbGlr
Website: bit.ly/2WwEEwy
After doing a video a short while ago concerning the difference between using series or parallel paths to process our Helix FX, I received a large number of comments on why my explanation was incorrect and how I wasn't understanding how the "Mix" control works on FX, specifically Reverb. In this video I prove scientifically why what I said in the first video is accurate utilizing null tests that show blending with the "mix" control gives identical results to blending with a parallel path. I really hope you enjoy the video and that this sets the record straight once and for all.
As always, thanks so much for watching...
Please visit my sponsors:
Line 6: www.line6.com
Mission Engineering: www.missionengineering.com
Morningstar FX: www.morningstarfx.com
Temple Audio: www.templeaudio.com 
Видеоклипы
on the AUX channel with the reverb try adding a compressor after the reverb. Set the compressor side chain input to your guitar. The compressor will duck the reverb and let the guitar peek through vs stepping all over it.
Quad erat demonstratum! Another great video - thanks, Jason!
Thanks so much Stephen 😀
Well, I guess this clears it up. Jason, you're a wizard. Cheers from Italy.
This is good information presented in a great way. I was very curious about that after seeing this technique (reverbs on paralell) on another famous "helix" channel, and have always wondered why would I do this instead of just adjusting the mix control. Thanks for the info and congratulations on your content.
Thank you so much :-) I hadn't seen any other videos on this topic, but was getting a lot of inquiries as to why I wasn't putting my Reverbs in split paths and a lot of folks telling my why I was wrong. Very strange and I was wondering why I was getting so many questions about it.
This is such a great scientific experiment to debunked a myth. What most might have missed about using mixer is the historical context why line mixer was a staple in 80s rock star racks, which was to preserve the analog dry signal (from having to go through conversions into low-res 70's/80's AD/DA converters in rack FX). With 21st century AD/DA, this probably isn't an issue anymore unless one really has a superhuman hearing :)
Again, thanks for the great video, Jason!
Great videos as always Jason! All the best!
Thank you so much 😀
Thank you…. Going to re work my mix now!
My pleasure and hope it helps :-)
I wasn't aware of that discussion, and was already wondering myself, just from reading the title of this video "but what's the point of a parallel reverb, if the output of reverb in series also has the dry signal mixed in it?"... Excellent demostration, and I'm glad to see scientific proof that the Helix works as reason would indicate it should!! ;)
Nothing left to argue when is just one reverb block on the parallel path and mixed back to the main path. I'll just point out that if combined with other FX on the parallel path, then is not just a matter of workflow, but it does also enable possibilities that can't be done in series. For example, reverb mix to 100 on the parallel path (so no dry signal), into a delay, and back into the main path mixed to taste. This will give you delay repeats only for the reverb tails, and none for the dry signal. Not sure if is a useful FX, but is one that can't be replicated by setting the same blocks in series and adjusting mix levels.
Thanks! And yes, I totally agree that there are most certainly times when using a parallel path opens up possibilities that are not possible in series and should be used in those cases if that is what is desired. This was in response to those claiming a "magic" improvement to the reverbs by simply pulling them down to a parallel path and blending them with the split or merge block, which is simply not true, but a belief held by a surprisingly large number of folks.
Great job as usual Jason. I had noticed in trying these two different methods of using reverb myself that there was no difference as well. Could you at some point try dialing in a Mark Tremonti/Alter Bridge - ish tone?
the complex reverbs don't null probably because they have some degree of randomization programing for the modulation or delay parts of the reverb. also it would be interesting to see the difference between doing this with stereo reverbs rather than mono.
Excellent, always good to have nonsense proved to be just that. Nice one.
The problem I am still grappling with is in regards to a wet dry wet setup with 3 amps physically in the room, kill dry reverb and delays in parallel are going to make the dry amp much more isolated than a series 50% mix which allows a bunch of dry signal in the wet amps.
You're still wrong....
Na, just kidding, you're right! Ha! People are still gonna argue though...just ignore em' Jason, not worth the time.
Lol....oh I know some people will still argue! But now the record is set straight and others can reference this for reality 😀
I've been learning a lot from your tutorials since i purchased an Helix 4months ago.Could you please quickly explain what is the use of pulling fx like Reverbs or delays in the parallel path please Oo ??Just willing to understand the difference :)
Hi Jason, I found your video very useful! I have one question for you..
In your opinion what would happen if we also put a delay in addition to the reverb? Would it make sense in this case to use them together in parallel or would we have the same ‘null’ effect?
excellent video. I asked in the last video why of not using effects in parallel mode. but the decision is absolutely personal. using the words of Malmsteen : if it s ok for you so it s the right sound. that s all folks! hugs
Thank you much and yes it is a personal decision and nothing wrong with working either way if one prefers the workflow, but this was simply to dispel the myth that there was some sort of sound difference 😀
Really good experiment. I would have been one who would have argued with you about this as I believed there was a difference. Line6 even made some videos where they prescribed this was the way to build a patch but this experiment shows there is no difference.
Thank you Chris and really glad the video was helpful :-)
If you are not selling a t-shirt that says, “null.”, then you should. Been enjoying your videos Jason. Trying to decide if should get an hx stomp. Cheers!
These plebs trying to call out the helix master.. thanks for doing what you do man! Using your tips and tricks has improved my patches and presets so much.
Thanks so much and my pleasure :-) Really glad the videos have been helpful!
I had never heard this argument before, and I'm honestly super confused by it. Like they have a mix control for a reason. This just seems like a way to overcomplicate the process.
Yup exactly! But you would not believe the number of people I get asking why I don't put my reverbs on a parallel path and also that tell me my explanation of the mix control is incorrect. This will finally put and end to that hopefully :-)
WOOO I really dont know where this argument came from but its a know fact that a mix knob is a blend between the original sound and the processed sound. there is no loss in quality unless you are using cheap old gear.
Yup, it is a known fact, but apparently not amongst a good number of Helix users. Hope this sets the record straight :-)
I would only do a parallel reverb to put an eq block on both paths and set the block to affect the reverb separate from how i want to tweak the guitar.
Some of the reverbs have terrible honk
Thanks. I watched the video from the guy that originally said he did this and believed him. This helps.
Glad this helps Jerry :-) I wasn't aware anybody else had done any videos on this topic, I was just getting a lot of questions on the topic and needed to clarify.
ruclips.net/video/y4MmxP-vK38/видео.html. At 7 minutes 22 seconds of his video
Steve is a good friend of mine but I hadn't seen this video of his. What he says here isn't accurate unfortunately as I showed in my video. Maybe this explains why I was getting the questions and feedback I was getting.
There could be another video out there from others.
Jason please help. I am fairly recent to the Helix and love you videos, they have really helped achieve some great tones. However I only have 5 reverbs??? I look at your videos and you have a ton of reverbs. I don't have spring, plate or anything like I would normally expect. I recently updated to the 3.0 software update and it would seem like I have the new additions only. Your help would be greatly appreciated.
Have you looked at the Legacy group of reverbs?
Honest question, if I parallel the reverb because I want my delay to run unaffected, then it makes a difference, right?
Absolutely that makes perfect sense and would be a great reason to run in parallel!
Yeah I think there are too many misconceptions that come from analog-world truths. In the digital world a dry signal is completely unaltered. It’s just a faithful reproduction of the numeric representation of the sound coming in. And a mix is just a linear combination of two signals. Makes no difference if the mixing is done inside a block or by a different block. There’s one very subtle difference I can imagine.. if the reverb introduced a small latency to both the dry and the wet, then its output mix would be subtly different than a parallel mix because the dry in that case wouldn’t have latency / phase shift. But your empirical test proves your point Without even speculating on points like this...
Yup, very well said :-)
thanks Jason
people , especially in the guitar world like to hold on to their "magic " tricks to achieve the ultimate tone, even when it is scientifically proven wrong like you just did, some people wil stil hear a difference.
personaly i'm glad you sorted this one out, i did the paralel reverb thing when i just got helix and switched to series very soon after because i couldn't notice a difference. saw some video's of a certain quite famous helix user nit so long ago claiming putting reverb parallel was night and day. so i started to doubt it again.
i'm convinced now.
thank you
Yes, I totally agree! I was getting so many comments and questions about this and it was obvious a lot of folks were not coming to the proper conclusion on this, so I felt this video was important to set the record straight. Glad you found it helpful :-)
0:45 "and that's false" followed by a mic drop that lasts about 20 minutes :D Completely agree. It's a Mix control. A control for the Mix.
Yup exactly 😀
@@JasonSadites The only time I've found parallel with one effect helpful is when you want to keep the volume levels of trails (reverb or echo) from a higher Mix % tailing off while you reduce the Mix %. In my HX Effects, I put a Transistor Tape (TT) on Path B, and set the TT's Mix to 100%. The TT is always on, as I prefer delay to reverb for ambiance. I use an expression pedal to control the Split A/B block's RoutTo parameter, with the expression pedal's "toe" mixing in more TT and "heel" reducing it.
I find when I use the TT (or any delay or reverb) in series, reducing/increasing the Mix also reduces/increases the volume of the repeats; in series if I rock back on my heel the TT's repeats go away too quickly. If I'm transitioning from an echo-y verse or bridge pad to a chorus, I want those echoes ringing out for a bit as the song moves to the next section which might not be as echo-y.
It's possible I could be overcomplicating the route to my goal, though as you state throughout this video, it's all about the decisions you make about workflow. Sound quality is the same regardless if serial or parallel. If there's a simpler way to do it in series, I'd do it, though I haven't figured it out yet.