Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Thanks Andy, I think I may be going the way you suggest, with the Vortex after the mixer, unfortunately my mixer doesnt have pre fade sends, but im wondering if I can do something with it that way, that works, maybe using the direct out sockets from each channel, I used to do something like this when I was playing bass for the cranes, using an old old old digital delay from Roland (maybe the sde 2000, was that what it was called) I just have to figure out what I used to do!!! The problem I had that I mentioned in the original post WAS what someone suggested (that I had inadvertanly cleared a register pair) so thanks for that, I sleep well now. Mark Still interested in how others used/configure/patch it, listening to other peoples stories GIVES me ideas, it doesnt stop me from experimenting experimenting experimenting, as the guy from finger paint rather patronisingly suggested... SoundFNR@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 05/11/99 08:47:51 GMT Standard Time, mark@grape.no >writes: > > > I could also do with some discussion as to the best / most flexible >place > > to put a Vortex in the signal path, > it works well anywhere. > if using in conjunction with a looper then putting the V after lets you > stereoise the loop, > but putting it first lets you layer up different vortex sounds. > > >I use a split signal from my guitar to > > two stereo effect processors and using it how they suggest places it > > directly after one of them, making it unusable with the other, but if >I > > put it on sends on my mixer, it doesnt process the sound 100% which is > > required for some of the patches... > Can you use pre fade aux sends, or switch off the channel routing to the > main O/P of the mixer(depends what you r mixer can do. > otherwise........ > I recommend you try the Vortex after the mixer, and see if you like it. > > Andy Butler > Lexicon Vortex Database > http://members.aol.com/soundfnr/vortex.htm