Insert channel fx too wet

Forums Forums Qu Forums Qu general discussions Insert channel fx too wet

This topic contains 10 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of [XAP]Bob [XAP]Bob 4 years, 9 months ago.

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #56889
    Profile photo of jhb1982
    jhb1982
    Participant

    I find the wet/dry control for insert fx far too granular. I want to use it to add a small amount of reverb on my snare but even with it on the lowest setting (other than completely dry!) It is still too much. I understand it reuses the same gui as the pan control for consistency, but it just doesn’t work well for the wet/dry control.

    #56892
    Profile photo of mervaka
    mervaka
    Participant

    Why not just use an FX bus and return?

    #56899
    Profile photo of jhb1982
    jhb1982
    Participant

    Because I want to use an insert fx.

    #56906
    Profile photo of mervaka
    mervaka
    Participant

    Suit yourself, I just think you’ve picked the wrong tool for the job. I think Mix-> return or Ch-> return would work a lot better for your application.

    #56908
    Profile photo of knga
    knga
    Participant

    What if 2 fx bus/return are already used? And you want specific FX for snare?

    I agree, it’s too wet, even if you choose the smallest possible ‘wet’ setting.

    #56910
    Profile photo of mervaka
    mervaka
    Participant

    Thats what ch-> return is for. Or use mix-> return on a non-fx bus.

    #56913
    Profile photo of jhb1982
    jhb1982
    Participant

    Well since you keep pushing the point… I want to use insert fx precisly because I don’t want to have to faff with return levels. As I run iems it means balancing multiple mixes that have different levels for that source. Plus I cannot afford to lose another mix channel just to run another return (fx 1 and 2 are already used up).

    It’s beside the point though. Insert fx is perfect for what I want but the wet dry control is not fit for purpose as far as I can see. I’m surprised no one else has found this, or perhaps that 80s vibe is fashionable at the mo!

    #56923
    Profile photo of dpdan
    dpdan
    Participant

    I completely understand now, why you want to insert the effect. That way everyone’s snare will sound the same in everyone’s IE mixes, regardless of how much of it they use.
    I will set up my QU24 and try this and see if I agree that it is not sensative enough to change the dry/wet.

    #56933
    Profile photo of [XAP]Bob
    [XAP]Bob
    Participant

    With a post fader send to the fx you don’t need to do anything else to balance the level FOH.

    For IEM applications I’d normally suggest starting dry anyway – you need to hear enough to be in tune and in time, you don’t need to hear FOH Fx.
    How much are you fiddling, during a set, with the snare reverb in a monitor?!

    #57017
    Profile photo of jhb1982
    jhb1982
    Participant

    I find that adding a bit of reverb to the iem mix here and there makes a big difference to an otherwise fairly sterile experience, especially in very dry rooms and where there aren’t many ambient mics.

    Understand re. Post fade but obviously that doesn’t help w.r.t. mix outs.

    No I don’t fiddle much with the verb during gigs, but general levels most certainly due to different acoustics, band member placement, moods of musicians on the day etc which can also necessitate rebalancing of fx.

    I appreciate people are usually only trying to help, but perhaps I should have just raised the issue that I find the wet/dry control far too granular 🙂

    I can see this being a general issue for other applications of insert fx.

    #57024
    Profile photo of [XAP]Bob
    [XAP]Bob
    Participant

    Ignore me – brain fade

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.