fx loop question

[audiothings]

i'm looking for a guitar amp head for my studio. the vox ac30cch is looking interesting. i would like whatever digital effects i'm using, to be in the fx loop. i want that the primary signal path be all analog, with the digital effects blended in for taste. i would like to know:

1. if the fx loop on the said amp is actually an 'insert' in studio terms. i don't see a blend/send/return level control... meaning, is the entire signal going through the fx loop, or is it split before the send?

2. is there any way to accomplish what i'm trying to do without an fx loop, without a mixing console? an external splitter+merger perhaps? if this is possible, my choice of amps increases manifold.

thanks,

[octatonic]

Originally Posted by audiothings

i'm looking for a guitar amp head for my studio. the vox ac30cch is looking interesting. i would like whatever digital effects i'm using, to be in the fx loop. i want that the primary signal path be all analog, with the digital effects blended in for taste. i would like to know:

1. if the fx loop on the said amp is actually an 'insert' in studio terms. i don't see a blend/send/return level control... meaning, is the entire signal going through the fx loop, or is it split before the send?

2. is there any way to accomplish what i'm trying to do without an fx loop, without a mixing console? an external splitter+merger perhaps? if this is possible, my choice of amps increases manifold.

thanks,

FX Loops are the work of the devil.
The only loops I use are the fully parallel loops that have separate send and return level and even then, it compromises tone to a degree and you might not have enough level to get the reverbs and delays loud enough and have to boost them on the fx return, as soon as you do... bam, there goes your tone.

I (and many others) do it this way.
Buy a high quality guitar splitter (Like the Radial JD7, Voodoolab Amp selector etc) so that your signal is split into several channels.
I use 3 channels.
One signal goes directly to the input of the Fender Prosonic (which I use for high gain tones and Fender cleans).
The second channel goes to my '62 Bassman.
The third channel goes to my FX rack (which has a preamp in it) and then to its separate power amp. You then set the FX to be 100% wet.

I still have some fx on the front end of the amps (distortion, univibe clone, octaver, ring mod) and they hit all 3 amps- the delay and reverbs are powered by a discrete power amp that has its own speakers.
It works- it took me a long time to get to the point of realising this- but honestly, it is the best way.

It does mean a lot more lugging of gear- sometimes I can't be arsed and only take one amp. I'm almost always unhappy with my tone when I do.

Eric Johnson does it differently- he mics his cabinets, has a mixer with all his fx in the auxes of the mixer and then amplifies them with PA speakers.
That works just as well (or perhaps better), but is even more of a pain in the ass.

[effectsnut]

some effects loops are good depends on the Amp. My Bogner Ecstasy classic has a choice of serial or parallel. I have used both. now in serial I used it with a tc g-force and my tone was fine. now using parallel it gets better. your effects and tone go along side each other and do not mix per say..I prefer the wet dry wet setup in my studio like octatonic said...I do it a little different same concept.
I mic a head and cab alone just raw tone. the bogners have the convenience of a line out like most high end amps do and I run my line out to a effects unit then from there to a line in on a mic preamp for some tube warmth on the effects. my tone and effects go to a mixer on separate channels. I mix my effects and tone separate..you get some nice raw TONE. I could never mix any other way