Discussion on frequency splitting with effects / Rane AC22 Crossover

[bovine mind]

My current effects maintains bottom fairly well with reasonable articulation between effects. Of course, i keep thinking it could get better.

I'm looking at splitting my frequencies to process the mid-highs and keep the low end intact, but all through one amplifier and one cabinet. ideally i'd use two cabinets, one clean and one effects, but i don't want to have to lug around another cab and have limited space in my rehearsal studio.

my rig:

Gibson ripper > FX with Barge Concepts VFB-2 loop switch with clean blend > Ampeg SVT-CL > Ampeg 810e.

I have my Barge VFB-2 set to about 80% effected, 20% clean blend. This is alright, but some effects kill my bottom, especially my wah and phaser.

would splitting the frequency with a crossover really make much of a difference? I'm looking at a used Rane AC22 or similar to do this.

the front panel:



back:



how would i hook this up properly?

what success have you had splitting your frequencies with effects when using on amp/cab setup?

[superbassman2000]

my opinion on hw to hook it up would be to put the crossover in the effects loop, then split the signal with the rane--send the lows to a mixer, and then send the highs through your effects and then into a mixer and then send the mixer through to the effect return jack. DOD makes a cheap rackmount mixer, and ART makes a nice little passive mixer thats about the size of a fat ipod--it'd be pretty easy to do. Would you get a different sound? I say yes because with the loop pedal you are effecting the whole frequency spectrum and also blending in a clean full frequency spectrum--with the crossover, you are only effecting the highs and leaving just the lows clean. I have heard success both ways--personally I like the crossover idea, however i would venture a guess that if you were looking for the 2 cab/one clean, one effected sound, the loop pedal with clean blend might be more to your liking

[bovine mind]

Originally Posted by superbassman2000

my opinion on hw to hook it up would be to put the crossover in the effects loop, then split the signal with the rane--send the lows to a mixer, and then send the highs through your effects and then into a mixer and then send the mixer through to the effect return jack. DOD makes a cheap rackmount mixer, and ART makes a nice little passive mixer thats about the size of a fat ipod--it'd be pretty easy to do. Would you get a different sound? I say yes because with the loop pedal you are effecting the whole frequency spectrum and also blending in a clean full frequency spectrum--with the crossover, you are only effecting the highs and leaving just the lows clean. I have heard success both ways--personally I like the crossover idea, however i would venture a guess that if you were looking for the 2 cab/one clean, one effected sound, the loop pedal with clean blend might be more to your liking

if option 1 is the crossover route, and option 2 is the clean/fx loop pedal routie, how did the different approaches sound to you, and why did you settle on the crossover idea instead?

[superbassman2000]

i personally went with the crossover plan because my plan involved my bass being split hi/lo, with the highs going through a guitar amp, and the bass got sent to a bass amp. It worked out for me, because i wanted more of a guitar sound going through the guitar signal chain, without any bassiness.

a wet/dry blend sounds good to me when the player wants it to sound like two identical cabs, only with one being all effects, and one being dry. However, its all YMMV as I am sure that people can argue with me on the above points.

[Swift713]

I was thinking of using a crossover to split my signal to two different overdrives and then blend them into one amp. Specifically, the Blueberry looses high end and I though that mixing it with say the OCD might be the "perfect" overdrive.

[bongomania]

There's a Rolls Tiny Crossover that would probably work great for this. Also, if you are made of money, the FEA Dual-Band compressor also doubles as an excellent crossover.

[Swift713]

10k ohms, is that inst level, line level, ?

[bongomania]

That's an impedance, not a level. Its value is only relevant in respect to what you're connecting it to. As an input for a passive bass, it's on the low side, but workable. For an active bass it's just right. As an output impedance, it would need to be connected to something with at least 100K input impedance.

[Swift713]

OK, bear with me if you will...say I ran my signal chain like so, bass>couple pedals>rolls>blueberry/ocd>little mixer>couple pedals>amp, would this work? I guess I was thinking of levels because I'm familiar with mic vs. line vs. inst levels but aren't these impedances also? Sorry, I just don't get this, yet. I've been using a volume pedal to get my active basses to the same level as my passives. (BTW, I realized the Blueberry has much better range of gain with the lower level signal. With my active bass on full blast the gain tops out at 12:00.)

[bongomania]

Levels are the "strength" of the signal, while impedance is the "efficiency" of the transfer of the signal from one place to another. If you're strong enough, you can overcome some of the negative results of poor efficiency. If you're efficient enough, you can overcome some of the negative results of low strength.

Active basses are always more efficient than passive ones, but they may be stronger, weaker, or the same (talking output levels here).

The results you get from feeding a signal into an overdrive pedal are dependent mostly on the levels, but can sometimes be related to impedance as well (see discussion on Fuzz Face types fuzzes).

The chain you described should work fine, but I haven't used the Rolls myself to guarantee it.

[Swift713]

Thanks Bongo, I'm sure you get tired of repeating these explanations. I should probably just find out what all the impedances of my gear are so I can really understand how it works. I think I more or less get the general idea but I have no reference point for measurements etc.