• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

running two amps, one wet, one dry

P

poomwah

Jan 26, 2008
1,235
21
#1
hope this is the right place, since it mentions effects I hope its not supposed to be in the effect section. I've heard of people running two seperate amps. one amp clean into one cabinet. and another amp with effect through a second cabinet. Does this give a noticable improvement in sound quality? Is this a lot better than the wet/dry mix on effects units? Would it be worth the effort and cost to set a system up with two amps rather than one.
can it be done with one multi-channel amp? My carvin bx1200 has two power amps and a cross-over. but only one input.
The other possibility for me is I have a hartke 3500 that I could run clean into one cabinet, then pick up a hartke2000 to run with effects into another cab?
worth doing? or am I better off just running everything into one.
 
#3
It sounds super badass when you run effects into a cab without a horn, and your normal sound into a full range cab. That's my opinion anyway.

The problem with the Carvin though is that I don't think it has separate volumes -- that's an important part of this setup. You want to be able to closely control the volume (balance) of the stereo setup. It will sound drastically different based on how much volume goes to each cab.

I used a Yamaha pre/power rig to do this and it was pretty epic. The Yamaha has a built in high and low pass, so what I did for a while was ran a 100hz highpass on the effects channel, and full range on the other. Typically I used a pretty nasty distortion through the effects side, but I tried it with synth too and it was pretty cool.

So: Separate volume dials, and some means of splitting your frequency that is not a crossover., is recommended.
 
#4
hi rp, fancy meeting you here, LOL
the carvin does have seperate volume controls. it only has one effects loop, but it has two amp send/returns which if I understand do the same thing as effects loops, just on each amp instead of both.
the only problem is, for my setup, I can't use an effects loop because I'm running a multi effects unit with a volume pedal, and use the volume pedal all the time, and need it up front.
 
#5
Then it won't work. Unless the FX unit has a stereo loop anyway. Some of them do, but usually only expensive ones.

I would suggest: buy a separate volume pedal, they are cheap. then run the multi-effects in the loop of the one you want to put effects on.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
 
#6
rpsands said:
Then it won't work. Unless the FX unit has a stereo loop anyway. Some of them do, but usually only expensive ones.

I would suggest: buy a separate volume pedal, they are cheap. then run the multi-effects in the loop of the one you want to put effects on.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Click to expand...

or just do without a volume pedal for a while, LOL
thanks for the heads up on that one though, great price
 
#8
Have you thought about just buying a new stereo power amp? I'd like someday to put a bass preamp into one side of a stereo amp for cleans into a 1x15" and a guitar processor for effects into the othe side into a 2x10"s. I know a lot of guys who go the effects route bi-amp in order to be able to maintain a clean signal no matter what effects they use.
 
#9
I've thought about different multi channel setups a lot. One that I'd like to try is

bass -> effects loop -> bass preamp -> looper (sequencer) -> power amp channel A -> cab A
..in parallel..
bass -> guitar combo -> microphone -> mic preamp -> power amp channel B -> cab B

With the time, muscle and money, there are so many ways to experiment.
 
#10
Biamping is a waste of time. seriously.

You'll do better running stereo, and a high pass on one side for effects (or a pitch shifter up an octave or a fifth...but quality pitch shifters are damn expensive).

You should also check out the band Clatter -- that chick has the coolest bass setup I've ever seen. She runs a fifth up into a Mesa half stack I think it is and then a full range signal to a Redhead combo for effects, or something like that.
 
#12
Bump!

I was thinking about this myself recently.

Before taking up the bass, I played guitar for 12 years (still do, as a matter of fact). I've heard that Robert Trujillo runs his SVTs for his regular bass tone, and a Mesa Recto for his distortion.

Here's what I was thinking: My bass >> Tuner/mute >> Octaver (wet out) to Sansamp DI to board >>>Octaver (dry out) to Distortion and other FX >>> into Guitar amp, with lows rolled off to prevent phasing issues and speaker failure.

Waste of time? Or awesome? I am aware that there may be some issues with ground hum, but there are safe ways to deal with that. Anyone else do this?
 
#13
rpsands said:
Biamping is a waste of time. seriously.

You'll do better running stereo, and a high pass on one side for effects (or a pitch shifter up an octave or a fifth...but quality pitch shifters are damn expensive).

You should also check out the band Clatter -- that chick has the coolest bass setup I've ever seen. She runs a fifth up into a Mesa half stack I think it is and then a full range signal to a Redhead combo for effects, or something like that.
Click to expand...



Her cool bass rig.
 
#14
PBass101 said:
Do explain. This guy is already talking about multiple cabs and amplifiers.
Click to expand...

Biamping is splitting your signal at a particular frequency and sending one to one cab and another to another cab.

The majority of cabinets on the market are at least somewhat full range, so doing this wastes volume. Additionally, for some reason biamping almost always winds up with weird frequency holes. This is a lot of work to get rid of and makes biamping usually more trouble than its worth.

If you're going to run two amps, it is in your best interests to do it one of three ways:
1) Both full range into full range cabs.
2) One full range and one high passed (for effects)
3) One full range and one low passed into a subwoofer style cabinet (for monstrous low end).

This is not to say that good results can't be achieved by biamping but typically you will be extremely hard pressed to match a good quality 3-way cabinet with a well designed crossover with a biamped setup. Some people manage, but it's the exception rather than the rule, and takes a LOT more effort for a dubious advantage.

For almost everyone, biamping is a waste of volume and money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RolandMHall
#15
I dont know anything about what this setup is named, but im going to use one of my preamps into one side of a poweramp and another preamp into the second channel of the poweramp. Each channel to each cabinet. One side totaly clean and the other only highs + sometimes distortion. Ran once my clean bass signal and only highs to a marshall guitar amp. Oh man, tone heaven
 
#16
AndyLES said:
Bump!

I was thinking about this myself recently.

Before taking up the bass, I played guitar for 12 years (still do, as a matter of fact). I've heard that Robert Trujillo runs his SVTs for his regular bass tone, and a Mesa Recto for his distortion.

Here's what I was thinking: My bass >> Tuner/mute >> Octaver (wet out) to Sansamp DI to board >>>Octaver (dry out) to Distortion and other FX >>> into Guitar amp, with lows rolled off to prevent phasing issues and speaker failure.

Waste of time? Or awesome? I am aware that there may be some issues with ground hum, but there are safe ways to deal with that. Anyone else do this?
Click to expand...

I have run effects with a high pass into another amp and it sounded awesome. I can only imagine it would sound more awesome an octave up through an awesome guitar amp.

This is a good idea. Clatter does it and it sounds quite simply amazing as you saw :)
 
#17
i agree that biamping (in it's classic sense) is a waste of time as far as bass rigs are concerned due to the nature of commercially available bass cabinets. It's wonderful for a pa with the right cabs. you can see me rant in a few threads about this. but back to the subject..........:p

The real issue is how to split your signal and what amps to use. You can use an a/b/y box that lets you run both sides at once. I've never done this as there are some tricks.

Many amp heads have a tuner out which runs pretty much right from the amp input. You can run a line from this into the input of another amp. You can also run a line out from the effects send of many amps that have a pre-eq effects send (not many but eden comes to mind). If you don't mind using the eq of amp #1 you can run a line from the line out or effects send of a post eq amp to the second amp. This signal will be a lot hotter than your bass.

with some effects a line out or effects send can be run from a preamp right into the effect without distorting it. I sometimes use my sans amp in this way. I run the line out into channel A of a poweramp and into one cabinet. i run the effects send into a sans amp, dial in some grit (maybe remove some lows) and send the output into channel B of the poweramp and into a second cab. Many stomp box type effects are not meant to be run at line level so this may distort some especially delay type effect stomp boxes.

Experimentation is the key. just make sure you think each setup through and make sure you don't plug anything where it shouldn't be. (mom always warned me about this). :ninja:
 
#19
The best trick for effect and distortion is to biamp using cabs chosen/designed especially for this, with the top cab handling above 125 Hz or so and getting all the effects and OD/DIST and the lower cab doing nothing but making big bass below that same frequency. If the routing of clean and dirty/wet signals is mixable on the high side of the crossover such a setup allows the benefits of this strategy in a less bulky rig and has no issues of low frequency cancellations two full-range rigs side-by-side would have.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back