Module phasing - can anybody confirm / deny ?

[bduersch]

Have been working on a stereo modular rig and noticed I was getting some strange phasing when running certain modules in parallel... that prompted me to fire up Sonar and do a little "science project". Basically I recorded a dry guitar track into Sonar then re-amped it into every module, returning it to Sonar via the MOD50's serial loop send. In general, the high gain modules appeared to be in phase with the input signal while low gain modules appeared to be out of phase with the input signal. Here are the details:

IN PHASE: ERECT A/B, SL2 A/B, MHG A/B, EG34 A/B, EG5 A/B, Salvation MarkUs (was an Ultra)

OUT OF PHASE: BMAN A/B, SL A/B, VX A/B, COD A/B, TD A/B, JTM (single), Randall KH1, Randall Blackface, Voodoo Express Deluxe (was a Blackface)

DEPENDS: Salvation StonerVerb (was an XTC) appears to be out of phase when clean and in phase when distorted

Given this wasn't the most well engineered science project (basically relied on looking at the waveforms in Sonar vs doing any technically-savvy audio analysis) - has anybody else tried this? Consistent / inconsistent with your findings?

Thanks!
--B

 

[salvation]

DEPENDS: Salvation StonerVerb (was an XTC) appears to be out of phase when clean and in phase when distorted


--B

Yes, it is correct.

Anthony

 

[djd100]

Each non-cathode follower tube stage changes the phase, so yes various modules will be out of phase with each other.

Generally speaking, the low-mid gain modules will likely match each other, while the high gain modules will as well. Combining low/mid gain and high gain will be a problem in many cases, though of course it all depends on the modules in question.

Have been working on a stereo modular rig and noticed I was getting some strange phasing when running certain modules in parallel... that prompted me to fire up Sonar and do a little "science project". Basically I recorded a dry guitar track into Sonar then re-amped it into every module, returning it to Sonar via the MOD50's serial loop send. In general, the high gain modules appeared to be in phase with the input signal while low gain modules appeared to be out of phase with the input signal. Here are the details:

IN PHASE: ERECT A/B, SL2 A/B, MHG A/B, EG34 A/B, EG5 A/B, Salvation MarkUs (was an Ultra)

OUT OF PHASE: BMAN A/B, SL A/B, VX A/B, COD A/B, TD A/B, JTM (single), Randall KH1, Randall Blackface, Voodoo Express Deluxe (was a Blackface)

DEPENDS: Salvation StonerVerb (was an XTC) appears to be out of phase when clean and in phase when distorted

Given this wasn't the most well engineered science project (basically relied on looking at the waveforms in Sonar vs doing any technically-savvy audio analysis) - has anybody else tried this? Consistent / inconsistent with your findings?

Thanks!
--B

 

[hunter]

If it's an issue at recording different takes one after another, you can always either use a speaker cable with reverted phase or just flip it in your DAW after recording.

 

[m0jo]

If it's an issue at recording different takes one after another, you can always either use a speaker cable with reverted phase or just flip it in your DAW after recording.

Yes but this won't work live.

An idea:
Do you run a loop switcher like a GCX?
You could find a buffer pedal with phase flip switch, turn that switch on, and switch that pedal into the chain whenever you need to flip a module.

OR

If you're not using the loops in the RM4: the pre-loops out is in a different phase then the post-out.
But I believe it's also different levels, because it misses a buffer stage (that flips the phase)


I found the same thing djdayson says: most mid gain modules use a gainstage less, so their phase is flipped when comparing to higher gain modules.

 

[Hamner1]

If you're not using the loops in the RM4: the pre-loops out is in a different phase then the post-out.
But I believe it's also different levels, because it misses a buffer stage (that flips the phase)

The levels are definately different. I tried this a couple of different times just to get a wet/dry setup. I had to run the one side of the poweramp about 1.5 higher (ex: ch1 = 3, ch2 = 4.5) to achieve the same volume level.

 

[bduersch]

[An idea:
Do you run a loop switcher like a GCX?
You could find a buffer pedal with phase flip switch, turn that switch on, and switch that pedal into the chain whenever you need to flip a module.

OR

If you're not using the loops in the RM4: the pre-loops out is in a different phase then the post-out.
But I believe it's also different levels, because it misses a buffer stage (that flips the phase)


I found the same thing djdayson says: most mid gain modules use a gainstage less, so their phase is flipped when comparing to higher gain modules.

Those are actually pretty good ideas... I think I can also flip phase of one of one side using my axe-fx, but haven't tried it yet. I was mostly curious about the groupings of modules that were in-phase with each other, which seems to be confirmed based on the discussion above. Thanks!!

--B

 

[djd100]

I use the Flanger Block to time/phase align my custom RM2 to the Axe's Amp Blocks (the RM2 lives 4CM in the Axe's FX Loop). I need 0.315ms to correct for the Axe's FX Loop A/D - D/A latency, plus it has a phase reverse switch as well.

If doing two RM4's then you could use two Flanger Blocks if a Flanger Block's latency is an issue (maybe not if only a few samples etc, have not checked, though someone has on the FAS Forum, do a search)?

In any case the Axe can do it.

Those are actually pretty good ideas... I think I can also flip phase of one of one side using my axe-fx, but haven't tried it yet. I was mostly curious about the groupings of modules that were in-phase with each other, which seems to be confirmed based on the discussion above. Thanks!!

--B

 

[bduersch]

Since I'm using the modules fully for tone generation (none of the Axe models as of yet), I haven't found the need to compensate for time alignment.

Easiest way I've found to address the phase (for two out-of-phase modules running in parallel) on the Axe though is to flip the phase in an "Enhancer" block.

--B

 

[m0jo]

Since I'm using the modules fully for tone generation (none of the Axe models as of yet), I haven't found the need to compensate for time alignment.

Easiest way I've found to address the phase (for two out-of-phase modules running in parallel) on the Axe though is to flip the phase in an "Enhancer" block.

--B

"Tone generation" .. that is the least sexy term I've ever heard in a guitar rig. :lol:

So have you chosen the modules over the Axe tones in a fair game or just haven't had the chance for a fair shootout and tweak?

 

[bduersch]

So have you chosen the modules over the Axe tones in a fair game or just haven't had the chance for a fair shootout and tweak?

Well, I had an Axe-FX Ultra rig a year or so ago... could never get an "in-the-room" tone / feel that I was entirely happy with. So I sold it and went modular (for the 4th time).

Recently I picked up an Axe-FX II, thinking I would flip it for an Axe-FX Standard or Ultra to only use as an FX box. So far I've only used the II for FX, haven't messed with the amp models at all. Time will tell, but I doubt it'll replace my MOD50's for "tone generation".

--B

 

[djd100]

The Enhance block adds some short delay to one side though, which can suck if summed to mono. Using the Flanger 100% panned mono doesn't.

I rarely use the Axe models by themselves, almost always mixed with one or two MTS modules (our custom RM2 mixes two modules).

I agree regarding the Axe's "in the room" tones, and in my rig A/B testing is easy (yeah, the real tube stuff always won out). That said, I have not heard the Axe II yet, and of course the Kemper Profiler looks promising too?

Since I'm using the modules fully for tone generation (none of the Axe models as of yet), I haven't found the need to compensate for time alignment.

Easiest way I've found to address the phase (for two out-of-phase modules running in parallel) on the Axe though is to flip the phase in an "Enhancer" block.

--B

 

[djd100]

First of all the Axe sounds great, though I've done a lot of testing as my rig has both MTS and the Ultra's Amp Blocks time and phased aligned, and MIDI switchable allowing instant comparisons through cabs and/or cab sims.

In the room through gtr cabs MTS wins hand's down "IMO", and MTS wins DI'd through the Axe's Cab Blocks as well "IMO", though it's much closer.

In terms of a exposed mix like a power trio MTS wins easily "IMO", though in a dense bigger band mix the Axe does well, even better in some cases. Also, the Axe is "plug and play" by itself, though in comparison MTS needs a decent recording environment/cab/mics or convolution cab sim etc.

That said the Axe and MTS are made for each other in a lot of ways and work very well together with the Axe supplying pre and post FX, cab sims, routing options, and the option of using the amp blocks (even in parallel if desired).

Since I'm using the modules fully for tone generation (none of the Axe models as of yet), I haven't found the need to compensate for time alignment.

Easiest way I've found to address the phase (for two out-of-phase modules running in parallel) on the Axe though is to flip the phase in an "Enhancer" block.

--B

"Tone generation" .. that is the least sexy term I've ever heard in a guitar rig. :lol:

So have you chosen the modules over the Axe tones in a fair game or just haven't had the chance for a fair shootout and tweak?