deckard1 Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 Hello, I'm aware one can use external effects processors (i.e. rack unit) with Logic X via the I/O plugin in Logic. Can one also use effect pedals (e.g. Boss) externally? The only reason I ask is because of the signal level...line level for effects processors and instrument level for effect pedals. Is it just a matter of choosing the correct input level on one's audio interface? Very curious. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triplets Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 Boss pedals and the like won't work because of impedance mismatch. You would have to use a DI box to bring line level up to instrument level and then another DI to go back into Logic. Way too much hassle for what you're getting in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 8, 2017 Author Share Posted November 8, 2017 Thanks! I'm trying to add a guitar pedal after my attenuator/load box which is mic level out. Effects loop of amp won't work because it's a stereo effect. I need a reamp box to go from mic level to instrument level and into the pedal? Or, what about using a direct box in reverse, which is less expensive? If so, how do you run a direct box in reverse exactly? Here's the pedal: Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triplets Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 If you want a signal out of Logic into an amp or pedal, you need a re-amp DI box. Even if you managed to get a DI in reverse to work, you would still need another DI box to get the signal back to line level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 8, 2017 Author Share Posted November 8, 2017 guitar=>amp=>attenuator/load box (mic level out)=> ? =>guitar pedal (instrument level in)=>audio interface=>Logic X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triplets Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 The question mark is the DI that converts line level to instrument level. Normally a re-amp box. The part that I'm dubious about is the type of sound you're gonna get. Because after the load box you should go to a preamp and not change impedance again to instrument level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 9, 2017 Author Share Posted November 9, 2017 I’m not happy with my guitar sound going DI. I think it’s the fact I’m using a resistive load box. Thought the pedal would help but having second thoughts now. Apparently, the reactive load boxes are better sounding than the resistive load box/attenuators? I was looking at the Weber load box/attenuators. They are reasonably priced and supposed to be good? https://www.tedweber.com/mass Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triplets Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 I don't think you'll ever like it. A DI or attenuator cannot recreate what a speaker and a mic does. Try the axetrak if you wanna invest in something that works. http://www.axetrak.com/benefits.asp If you want I can send you a sound recording of a 100 watt amp going thru the axetrak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 9, 2017 Author Share Posted November 9, 2017 I don't think you'll ever like it. A DI or attenuator cannot recreate what a speaker and a mic does. Try the axetrak if you wanna invest in something that works. http://www.axetrak.com/benefits.asp If you want I can send you a sound recording of a 100 watt amp going thru the axetrak. Hi Triplets, The Axetrack looks incredible! I had to go with an iso cab that let me do the split payments, otherwise it's too expensive for me at the moment. I ordered the Randall iso cab from Zzounds today. Not as good as the Axetrack but hopefully will improve my guitar tone when recording. Can you possibly suggest a mic for it? SM57??? Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triplets Posted November 10, 2017 Share Posted November 10, 2017 Those Randalls are huge. Not much isolation happening with that box. But definitely better than load box or DIs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Nahmani Posted November 10, 2017 Share Posted November 10, 2017 Can you possibly suggest a mic for it? SM57??? Depends what sound you're after but a SM57 would be a good first choice, yes. It will give you a focused mid-range guitar tone that is going to be easy to blend with other instruments in a mix. On the other hand if you prefer a beefier tone then give the Sennheiser MD 421-II a try, it's also great at picking up guitar speakers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 10, 2017 Author Share Posted November 10, 2017 Those Randalls are huge. Not much isolation happening with that box.But definitely better than load box or DIs. I used to own a Rivera 'Silent Sister' iso cab and it was far from silent when diming the amp. The Randall is similar in design. I won't be cranking the amp to 10...just 2 or 3. Apparently, if you put some Auralex foam inside the iso cab it helps a lot. Also, an Auralex Gramma under the iso cab will help since someone lives below me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 10, 2017 Author Share Posted November 10, 2017 Can you possibly suggest a mic for it? SM57??? Depends what sound you're after but a SM57 would be a good first choice, yes. It will give you a focused mid-range guitar tone that is going to be easy to blend with other instruments in a mix. On the other hand if you prefer a beefier tone then give the Sennheiser MD 421-II a try, it's also great at picking up guitar speakers. Thanks, David. I've always thought the SM57 was a little too mid-rangy for some reason. The Sennheiser MD 421-II is a little too expensive for me at the moment. What about this one? Isn't this mic used a lot too for picking up guitar speakers? https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/E609Silver Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Nahmani Posted November 10, 2017 Share Posted November 10, 2017 I've never used that mic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garfy Posted November 10, 2017 Share Posted November 10, 2017 Hi deckard I’ve got the e609 and I’ve also used its more expensive sibling the e906 and they’re both good mics for guitar amps, amongst other things. Not quite as much mid-bite as a SM57 and not as much low capture as the MD421, but a good smooth sound all the same. However, I’ve never used one in an iso-box so couldn’t comment on it’s usefulness there. It’s a super-cardioid pattern so a bit more focussed/narrow in front of the mic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 12, 2017 Author Share Posted November 12, 2017 Hi deckard I’ve got the e609 and I’ve also used its more expensive sibling the e906 and they’re both good mics for guitar amps, amongst other things. Not quite as much mid-bite as a SM57 and not as much low capture as the MD421, but a good smooth sound all the same. However, I’ve never used one in an iso-box so couldn’t comment on it’s usefulness there. It’s a super-cardioid pattern so a bit more focussed/narrow in front of the mic. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 12, 2017 Author Share Posted November 12, 2017 Just wanted to give a quick update: Got the Randall isolation cabinet set up in my closet. Using a Sennheiser e609 mic and the speaker is a Celestion V30. Huge, huge, improvement over recording direct with an attenuator/load box without disturbing the neighbors. Still playing around with the mic position relative to the speaker. Might check out the MD 421 II as the e609 is a little bit bright to my ears...but still sounds pretty good. Going to pass on the SM57. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Nahmani Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 Huge, huge, improvement over recording direct with an attenuator/load box without disturbing the neighbors. Good to hear!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 13, 2017 Author Share Posted November 13, 2017 Is the MD 421 II thicker sounding than the 57 or e609? The e609 is a little too thin sounding to my ears. If it’s not the amp and it’s not the guitar I am using causing the thinness it has to be the mic, correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triplets Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Is the MD 421 II thicker sounding than the 57 or e609? The e609 is a little too thin sounding to my ears. If it’s not the amp and it’s not the guitar I am using causing the thinness it has to be the mic, correct? The 421 is not that different from the 57, just different boosts in the high mids. So don't expect thicker. You have to experiment with the mic position. Move it away from the cone center to get less highs. Do you have a 57? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 13, 2017 Author Share Posted November 13, 2017 Is the MD 421 II thicker sounding than the 57 or e609? The e609 is a little too thin sounding to my ears. If it’s not the amp and it’s not the guitar I am using causing the thinness it has to be the mic, correct? The 421 is not that different from the 57, just different boosts in the high mids. So don't expect thicker. You have to experiment with the mic position. Move it away from the cone center to get less highs. Do you have a 57? Yep! Haven't tried the 57 yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 14, 2017 Author Share Posted November 14, 2017 The 57 is ideally supposed to be positioned at a right angle to the speaker? On-axis I believe it's called. I can't position the goose-neck, the thing that holds the mic, so that the 57 is at a right angle unless it goes inside the speaker. Not literally inside but past the circumference of the outer edge of the speaker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triplets Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 The 57 is ideally supposed to be positioned at a right angle to the speaker? Only if you want the brightest sound possible. Angle it and point at the cone of away from the cone to get a darker sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 14, 2017 Author Share Posted November 14, 2017 The 57 is ideally supposed to be positioned at a right angle to the speaker? Only if you want the brightest sound possible. Angle it and point at the cone of away from the cone to get a darker sound. Thanks, Triplets. It's okay if the 57 is positioned like in the picture I provided above? Ideally, there would be a grille on a cabinet to prevent one from doing that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triplets Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 Yeah, move it until you find the sound you want. It's amazing how the sound changes if you move it barely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 14, 2017 Author Share Posted November 14, 2017 Yeah, move it until you find the sound you want.It's amazing how the sound changes if you move it barely. I noticed that. You could spend all day trying to find the best placing of the mic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triplets Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 You could spend all day trying to find the best placing of the mic. Just remember that center of the cone is the brightest spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckard1 Posted November 30, 2017 Author Share Posted November 30, 2017 Can you possibly suggest a mic for it? SM57??? Depends what sound you're after but a SM57 would be a good first choice, yes. It will give you a focused mid-range guitar tone that is going to be easy to blend with other instruments in a mix. On the other hand if you prefer a beefier tone then give the Sennheiser MD 421-II a try, it's also great at picking up guitar speakers. There was a great deal for Black Friday on the Sennheiser MD 421-II, so I picked one up. The mic just arrived today and it sounds very good in my isolation cabinet. Took me about 30 minutes to find a good mic position. By the way, I added some room reverb to my guitar signal as well...not a lot...and the room reverb really widened the guitar sound...made it sound thicker. I was shocked at how much better my guitar tone sounded with the added room reverb. Thanks for the mic suggestion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerEvil Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 Sorry to ask but I have a similar issue. There are a few pedals, like my Source Audio Nemesis Delay that I would like to add in "post" but not sure how to do this. Saw a couple of articles but made no sense to me. This would be for guitars and mainly on leads. The same would be applied for specific reverbs and mod effects. I am on the most current version of Logic Pro X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.