GCX / mute send for parallel routing / question

[chirp60]

Reading from the GCX manual, I can use the send out jack of any given loop to feed an effect unit and then go parallel into a line mixer, I would take it as meaning the original "in" jack signal would not be available at the "out" jack. How could I split the dry signal that's going into the GCX for a group of individual effects (one per loop) other than using a mess of Y splitters?

[nyteowl]

Reading from the GCX manual, I can use the send out jack of any given loop to feed an effect unit and then go parallel into a line mixer, I would take it as meaning the original "in" jack signal would not be available at the "out" jack. How could I split the dry signal that's going into the GCX for a group of individual effects (one per loop) other than using a mess of Y splitters?

In the simplest terms, connect your guitar to the Front Panel Guitar In jack, then connect the Rear Panel Guitar Out to the Loop1 In jack, the Rear Panel Feed Thru to the Loop5 In Jack, and the Loop4 and Loop8 Out jacks to a pair of channels on your line mixer. This will give you two independent, parallel signal chains.

Again, this is just an example of how to create parallel signal chains on your GCX without using Y-Splitters and is only a starting point. Adjust as needed to fit your current situation.

Hope this helps...

[chirp60]

nyteowl;
Thanks for the reply and yes it does help. (in the hope that this routing can happen)
I can "see" the in's and out's as you have described. The thing I can't see is the pathway out of loop 1 to loop 4. I mean, will the signal appear at loop 4 "out" even though I've taken the send jack of any loop (1-4) to an effect? I guess I interpret the manual as saying I'll mute (break the signal chain) of anything beyond the send jack of, for example, loop 1.
I imagine I could just try it out and see.
By your example though, I can see that it's possible.

[JohnClark]

The GCX will not normal the signal to the IN of each Loop. If you need multiple loops to be fed with the same dry signal, you will need to split the signal externally. This can be as easy as using a Y Cable or by employing a buffered splitter box... the need ultimately depends on what the signal source will be.

Will your parallel effects be Instrument Level like pedal effects in front of an amp, or Line Level like an Effects Processor in an Effects Loop?
How many effects devices will be routed in parallel?

[nyteowl]

nyteowl;
Thanks for the reply and yes it does help. (in the hope that this routing can happen)
I can "see" the in's and out's as you have described. The thing I can't see is the pathway out of loop 1 to loop 4. I mean, will the signal appear at loop 4 "out" even though I've taken the send jack of any loop (1-4) to an effect? I guess I interpret the manual as saying I'll mute (break the signal chain) of anything beyond the send jack of, for example, loop 1.
I imagine I could just try it out and see.
By your example though, I can see that it's possible.

My bad, but as per what John wrote, use a single mono splitter from the Rear Panel Guitar Out to feed the same dry signal to the IN jacks of Loops1 and 4 to create the two parallel signal chains I previously described.

You're correct in that, if you use a loop's Send jack to feed an effect, your signal stops there unless you connect the effect's OUT jack to a Loop's RETURN jack, and again, your signal will stop there unless you connect that loop's OUT jack to the IN jack of another loop or external device. You have to make the necessary connections to maintain continuity, or not make them if you don't. For example:

Connect the Rear Panel Guitar Out to the Loop1 IN jack.
Connect Loop1 Send to your Tuner IN; DO NOT connect the Tuner OUT signal to Loop1 Return; Connect Loop1 Out to Loop2 IN.
When Loop1 is off, your signal will pass directly thru Loop1 to Loop2 and beyond. When Loop1 is activated, however, your signal goes to your tuner and no further because it's not being fed back to the Loop1 Return, a neat little trick that enables silent tuning.

Keep in mind you can connect the OUT jack of any loop to the IN jack of any other loop and route your signal to follow any path you desire, although to keep things simple most folks connect short jumper cables between the OUT and IN jacks of neighboring loops, i.e. Loop1 OUT->Loop2 IN, Loop2 OUT->Loop3 IN, etc.

Let us know how you make out...

[JohnClark]

Running the Out of the effect back into the signal path will render it no longer parallel. The Out of each effect has to run to the mixing device. If you run the out of an effect to the in of the next effect then these would be in series. For a completely parallel routing, you do need an independant dry signal split for each effect that will be routed in parallel.

So if you have four effects that will be routed in parallel, you will need a 5 way split, a feed for each effect and one more for the dry feed to the mixer.

A pair of Y-Cables on the rear panel of the GCX, one from the Guitar Out and one from the Feedthru, will give you four copies of whatever is routed to the front panel Guitar In. Alternatively, the mixing device may have a better way to create multiple copies the dry signal using a bus.

What needs to be known is how many effects will be in parallel and what is the signal that will be used to drive them. If it's an instrument level signal that I would want a buffered splitter for sure so the signal isn't loaded down by feeding multiple inputs.

[chirp60]

Sorry... been away for a couple of days. Thanks for the replies, I'm starting to see how this is taking shape.
I'll get into the specifics by setting it up this way. I run a wet-dry set-up at gigs, which I like. One of the guitar signal flows from my pedalboard into the GCX. I consider this the effect side of the rig. From the GCX guitar out, I go to a Gmajor 2 at instrument-line level to pick up additional effects and reverb. I get much better guitar signal strength this way as opposed to using the effects loop of an amp. From there I return to loops 1 to 4, each with a dedicated delay pedal. (starts with a real short slap all the way to very long delays.) All of this in series routing.
The reason I feel I need parallel routing is because of the bad interaction of reverb into delays. The delays get wiped out and if I were to put the G major at the tail end of the signal chain; whatever flanger, phaser, or tremolo I use might sound real funky post delay.
So, what I think I need to try is to feed the pedalboard signal to the G major 2 (thru the GCX) and go parallel out to an 8 channel line mixer that I have. But the rub is having to split the other signal (feed thru) to each of the four loops where the delays go parallel to the mixer.
I didn't want 3 or 4 Y-splitters tangling up the back of the rack.

If I'm to get the idea though, the GCX feed thru goes to a buffered splitter, where I use two Y cables connected to the two "out" signals of the buffered splitter to run to the "in"s of loops 1 - 4 of the GCX; Then route the delays parallel into the mixer.
If that's one way to do it, I give it a try.

[nyteowl]

My bad again.

I thought you wanted two different groups of effects running parallel to each other; didn't realize you wanted ALL of your effects running in parallel.

[chirp60]

Nyteowl;
I was following your thinking as you posted, but you couldn't have known what I was aiming for until I laid it out specifically. I really do appreciate you're jumping in to help try to find a solution to my issue. That's not easy to do when you're not seeing the problem first hand.
This isn't the first time you've chimed on a routing problem that I've encountered previously, and just getting someone's thoughts does help in finding a solution.
At least for me, by all means, do post your thoughts. And Thanks!

It'll be awhile for me to post again because I'm redoing the rack almost completely, but I will get back to the forum on how it worked out.

[JohnClark]

Funny thing now that you lay it out more is that you may not need a split after all and nyteowl's suggestion of using the Loop Outs may indeed work for you... What I think I'm reading here is that you just want the four delay units in parallel with the output of the G-Major. The way you describe the delays makes me think that you only use them one at a time... is that correct?