| Author |
Topic: Patching Tubefex to Peavey 1000? |
Harold Bullard
From:
Harrisonville, MO 64701 USA
|
Posted 27 Jan 2000 11:25 am |
|
| Has anyone successfully patched a tubefex or a profex to a Peavey 1000 and maintained a clean sound? I ask this because I tried numerous times to patch a tubefex or a profex to a Nashville 400 (from the front and the back) and was never able to reduce the noise that was produced to a level that I could use on stage. Going on the assumption that this "noise" might be typical on this type of setup, I was curious if the Peavy 1000 had been engineered to accept one these "fexs" and still have a clean sound. Any comments? |
|
|
|
jerry wallace
From:
Artesia , NM (deceased)
|
Posted 27 Jan 2000 3:14 pm
|
|
Hi Harold,well here is how I do it and I have good results both with a 400, 1000,and a webb..I run the psg {pickup}to the input on the pro or tubefex..The output from the fex unit,to the input on my volume pedal,,The output of the volume pedal to the input jack on the amp.This gives you a constant input level to the pro/tubefex..You'll need to adjust the input sensitivity to avoid clipping.I do not use the loops at all.I got this line up method from a Paul Franklin effects instruction tape,and it works for me..
------------------
Jerry Wallace-LegrandeII,,Nashville 1000,Webb 6-14e,tubefex,profexII, ARTESIA, NEW MEX
|
|
|
|
Harold Bullard
From:
Harrisonville, MO 64701 USA
|
Posted 27 Jan 2000 3:18 pm
|
|
| Thanks Jerry, I'll try again! |
|
|
|
Jack Stoner
From:
Kansas City, MO
|
Posted 27 Jan 2000 3:24 pm
|
|
If you're using a Tubefex or Transtube Fex, just add the noise gate (NG) to the end of the chain and it will quiet it down to an acceptable level.
Before going "stereo", I used my Transtube Fex with my Nashville 400, running into the POWER AMP IN jack on the back. (I run from my guitar to the volume pedal to Transtube Fex to amp).
Go to my web site and you can download the program listing or just write down the NG parameters. My A0 program has the NG.
The preferred method is to run the *Fex units into the power amp in for best results. The *fex units have a preamp eq so you don't need the amp's preamp/eq.
I don't know about the Profex II, the noise was one of the reasons I got rid of mine.
http:home.earthlink.net/~jestoner
|
|
|
|
Harold Bullard
From:
Harrisonville, MO 64701 USA
|
Posted 27 Jan 2000 4:56 pm
|
|
| Thanks Jack. Appreciate the input! |
|
|
|
Jeff Peterson
From:
Nashville, TN USA
|
Posted 27 Jan 2000 7:40 pm
|
|
The trouble with gates is that when you play, the noise is in there too. You should just go back and check all your gain stages.
The trouble with running a 'fex' before your pedal is, if you run any time effect(reverb/delay/chorus), you lose the sustain and decay on notes when you pull back on the pedal. If you don't, you're fine. You'd probably get the best s/n ratio thru the effects loop....you'd think. |
|
|
|
Jack Stoner
From:
Kansas City, MO
|
Posted 28 Jan 2000 3:18 am
|
|
One of the problems running into a power amp sections of an amp (any amp not just a Peavey Nashville 400) is that the amp is basically at "full volume" and the signal to noise ratio of the power amp will induce some no signal or "quiet" noise.
Couple the amp noise with the "no signal" S/N ratio of the preamp or preamp effects unit and there can be an unacceptable "no signal" S/N ratio.
By limiting the "no signal" noise of the preamp, e.g. setting the threshold on the noise gate on the *Fex unit, the "no signal" ambient noise from the unit is minimized.
At global output levels of 60 or less on the *Fex unit the S/N ratio is an acceptable level without the noise gate. However for non-miked stage use the global output has to be raised to the 90-100 range.
Although I have not put the output signal on an oscilloscope and analyzed the difference in sustain, decay, etc of the guitar signal with or without the noise gate, I cannot detect any difference by ear in a live playing situation. There may be a very slight difference in a recording situation, but the playing level in a recording studio and on a live performance is much different. |
|
|
|
Bobby Lee
From:
Cloverdale, California, USA
|
Posted 28 Jan 2000 11:33 am
|
|
| Excuse my ignorance, but I thought that the 1000 included the circuitry of a TransTubeFex. Was I dreaming? I'm the first to admit that I don't know much about Peavey gear... |
|
|
|
Jack Stoner
From:
Kansas City, MO
|
Posted 28 Jan 2000 11:34 am
|
|
b0b, the 1000 is basically the next generation Nashville 400. The 2000 will have the processor built into it.
|
|
|
|
