RG16 = Dave Friedman Buffer Interface???

A

ARelicMind

Member
Ron, ive been using the RG 16 but my rigs seems to hv been to big here (10U Rack). So ive been using a pedalboard for live and just use the RG16 in my studio. Had to keep removing the analog pedals back n forth. So i came up with this idea of just having RG16, Pedals and Furman which makes it 4U and easy to lug around. My other option is getting a LASD Buffer Interface for my pedalboard. The interface idea was cos i wanted a buffer and the ability to send to 2 amps and use my effects in stereo. So my question is, does the RG16 function the same but with loop switching capability? Interface cost $275 and the hassle to keep moving pedals. Are the buffers on RG16 better than or similar quality as on the LASD Interface? And the interface has a transformer but does the RG16 have one or need one? What does the transformer even do and does the RG16 function similarly? I mean if it does the same and better with the loops system on the RG16 id rather spend that cash on the Mini Line Mixer and use my pedals in stereo parallel to the dry sound to an amp. 4U Rack still makes sense to me.

Do share ur wisdom with me Ron, id appreciate it, cheers :)

Alex
 
The buffer in the RG-16 (and all of our other products) is Dave Friedman's design - it's a good buffer. LASD has just started using a new buffer of their own design, and I'm sure it's good, but I have not used it myself. I would have to guess they're both of similar quality. The transformer is in the interface to help combat ground loops when running more than one amp at a time. You could certainly use the RG-16 to switch between two amps (and also run them both simultaneously). You probably wouldn't even need to use a transformer - I seem to remember you have a Mark IV, which has a ground lift switch. That should be enough to break any ground loops.
 
Oh wow thats quite obvious then. I should opt to keep using my RG16. God knows after ive tasted that its really hard to enjoy other setups. I will just use a smaller setup with the RG16. Yes i hv a Mark IV, but which ground switch are u talkin about? U mean on the Mark IV itself ??? or the RG16 unit?

So Ron, i wanna get a Mini Line Mixer but am quite new so can i ask u honestly bout quality,features and differences between MLM, CAE LIne Mixer, Suhr Minimix ?
I read that u might be upgrading ur MLM, is that so when n what will change?

Another question is, i hv many pedals as in overdrives and dist n a fuzz. The RG16 only has 8 loops so is it a norm to just hv a few pedals u can kick in and out of the front of the input since all the pedals are true bypass. Just hv the rack eventide and my time based fx on the RG16? Would that deteriorate the sound? Right now i only have a CAE wah in front of the RG16. What if i added a couple of Tubescreamers and a fuzz in front of it....all good?

Thx Ron.
 
The ground lift switch I'm talking about is on the back of the Mark (or at least there's one on the back of the Mark I have in the office right now). It has 3 positions - use the one that results in the least hum.

I have not heard the CAE and Suhr mixers, but I'm imagining that they're all similar sound-wise. They all vary on features - what are you going to be doing with the mixer exactly?

You could certainly put a few pedals in front of the amp, outside of the RG-16. If they're true bypass you shouldn't have a tone problem. If you're running a lot in front of the amp, you might want to consider putting a buffer on the board before the pedals.
 
I will be running the basically the eventide H3000 in stereo in parallel with my dry sound to one amp... or sending off wet lineouts to different amps, even straight to the FOH mixer (at least would like to hv the options to when the venues provide). I will not hv a separate poweramp n cab though, its just a simple rig but i want both sides of the eventide to be heard with the dry sound untouched. I hv seen many forums that says my Mark IV fx loop is parallel and some says its in series. Would u hv a confirmed information on that? I know that when i use Timefactor with KillDry function in the loop i dont hear the dry sound...but yet people says my amp loop is parallel.
What do u think Ron?
 
The Mark IV's loop is series as far as I can tell. For your application, any of the mixers you list should work fine. The CAE one would be overkill, and the only difference between Suhr's and ours in this application is that Suhr's wouldn't need a Y cable to split the dry signal. (Although if you're using the RG-16 to switch the H3000, the RG-16 would perform the Y-split for you.)
 
Hmm, actually how i have it set right now is Eventide Left is on loop 7 and Eventide Right is loop 8. So i guess its kinda goin in series kinda thing. N then from loop 8 it goes in the amp fx return. I just turn on loop & for Left and loop 8 for Right. That works fine right? Is there a reason why it shouldnt be routed that way? Why would i need a Y split cable again??So i hv all analog pedals goin front of amp and eventide in the loop. Prob is the the dry and wet seems to be mixed. Which is why i wanted the MLM based on one of ur diagram.

Thx Ron.
 
Using separate left and right loops is no problem, although you won't need that if you're using a mixer. You need a Y split so the dry signal can go to both the mixer and to the effects input. With the RG-16, a loop is your Y splitter. The amp's loop send goes to an RG-16 loop input, the RG-16 loop send goes to the effects input and the RG-16 loop output goes to the dry input of the mixer. The effects outputs go to the mixer and the mixer output goes to the two amp inputs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top