What does "WET" and "input "output" gain do in FX channel

BLP

New member
(USING DAW -AA3)


When I'm looking at the channel FX, there is in option for "Wet" that is set to 100% and can go down to 0%. Right above that is an input gain and output gain.


What exactly do you do with this?


Does the "Wet" percentage determine the amount/intensity the FX will be on that channel?

What is the input and output gain on FX channel for then?
 
Does the "Wet" percentage determine the amount/intensity the FX will be on that channel?

It determines the amount of effect as opposed to the dry signal.


What is the input and output gain on FX channel for then?

The input gain allows you to adjust the signal strength being fed to the effect so you can avoid clipping. The output gain adjusts the signal strength being sent from the effect to make up for signal loss which occurs with some effects.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BLP
It determines the amount of effect as opposed to the dry signal.




The input gain allows you to adjust the signal strength being fed to the effect so you can avoid clipping. The output gain adjusts the signal strength being sent from the effect to make up for signal loss which occurs with some effects.


What I don't understand is say I got a

Dynamic Processor
Reverb
Echo

all on one channel

If I turn down the "wet" percentage all 3 FX will come down in intensity simultaneously ?

and in this case If i turn down the Wet percentage how could turning the OUTPUT of the fx be any different. It sounds like it would be doing the same thing??
 
What I don't understand is say I got a

Dynamic Processor
Reverb
Echo

all on one channel

If I turn down the "wet" percentage all 3 FX will come down in intensity simultaneously ?

Yes. Because you aren't actually using the parameters within the individual fx plugs, you are using the overall wet on the fx track. The wet signal therefore is basically the signal once affected by whatever combination of FX you put on that track. It's usually better practice to give individual effects individual FX tracks because of this.

and in this case If i turn down the Wet percentage how could turning the OUTPUT of the fx be any different. It sounds like it would be doing the same thing??

No. Wet defines the mix of wet and dry signal. Output defines the overall volume level of the output signal after the mix of wet/dry has been defined.
 
For example: If you are using a compressor the "wet" knob controls how much of the signal gets compressed and how much is sent through unaltered. The "output" knob has nothing to do with how much of the signal is effected. It only controls the overall signal level leaving the channel.
 
To use an SSG style food/drink analogy (albeit not a very good one), think of wet as how much powdered milkshake mix you want to mix with how much milk, and output gain as how much of that horrific concoction you want to put in a glass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BLP
Oh alright.

When, generally speaking about the FX . should I call it "chain" or "channel"
 
To use an SSG style food/drink analogy (albeit not a very good one), think of wet as how much powdered milkshake mix you want to mix with how much milk, and output gain as how much of that horrific concoction you want to put in a glass.


Ok so If you set it to 80% Percent wet and +2db on output gain you are getting less of the effect but making effect louder?
 
Oh alright.

When, generally speaking about the FX . should I call it "chain" or "channel"

If you're talking about an FX channel or track, I guess it would be channel.

An FX chain is literally what it sounds like - a chain of effects, comprising the effects themselves, and the order they are in from first input to last output.
 
Ok so If you set it to 80% Percent wet and +2db on output gain you are getting less of the effect but making effect louder?

You're getting a mix of 80% effected signal, and 20% dry. The output volume doesn't make the effect +2db louder as such, it makes the entire signal, or the end result (the 80/20 combination of wet and dry) +2db louder.

Output gain is also commonly referred to as 'make-up gain'. That is, the idea is to make up for any volume lost in FX processing. This is common with compressors especially, as the harder you compress something and the lower the threshhold, the lower the resulting volume will be. The output gain will enable you to put the lost volume back onto the signal so that you don't have to use your track fader to push it back up.
 
If you're talking about an FX channel or track, I guess it would be channel.

An FX chain is literally what it sounds like - a chain of effects, comprising the effects themselves, and the order they are in from first input to last output.

Do you know off the top of head where I can read info on the different outcomes of putting FX in different orders? if not it's fine. I just don't know what to type in search engine! lol :confused:


I usually just order the FX by impulse and change them around by ear :cool:
 
You're getting a mix of 80% effected signal, and 20% dry. The output volume doesn't make the effect +2db louder as such, it make the entire signal, or the end result (the 80/20 combination of wet and dry) +2db louder.

Thanx! That was all I needed to fully understand what I was asking

+REP for both of yall!
 
Do you know off the top of head where I can read info on the different outcomes of putting FX in different orders? if not it's fine. I just don't know what to type in search engine! lol :confused:


I usually just order the FX by impulse and change them around by ear :cool:

You probably won't find anything definitive on different outcomes of different orders, as it all depends on the source signal and personal preferance. There are so many different effects out there to consider. And different variations of the same effect. Best thing to do is experiment. eg: do I want to distort my flanged guitar signal or flange my distorted guitar signal? You'll get very different results, but the only real way to tell how it's going to sound is to try it. Some of it can be figured out from experience, but again, it's about experimenting. Which Fx are great for. I've had a lot of fun experimenting with how different FX affect each other. :)
 
Do you know off the top of head where I can read info on the different outcomes of putting FX in different orders? if not it's fine. I just don't know what to type in search engine! lol :confused:


I usually just order the FX by impulse and change them around by ear :cool:

Yeah, answers will differ depending on who you ask.

I'm not aware of any real rules, but if you visualize your signal flow, you can apply some reasoning.

For example, if you put a compressor after a reverb, then you're probably going to have some strange results (think 80's gated reverb snare without the gate). If you're using distortion+delay on a lead guitar part, do you really want the repeats from the delay to individually drive the distortion, or would you prefer to consider the distorted guitar as your "base instrument" on which to apply delay? Etc, etc.
 
Since coming to this site and asking simple questions that where bugging me it seems I can visually picture in my head everything I'm doing now.

I started out setting pre-sets that I liked and going one way with recording every time.


Now I LOVE to start a new recording session and mixing from scratch because I tend to mix better and learn new techniques. Pre-sets were just starting point till I started learning what the pre-sets do.
 
To use an SSG style food/drink analogy (albeit not a very good one), think of wet as how much powdered milkshake mix you want to mix with how much milk, and output gain as how much of that horrific concoction you want to put in a glass.
MMMMMmmmmm...horrific concoction! :)

G.
 
I am starting to hate my OLD mixes with a Mel Gibson passion after learning what I was doing wrong and ways to improve from this site.
 
How do you close this thread? I'm done with question, it got answered but hopefully a future noob will search this and learn something!
 
Back
Top