Suhr MiniMix II

[dogears]

Dogears head is swelling. Oww!

[boldaslove6789]

Please pop your mini Mix II open and copy the circuit for all of us LOL. $200 plus is just too much. I could see how it corrects all the problems involved with series operation though, I've A/B'd bypass and the my T.C. and you can tell how much it changes the tone of the amp.

[ayan]

But the way, I just found one processor which works great in a D loop without any additional buffering device. After modification it switches channels as well as FXs.
You can put amp’s master at very loud gig setting (5 or 7) and no problems at all on input overloading. And most importantly it can make amp bigger, sweeter, stereo with the second amp. I am in the middle of a modification process and if I’m successful I’ll publish a video here.

Cheers

I wonder if I am the only person who's curious about thename of the device you hint at above. What processor is this?

Gil

[exocet]

The thing that I always wondered about with parallel loops is that signal phase becomes an issue, especially when placing an FX processor in the loop and setting it to 100% wet.

Is it possible that the minimix is just introducing a phase reverse or correcting a phase reverse that was already there within the Intellifex?

[vibratoking]

Most good processors do not introduce a phase reversal, but there are units that do. This has been discussed before, but a parallel loop will not suffer due to phase reversal as long as a 100% wet/0%dry signal is returned through the loop. The only component of dry signal should be directly through the amplifier itself. That is the big advantage of the parallel loop - the basic tone of the amplifier is not altered in any way.

[exocet]

Most good processors do not introduce a phase reversal, but there are units that do. This has been discussed before, but a parallel loop will not suffer due to phase reversal as long as a 100% wet/0%dry signal is returned through the loop. The only component of dry signal should be directly through the amplifier itself. That is the big advantage of the parallel loop - the basic tone of the amplifier is not altered in any way.

But surely with the standard ODS type FX send / return you are breaking the signal path with the dumbleator and then feeding an FX unit either directly (series mode) where the Wet / Dry mix is controlled by the FX unit itself (in the case of an Intellifex for example which has its own internal mixer) or by the FX return level in the FX return path when set to parallel mode.

If you add a Suhr minimix, this allows you to place the FX unit in parallel with the series dry signal, thereby allowing you to run the FX unit 100 % wet. You then take the output from the FX unit and mix it with the dry signal in the Minimix. In this scenario, the phase of the Wet signal could well be reversed and might this not have an impact when mixed back with the Dry? Just a thought that's all.

[ayan]

The single biggest deal [ and unless I got something wrong this would be a deal breaker to me ] in the case of an amp with a Dumble topology and a using stock Dumbleator with something like the Suhr device, is that you end up without a gobal master volume that will allow you to turn the SPLs up or down at a gig without upsetting the Wet/Dry balance. If you turn the Dumbleator's return level up, you only make your mix wetter... and if you turn your amp's master volume up, while you will increase the volume, you will also probably clip the input of your FX or at the very least upset sensitivity settings for "ducked" delay, reverb, etc.

It seems that to make a change in SPLs one would have to:

1. Readjust the amp's master volume setting to achive the desired SPL.

2. Readjust the FX units input sensitivity and/or the Dumbleator's send level to prevent undesired clipping of the FX box now that the input signal is different.

3. Readjust the Dumbleator return level to dial in, again, the desired Wet/Dry mix.

I t really does sound like a clear case of "fhogeddaboudit" to me.

I will add that while I am cheap and use old trusty Rocktron Intellifexes, those boxes have a decent mixer and I -- modesty aside -- get a very good sound live. There have been a couple of folks who have copied (in once case, the guy borrowed my amp and literally cloned it) my rig but "upgraded" the FX box to something "better," but which does the dreaded A/D conversion right after the input jack and end up sounding like ass. Amazingly, these people seem to not be capable of hearing and accepting my simple explanation as to why that is -- their box is just "better" than mine.

Gil

[exocet]

"I t really does sound like a clear case of "fhogeddaboudit" to me."

I'm with you there Gill, just out of interest, do you rely solely upon the mixer within the Intellifex to control wet / dry? I have one of these units after reading one of your earlier posts - I like it a lot.

[ayan]

"I t really does sound like a clear case of "fhogeddaboudit" to me."

I'm with you there Gill, just out of interest, do you rely solely upon the mixer within the Intellifex to control wet / dry? I have one of these units after reading one of your earlier posts - I like it a lot.

Yes indeed, the Intellifex's is the only mixer involved.

Gil

[talbany]

I agree with Gil..In a gig situation where you have to adjust things quickly on the fly the Minimix (as it's described) can be cumbersome..I set mine as a serial loop and control the overall volume on the D-lator return call up the mix bank in the lexicon and can quickly control the amps volume and reverb mix zip zip without touching the amp..It might not sound the same (good enough for me) but I sure like the quick and easy control factor during a gig..

Tony

[bluesfendermanblues]

Gil and Exocet you got it all wrong about the little suhr device....
Check the diagram on page 1 in this threat.

You use your amp with a dumblelator as always, but connect the suhr to the dumblelator send/return and connect your intellifex to the send and return on the suhr.

The dumblelator recovery still asct as the mastervolume. Its quite simple and a no brainer.

The Suhr is a simpleline mixer with two IC's (NE5532's) and it does not change the phase. Its as a buffer amp and a mixer, very simple.

Guys, my point with this post is simply to tell you that my rig sounds better with the suhr (and my intellifex at 100% wet) instead of doing the mixing in the intellifex.

I bought my an old blackface intellifex on fleabay because people (e.g. Gil) parised the unit and its mixing circuit. However, mixing the clean/wet signal in the suhr sounds way better than mixing the clean/wet in the intellifex. As simple as that.

I thought that parallel loop was superior until I tried the "dumblelator + 180pf cables + 68pf on master" ...............The suhr mixe takes this setup to another level. Period

[vibratoking]

I run a TC MOne-XL in the parallel loop - no serial loop involved at all. I have a volume pedal setup to send CC messages to the MOne. That pedal sets the level of the wet side return. I never have the need to make volume changes that are so large that I have to reset the gain structure of the rig. It works and sounds great. If I put the MOne in a serial loop, it degrades the sound.

I would still love to hear what the Minimix adds to the sound. If it sounds that good, then I would repeat the request to open it up and share the circuit with us. I'm not really interested enought to drop $250 to find out.

[talbany]

Claus
OK I didn't see the diagram..control the mix by the output level on the processor makes sense now..Thx for sharing..

Tony

[ayan]

Gotcha, I'd actually love to hear the little box. Not to copy my buddy Tag, but if you already have any clips, I'd appreciate being able to listen to them.

Cheers,

G.

Gil and Exocet you got it all wrong about the little suhr device....
Check the diagram on page 1 in this threat.

You use your amp with a dumblelator as always, but connect the suhr to the dumblelator send/return and connect your intellifex to the send and return on the suhr.

The dumblelator recovery still asct as the mastervolume. Its quite simple and a no brainer.

The Suhr is a simpleline mixer with two IC's (NE5532's) and it does not change the phase. Its as a buffer amp and a mixer, very simple.

Guys, my point with this post is simply to tell you that my rig sounds better with the suhr (and my intellifex at 100% wet) instead of doing the mixing in the intellifex.

I bought my an old blackface intellifex on fleabay because people (e.g. Gil) parised the unit and its mixing circuit. However, mixing the clean/wet signal in the suhr sounds way better than mixing the clean/wet in the intellifex. As simple as that.

I thought that parallel loop was superior until I tried the "dumblelator + 180pf cables + 68pf on master" ...............The suhr mixe takes this setup to another level. Period

[bluesfendermanblues]

Claus
OK I didn't see the diagram..control the mix by the output level on the processor makes sense now..Thx for sharing..

Tony

Hi tony,

The diagram could look something like this...

a buffer + a mixer

However, the minimix II is much more sophisticated with three line transformers in order the eliminate ground loops etc. plus sophisticated voltage circuits etc.