I'm interested in understanding the difference too. On the paper, it should sound the same.facon wrote:Hmm, I'm a bit confused. The delay has a built in parrallel blend/mix already. I have used the delay on an aux while mixing because I was routing a few things through it at once. I'm not sure I understand the benefit while using a single source though.c7sus wrote:Before you ditch the 104 try using it as a send/return off your mixer instead of routing directly through it. I bring the returns back to a pair of inputs and mix to taste. I've found that using the 104 in this way the audio doesn't get taken over and swallowed whole by the delay.
Talk me into keeping my MF104M
- stiiiiiiive
- Posts: 2545
- Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:58 pm
- Contact:
Re: Talk me into keeping my MF104M
Toxic Overdrive | Minkovski | DNOT | Maetherial | Folie à 6
Re: Talk me into keeping my MF104M
Sounds better to my ears as a send/return. YMMV. I prefer to not constantly run my audio through it. It's more flexible for me to use as a send/return then directly in the signal path.
Voyager EB #165, T3 #292, MF-101, 102, 103, 104SD, 2x104MSD, 105M, 107, 108M, MP-201, VX-351, CP-251, Frostwave Fat Controller.
-
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:14 pm
Re: Talk me into keeping my MF104M
You can further process the returned delay signal using EQ to brighten it up for one. Can't do that if you're using it as an insert.stiiiiiiive wrote:I'm interested in understanding the difference too. On the paper, it should sound the same.facon wrote:Hmm, I'm a bit confused. The delay has a built in parrallel blend/mix already. I have used the delay on an aux while mixing because I was routing a few things through it at once. I'm not sure I understand the benefit while using a single source though.c7sus wrote:Before you ditch the 104 try using it as a send/return off your mixer instead of routing directly through it. I bring the returns back to a pair of inputs and mix to taste. I've found that using the 104 in this way the audio doesn't get taken over and swallowed whole by the delay.
But analog BBD delays are a bit darker. I was really struggling to decide between the MF-104 and the Strymon El Cap. Both beautiful delays, but I preferred the darker 104. If it's too dark for you, I highly recommend looking into the Strymon El Cap or perhaps Timeline, although I felt the samples I listened to, the El Cap was better than the Timeline approximating the El Cap. (Timeline gives so many delay options though)
Re: Talk me into keeping my MF104M
I don't know why it is but I definitely find that it's more satisfying sounding to send my Sub37 to my 104m from a mixing console aux send and return 100% wet delay to an effects return than it is to use it inline and balanced with blend - I wonder if there's some kind of limiter circuitry that occurs AFTER the blend therefore affecting both the wet and dry signals? I much prefer the sound of the send/return to inline and only use it inserted inline for live gigs and definitely notice that something is lost compared to the send/return setup I normally use.facon wrote:Hmm, I'm a bit confused. The delay has a built in parallel blend/mix already. I have used the delay on an aux while mixing because I was routing a few things through it at once. I'm not sure I understand the benefit while using a single source though.c7sus wrote:Before you ditch the 104 try using it as a send/return off your mixer instead of routing directly through it. I bring the returns back to a pair of inputs and mix to taste. I've found that using the 104 in this way the audio doesn't get taken over and swallowed whole by the delay.
instagram.com/stew_crookes
stewcrookes.com
~ all meters ~ all red ~ all the time ~
stewcrookes.com
~ all meters ~ all red ~ all the time ~