Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

DI for Re Amping

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 3:37:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I'm getting ready to do alot of reamping for an upcoming project.
I'm curious about which DI yeilds the best result for reamping Electric
guitars primarily, but also for Bass guitars. I'm guessing that I want
the cleanest DI I can get so the guitar sound remains as intact and
natural as possible. Does this seem to be the best approach?

Currently I'm considering the Radial JDV as it is supposedly one of the
cleanest DI's available.
I've also heard excellent reviews of the FMR RNP for use as a guitar
DI. Any comments about either of
those two DI's for reamp purposes?

As a point of reference, I have used the BSS AR133 (I believe), KT
LBB100, and the Countryman extensively. I've also had the pleasure of
using the Demeter, Manley and the Avalon DI's bot they were chosen
based upon their tone altering capabilities and what they added to the
source input.

Thanks,
Chris
wavetrap

More about : amping

Anonymous
February 7, 2005 4:11:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

some boxes are known for their DI. Avalon makes a $500 DI that is
highly regarded. The Demeter VTMP tube preamp series is known for
their bass DI's.

Check out the Millennia Media TD-1. That's a whole lot of high-quality
bang for the buck. You'll get excellent DI and re-amp all in one box,
plus tons of other fully high-quality stuff.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 5:23:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott Dorsey wrote:

>
> >Currently I'm considering the Radial JDV as it is supposedly one of
the
> >cleanest DI's available.
>
> It's still a passive box. You may want to consider the active
Radial,
> or the Countryman.
>


JDV *is* the active Radial box; JDI is their passive unit.

I know, just splittin' hairs...
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 5:27:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I thought the JDV was the active multi zone top of the Radial line di
box.

As for the playback part, is the Radial x amp up to the task or is
there a better offering out there?
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 6:33:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike,
Thats a great question-
Has anyone done any blind tets/comparisons of those DI's? I've used
them all in sessions but with diffent players and instruments. So while
I'm familiar with all of them and have gotten satisfactory resutls with
each and every DI listed I am curious if one seems cleaner and more
transparant than all the others.

Chris
wavetrap
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 6:53:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

wavcatcher <wavcatcher@comcast.net> wrote:
>I'm getting ready to do alot of reamping for an upcoming project.
>I'm curious about which DI yeilds the best result for reamping Electric
>guitars primarily, but also for Bass guitars. I'm guessing that I want
>the cleanest DI I can get so the guitar sound remains as intact and
>natural as possible. Does this seem to be the best approach?

I tend to agree.

>Currently I'm considering the Radial JDV as it is supposedly one of the
>cleanest DI's available.

It's still a passive box. You may want to consider the active Radial,
or the Countryman.

>I've also heard excellent reviews of the FMR RNP for use as a guitar
>DI. Any comments about either of
>those two DI's for reamp purposes?

If you have the RNP, it should be clean enough for the job. The hard
part isn't really the recording, but the playback.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 8:25:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Thanks for the reality check Scott.
Sometimes you can get so wrapped up with the details you forget
something obvious like how
blatantly different amps are !

It sounds like any of the clean, active DI's I listed should do the job
just fine.

Thanks to all for their input.

Chris
wavetrap
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 9:30:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Buster Mudd <mr_furious@mail.com> wrote:
>
>JDV *is* the active Radial box; JDI is their passive unit.
>
>I know, just splittin' hairs...

I thought the JDI was passive and the J48 was the active one?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 9:40:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Actually Mike I'm looking for a clean active DI for recording the
guitar only. Then I was planning to get a passive reamp box from either
REamp or Radial for the actual reamping of the recorded di track. I'm
aware of the fact that you cant use an active di for the reamping. So
ultimtately I'm just looking for the best combination of a DI to record
with and the reamp box to reamp with.

And Hank, my god you are so pumped about eh Evil Twin I'll have to try
one sometime. IF they are still $800.00 it may be more than I can
justify on this project but I'm glad to hear about its rave reviews.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 10:24:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

wavcatcher <wavcatcher@comcast.net> wrote:
>Has anyone done any blind tets/comparisons of those DI's? I've used
>them all in sessions but with diffent players and instruments. So while
>I'm familiar with all of them and have gotten satisfactory resutls with
>each and every DI listed I am curious if one seems cleaner and more
>transparant than all the others.

Some may, but after it goes through the instrument amp, it won't matter
as much as you might think.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 11:36:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1107808628.993313.313820@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> wavcatcher@comcast.net writes:

> I'm getting ready to do alot of reamping for an upcoming project.
> I'm curious about which DI yeilds the best result for reamping Electric
> guitars primarily, but also for Bass guitars. I'm guessing that I want
> the cleanest DI I can get so the guitar sound remains as intact and
> natural as possible. Does this seem to be the best approach?

Yes. But are you looking at a DI for recording the guitar, or are you
planning to use a DI "backwards" to send a recorded signal to an
amplifier? Or are you looking for one that will do both?

Obviously (or maybe not) you can't use an active DI or mic preamp with
an instrument input hooked up backwards to go from your recorder to
the amplifier. You need a passive DI, or better, a 1:1 transformer
that can take plenty of level.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 12:29:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
> wavcatcher <wavcatcher@comcast.net> wrote:
>>I'm getting ready to do alot of reamping for an upcoming project.
>>I'm curious about which DI yeilds the best result for reamping Electric
>>guitars primarily, but also for Bass guitars. I'm guessing that I want
>>the cleanest DI I can get so the guitar sound remains as intact and
>>natural as possible. Does this seem to be the best approach?

> I tend to agree.

>>Currently I'm considering the Radial JDV as it is supposedly one of the
>>cleanest DI's available.

> It's still a passive box. You may want to consider the active Radial,
> or the Countryman.

I have never done it this way, but don't some people reamp by running
the channel backwards through a DI just so that the guitar amp gets
a high impedance signal at the correct level? And so, you obvioulsy want a
passive DI for this.

>>I've also heard excellent reviews of the FMR RNP for use as a guitar
>>DI. Any comments about either of
>>those two DI's for reamp purposes?

> If you have the RNP, it should be clean enough for the job. The hard
> part isn't really the recording, but the playback.
> --scott

Actually someone who posts here contributed a very nice DIY DI project for
Recording magazine. And it's strength is that it sounds great on guitar.

Now who was that, again...

Scott, would you know?

Rob R.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 12:29:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Rob Reedijk <reedijk@hera.med.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>> wavcatcher <wavcatcher@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>>Currently I'm considering the Radial JDV as it is supposedly one of the
>>>cleanest DI's available.
>
>> It's still a passive box. You may want to consider the active Radial,
>> or the Countryman.
>
>I have never done it this way, but don't some people reamp by running
>the channel backwards through a DI just so that the guitar amp gets
>a high impedance signal at the correct level? And so, you obvioulsy want a
>passive DI for this.

For the reamping part. Not for the original tracking part. For the original
tracking, you want something as neutral as possible (which means as high Z
as possible). For the reamping part you need a passive box.

>>>I've also heard excellent reviews of the FMR RNP for use as a guitar
>>>DI. Any comments about either of
>>>those two DI's for reamp purposes?
>
>> If you have the RNP, it should be clean enough for the job. The hard
>> part isn't really the recording, but the playback.
>
>Actually someone who posts here contributed a very nice DIY DI project for
>Recording magazine. And it's strength is that it sounds great on guitar.

HOPEFULLY I will have a DIY reamp box soon as well, but we're still trying
to work some of the grounding bugs out of it while still getting all the
parts from one source.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 2:17:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 7 Feb 2005 12:37:09 -0800, "wavcatcher" <wavcatcher@comcast.net>
wrote:

>I'm getting ready to do alot of reamping for an upcoming project.
>I'm curious about which DI yeilds the best result for reamping Electric
>guitars primarily, but also for Bass guitars. I'm guessing that I want
>the cleanest DI I can get so the guitar sound remains as intact and
>natural as possible. Does this seem to be the best approach?
>
>Currently I'm considering the Radial JDV as it is supposedly one of the
>cleanest DI's available.
>I've also heard excellent reviews of the FMR RNP for use as a guitar
>DI. Any comments about either of
>those two DI's for reamp purposes?
>
>As a point of reference, I have used the BSS AR133 (I believe), KT
>LBB100, and the Countryman extensively. I've also had the pleasure of
>using the Demeter, Manley and the Avalon DI's bot they were chosen
>based upon their tone altering capabilities and what they added to the
>source input.

You have all the good DIs you need:
Radial JDV
Countryman Type 85
BSS AR133
KT LBB100
They are all so clean that they will all sound the same. Yep, I have
them too, and it's only on the rare guitar with incredibly fussy
pickups that I can hear any difference ... and even then, I may be
imagining it. Anybody done any blind tests comparing these DIs?
Mike T.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 2:28:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

wavcatcher wrote:

> I'm getting ready to do alot of reamping for an upcoming project.
> I'm curious about which DI yeilds the best result for reamping Electric
> guitars primarily, but also for Bass guitars. I'm guessing that I want
> the cleanest DI I can get so the guitar sound remains as intact and
> natural as possible. Does this seem to be the best approach?

I'd forego guessing at least long enough to try an Evil Twin, and I
might also look into the Little Labs stuff.

> Currently I'm considering the Radial JDV as it is supposedly one of the
> cleanest DI's available.
> I've also heard excellent reviews of the FMR RNP for use as a guitar
> DI. Any comments about either of
> those two DI's for reamp purposes?

Haven't used the Radial; the RNP is a very good DI, too. But I find the
ET scary good, in a comforting way. <g>

--
ha
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 3:08:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hank alrich wrote:
> wavcatcher wrote:
>
>
>>I'm getting ready to do alot of reamping for an upcoming project.
>>I'm curious about which DI yeilds the best result for reamping Electric
>>guitars primarily, but also for Bass guitars. I'm guessing that I want
>>the cleanest DI I can get so the guitar sound remains as intact and
>>natural as possible. Does this seem to be the best approach?
>
>
> I'd forego guessing at least long enough to try an Evil Twin, and I
> might also look into the Little Labs stuff.
>
>
>>Currently I'm considering the Radial JDV as it is supposedly one of the
>>cleanest DI's available.
>>I've also heard excellent reviews of the FMR RNP for use as a guitar
>>DI. Any comments about either of
>>those two DI's for reamp purposes?
>
>
> Haven't used the Radial; the RNP is a very good DI, too. But I find the
> ET scary good, in a comforting way. <g>
>
> --
> ha

Get the Little Labs RedEye. You can use it as a DI and a
reAmp. Sounds very good. We also use the original ReAMP
a lot and that works great. The Evil Twin is da Bomb but
it ain't cheap even if you can find one. How's Bruce
Siefried doing? I recall that he had some health issues
a while ago. He posted some really nice gear for sale
here not too long ago.

--
--
John Noll
Retromedia Sound Studios
Red Bank, NJ

jn145_deletethisfirst_@verizon.net
http://www.retromedia.net
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 3:42:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

John Noll wrote:

> The Evil Twin is da Bomb but
> it ain't cheap even if you can find one. How's Bruce
> Siefried doing? I recall that he had some health issues
> a while ago.

He seems to have finally gotten through his ordeal, and has a small run
of ET's coming up right about now. I don't know if they're all spoken
for yet, but interested parties might want to contact him ASAP. There
will be another run in a couple of months, but parts cost increases will
mean a higher price for the finished product.

Yes, they ain't cheap. But in my view, this is one of those pieces of
kit that proves its worth every time it gets used, and now for me gets
used every time something wants DI'ing, and will hold its performance
value long after the price has been forgotten.

> He posted some really nice gear for sale
> here not too long ago.

Yep. He is out of the studio business, and hopefully, fully into the
Evil twin business. Go, Eclair Engineering!

--
ha
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 4:41:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

wavcatcher wrote:

> It sounds like any of the clean, active DI's I listed should do the job
> just fine.

Yeah, okay, but you still want an Evil Twin. It'll put hair on yer
flatpick. <vbg>

--
ha
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 8:46:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

wavcatcher wrote:

> And Hank, my god you are so pumped about eh Evil Twin I'll have to try
> one sometime. IF they are still $800.00 it may be more than I can
> justify on this project but I'm glad to hear about its rave reviews.

I got it as a bass guitar DI, just like Bruce supposedly intended it to
be used. Then I ran guitar through it, upright bass through it, then
electric guitar, keys (actually one of my first heads-ups about it was
Dave Martin saying quite a while ago that he had two and often ran
stereo keys through 'em to storage), and the last straw, so to speak,
was what it does for my early 20's Gibson A mandolin with Fishman bridge
pickup (which ain't such a sweet pickup). Now it just goes with me most
times when I'm going to plug something in. I use it often as a jazz
guitar preamp. I never used to track the pickup on my duo partner's
cello when we're tracking. Now we do track that. There just aren't a
whole lot of pieces of supposedly specialized kit that I've met that
seem this versatile.

One came up on eBay last year. Went for less than $500 IIRC. Most folks
have no idea what it is.

--
ha
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 8:46:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hank alrich wrote:
> wavcatcher wrote:
>
>
>> Hank, my god you are so pumped about eh Evil Twin I'll have to try
>> one sometime. IF they are still $800.00 it may be more than I can
>> justify on this project but I'm glad to hear about its rave reviews.
>
>
> I got it as a bass guitar DI, just like Bruce supposedly intended it to
> be used. Then I ran guitar through it, upright bass through it, then
> electric guitar, keys (actually one of my first heads-ups about it was
> Dave Martin saying quite a while ago that he had two and often ran
> stereo keys through 'em to storage), and the last straw, so to speak,
> was what it does for my early 20's Gibson A mandolin with Fishman bridge
> pickup (which ain't such a sweet pickup). Now it just goes with me most
> times when I'm going to plug something in. I use it often as a jazz
> guitar preamp. I never used to track the pickup on my duo partner's
> cello when we're tracking. Now we do track that. There just aren't a
> whole lot of pieces of supposedly specialized kit that I've met that
> seem this versatile.



I don't think anybody's mentioned that it has a line level blalnced output. So it's more than a DI (in many ways.)
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 9:02:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hank alrich should have written:

> Then I ran *bass* guitar through it

(Guess I was too deep in misery, not having a TV and all.)

--
ha
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 9:47:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <cu8mk4$5ks$1@news1.chem.utoronto.ca> reedijk@hera.med.utoronto.ca writes:

> I have never done it this way, but don't some people reamp by running
> the channel backwards through a DI just so that the guitar amp gets
> a high impedance signal at the correct level?

Some people do, but it doesn't really work that way. When you hook up
a DI backwards, it's acting as a step-up transformer. When you connect
a line level signal to the XLR end of the DI, it comes out the 1/4" jack
end at a level well above that of a typical guitar pickup. Of course
you can always turn down the input to the DI so that you're putting
something close to mic level into the "mic" side. You'd eventually
figure that out.

What you really want is a transformer that's close to a 1:1 ratio.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 11:57:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

A hundred years ago Mix magazine did a shootout with all of these DI's,
the Radial won most of the categories hands down, oddly enough a RAPCO
box took second in a lot of the categories. Ampeg however is marketing
an affordable tube DI these days.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 2:16:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1107830420.244312.156160@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wavcatcher@comcast.net writes:

> Actually Mike I'm looking for a clean active DI for recording the
> guitar only. Then I was planning to get a passive reamp box from either
> REamp or Radial for the actual reamping of the recorded di track.

I guess I read too much into your original message. Most people who
ask a question without a full explanation are looking for a one-box
solution.

In my (admittedly limited) experience with recording an electric
guitar direct, once you get over the bottom line junk, the choice of a
DI is relatively non-critical. Unless it's for a very special effect,
you're not going to use the direct sound without some significant
processing so as long as it comes close to representing what the
guitar is doing, you can work with it.

Bass is a different animal. With the right combination of bass, DI and
music, you can get a usable sound directly off the pickup, and it's
almost always useful to augment the sound of a mic on a speaker.
This is apparently where the Evil Twin DI really shines.

When you play a DI guitar back through an amp, it'll start sounding like a
guitar again, but since there are no vibrating strings to react to the
sound of the amplifier (and no player, either), the amp will respond
differently to the playback of a direct-recorded guitar than it will
to a played guitar. So you can't get your sound back by simply setting
the controls like you're used to.

Radial stuff is good quality. If it's easy for you to buy, it's a good
place to start. But this isn't a make/break decision. If you can use
another decent mic preamp, you might look at one that has a good rep
as both a useful preamp. That's getting two for the price of one,
a potentially good deal if you can use the two.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 5:52:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:

> In article <cu8mk4$5ks$1@news1.chem.utoronto.ca> reedijk@hera.med.utoronto.ca writes:

>> I have never done it this way, but don't some people reamp by running
>> the channel backwards through a DI just so that the guitar amp gets
>> a high impedance signal at the correct level?

> Some people do, but it doesn't really work that way. When you hook up
> a DI backwards, it's acting as a step-up transformer. When you connect
> a line level signal to the XLR end of the DI, it comes out the 1/4" jack
> end at a level well above that of a typical guitar pickup. Of course
> you can always turn down the input to the DI so that you're putting
> something close to mic level into the "mic" side. You'd eventually
> figure that out.

Actually, I think I would probably use the same DI for recording and
reamping. I would also ensure that the levels going out matched the
levels going in. This way, I would have the best chance of feeding
the guitar amp something close to what it would have received if
the guitar had been originally hooked up to it.

As guitarist, I have experienced how dramatically different the amp
interacts with the guitar depending on what you feed it. Guitars
with active electronics, passive electronics, single coils, and of
course the can of worms that effects pedals are...it is very important.

With that said, after getting an output from tape that matched the
input as closely as possible in terms of level and impedance, I would
spend some time trying adjusting this output level and seeing how
the amp "likes" it. I guess one of the purposes of reamping is
having the choice later between different amps and effects.

Rob R.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 6:42:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Kurt Albershardt wrote:

> hank alrich wrote:
> > wavcatcher wrote:

> >> Hank, my god you are so pumped about eh Evil Twin I'll have to try
> >> one sometime. IF they are still $800.00 it may be more than I can
> >> justify on this project but I'm glad to hear about its rave reviews.

> > I got it as a bass guitar DI, just like Bruce supposedly intended it to
> > be used. Then I ran guitar through it, upright bass through it, then
> > electric guitar, keys (actually one of my first heads-ups about it was
> > Dave Martin saying quite a while ago that he had two and often ran
> > stereo keys through 'em to storage), and the last straw, so to speak,
> > was what it does for my early 20's Gibson A mandolin with Fishman bridge
> > pickup (which ain't such a sweet pickup). Now it just goes with me most
> > times when I'm going to plug something in. I use it often as a jazz
> > guitar preamp. I never used to track the pickup on my duo partner's
> > cello when we're tracking. Now we do track that. There just aren't a
> > whole lot of pieces of supposedly specialized kit that I've met that
> > seem this versatile.

> I don't think anybody's mentioned that it has a line level blalnced
> output. So it's more than a DI (in many ways.)

Right, and the 1/4" output can be switched to loop-through, or provide
another line output in addition to the XLR out. The ET offers up to 36
dB of gain.

--
ha
!