The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > Acoustic Amplification

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 11-07-2017, 11:14 AM
Cuki79 Cuki79 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 749
Default

I agree with James.

In my own IR experiments, I usually do one recording with one mic position and then spend a lot of time in signal processing (a recipe including, number of samples, IR size, EQ, shaping the tail, multiband blending...).

It can be very tricky and it does not seem to give better results that what people have come to with Tonedexter just playing with the mic position.

I think everyone is trying to achieve a certain sound.

Cuki

PS: However I really wished Tonedexter enabled to export/import the wavmaps as wav or aif files and let people apply whatever plugins to their IR files. But I understand the DIY audio tweaker is not a valuable market target for Tonedexter.

PS2: The main advantage you have in tweaking yourself is the FFT windowing which seems to be quite strong in Tonedexter (from the samples I heard: I don't have a Tonedexter)... Making the IR a bit dark with a high end loss (to my taste).



Quote:
Originally Posted by James May View Post
No drawback and no latency problem, it's just more complicated that's all.

You can run the mic through a mixer/EQ if you want to sculpt the tonal balance and ToneDexter will make it sound like that when it trains. Just make sure whatever device you use has it's output reduced to mic level and can tolerate 48V phantom power.
__________________
Martin D-18 (2012) Lyric gilgaus mod + EPSI IR
Martin HD-28 (2014) Trance Audio Amulet M-VT
Taylor GS Mini-e Bass (2017)

Gibson Les Paul Standard 1958 Reissue (2013)
Fender Stratocaster American Vintage 1954 (2014)
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-07-2017, 02:19 PM
guitaniac guitaniac is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,114
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James May View Post
No drawback and no latency problem, it's just more complicated that's all.

You can run the mic through a mixer/EQ if you want to sculpt the tonal balance and ToneDexter will make it sound like that when it trains. Just make sure whatever device you use has it's output reduced to mic level and can tolerate 48V phantom power.
Much thanks for this info, James. as well as for the good advice on mics and for even providing a feedback resistant SBT option for those who're inclined toward that pickup type.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-05-2017, 04:14 PM
guitaniac guitaniac is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,114
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James May View Post
We've tried low cost measurement mics, which are omnis that have very flat response. They work well. The cheapies, like the Dayton Audio EMM-6 ($50) have a high noise floor level which makes them unsuitable for recording, but they work fine with ToneDexter because Dexter ignores the noise during training. The TC20 would surely work.

The omnidirectional pickup pattern WILL affect the sound that the mic perceives of your instrument. Sometimes for the better, sometimes not. In our experience so far, it has been very usable at least and sometimes excellent. One thing to point out is that you need not worry about capturing more room sound with an omni., because Dexter limits how much of that is captured anyway, regardless of whether omni or cardioid pickup pattern.
I've taken the advice here and have started using a cheap omni-directional condenser mic (Behringer ECM8000) for training. So far so good, although I'll likely opt for the Slate ML-2 at some point.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-05-2017, 08:33 PM
Br1ck Br1ck is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: San Jose, Ca
Posts: 2,254
Default

One of the very best investments I made for my home studio was a pair of SM 81s.
__________________
1980 Martin M 36
1970 Guild D 35
1965 Epiphone Texan
2014 Martin 00 15 12 fret custom
Pono OP 30 D parlor
Pono OP12-30
Pono MT uke
Goldtone Paul Beard squareneck resophonic
Fluke tenor ukulele
Boatload of home rolled telecasters

"Shut up and play your guitar" Frank Zappa
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-06-2017, 12:02 PM
varmonter varmonter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Northern Vermont
Posts: 690
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loco gringo View Post
If a person were wanting to purchase one mic for the purpose of Dexterizing guitars, lets say $400.00 max, what would be a good choice? Maybe discuss lesser priced mics as well. Would a mic in the $400 range give you a better dual purpose mic, say Dexterizing as well as a recording mic, than say a $150 mic?

Let's assume said person has no mics and can't experiment with several that they have on hand.
The worlds best kept secret .. the MXL 604 small
Condensor mic. ... shhh ..

You can buy these on eBay cheap and they sound really good.
I don't think you'll notice a huge difference in what
ToneDexter does with a lesser mic then it will do
With a 500 dollar mic in a live setting anyway.

Shame you can't rent a high end mic for this purpose.
As it's a one time use and your done.

Last edited by varmonter; 12-06-2017 at 12:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-06-2017, 09:20 PM
loco gringo loco gringo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 337
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by varmonter View Post
The worlds best kept secret .. the MXL 604 small
Condensor mic. ... shhh ..

You can buy these on eBay cheap and they sound really good.
I don't think you'll notice a huge difference in what
ToneDexter does with a lesser mic then it will do
With a 500 dollar mic in a live setting anyway.

Shame you can't rent a high end mic for this purpose.
As it's a one time use and your done.
I keep waiting for the ML2, but it hasn't showed up yet. I have an MXL4000 LDC as well as numerous dynamic mics, Shures and Sennheisers. I am finally going to have time this weekend to play with the TD and the mics I have on hand.

I can get a new SM81 for $299.00. I may pull the trigger on it.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-07-2017, 07:28 AM
varmonter varmonter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Northern Vermont
Posts: 690
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loco gringo View Post
I keep waiting for the ML2, but it hasn't showed up yet. I have an MXL4000 LDC as well as numerous dynamic mics, Shures and Sennheisers. I am finally going to have time this weekend to play with the TD and the mics I have on hand.

I can get a new SM81 for $299.00. I may pull the trigger on it.
Again you may be totally happy with the ToneDexter results you get with
The mics you already have.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-08-2017, 04:19 AM
pieterh pieterh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Near Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 2,546
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loco gringo View Post
I keep waiting for the ML2, but it hasn't showed up yet. I have an MXL4000 LDC as well as numerous dynamic mics, Shures and Sennheisers. I am finally going to have time this weekend to play with the TD and the mics I have on hand.



I can get a new SM81 for $299.00. I may pull the trigger on it.


The SM 81 is a great mic and I would think you’ll get use out of it once the Tone Dexter is set up to your liking - it’s a great hi hat mic for example and very good as an instrument overhead for violin, flute etc.
__________________
Mine: Furch OM34sr 2015; Fender MiJ Geddy Lee bass, 2009 (?); Taylor 414CE 2005/ES2.0; Guild D35 NT 1976/K&K Pure Mini; Fender MIM Classic 60s Tele 2008; Fender US Standard Strat 1992; G&L ASAT classic hollowbody 2005; Ibanez RG350MDX 2010(?); Ibanez Musician fretless, 1980s; Seymour Duncan Tube 84-40; Vox AC4TV;

Ex-pat Brit in Sweden
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-08-2017, 04:27 AM
pieterh pieterh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Near Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 2,546
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LookerBob View Post
I have tried an AKG C414 XLII, and I liked what I got with other mics better, it had a harsher top end... I think those may be the same capsule, though they do sound different.



My favorite so far when training TD has been an Ear Trumpet Myrtle.


The 214 is based on the 414 range but has one diaphragm whereas the 414s have two. As a result the 214 is a cardioid, the 414s have a choice of patterns. Not that it is immediately relevant here but I use 214s a lot to mike up jazz drum kits or when I can’t close mike rock kits. Great value for money and way better than the equivalent Perception series mics.

James can probably chip in here with the science etc but small diaphragm mikes are more likely to give an even response - the smaller diaphragm is easier to move by high and low frequencies whereas large diaphragm mics tend to be better at capturing detail and “air” but not necessarily “good at everything”!
__________________
Mine: Furch OM34sr 2015; Fender MiJ Geddy Lee bass, 2009 (?); Taylor 414CE 2005/ES2.0; Guild D35 NT 1976/K&K Pure Mini; Fender MIM Classic 60s Tele 2008; Fender US Standard Strat 1992; G&L ASAT classic hollowbody 2005; Ibanez RG350MDX 2010(?); Ibanez Musician fretless, 1980s; Seymour Duncan Tube 84-40; Vox AC4TV;

Ex-pat Brit in Sweden
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-08-2017, 08:38 AM
stevecuss stevecuss is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 472
Default

Has anyone used the ADK A6 large diaphragm mic with the tone dexter?
__________________
Steve
Mcilroy AJ20 with Trance PU
50th Anniversary Fender Am Std Strat
If I played them as much as I read threads on AGF, I'd be a pro....
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > Acoustic Amplification

Thread Tools



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=