The Acoustic Guitar Forum

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #46  
Old 12-04-2012, 08:56 AM
mchalebk mchalebk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Hanna View Post
That's not even close to the way their copy reads. Of course it's all speculation but the inference is that there is some pretty sophisticated (maybe sophisticated is not the right word...perhaps clever) filtering and eq'ing going on to allow for the absence of the pickup and increased low-end response without feedback. Either way the inference is not "simpler electronics".

LR Baggs is clearly not marketing this as an Anthem without the Element kinda thing.
Their marketing suggests that they're doing all sorts of fancy stuff in their preamp. What all that actually is we can only speculate upon. However, the fact of the matter is that this is simpler device than the Anthem. The Anthem has a similar mic, plus a pickup. It has to mix the two sources together. It has to perform a crossover function. It also has noise cancelling features and, I'm sure, some EQ.

Baggs may not be marketing this as an Anthem without a mic, but they aren't making an effort to distance this product from the Anthem. They haven't renamed the microphone, for example; they're still calling it a Tru-Mic.

Yes, there may be more complicated EQ going on here, but overall this is a simpler device than the Anthem and ought to cost less.

Of course, that may not prove to be the case.
__________________
Brian
http://www.youtube.com/mchalebk
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 12-04-2012, 11:54 AM
GibbyPrague GibbyPrague is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Prague CZ / Adelaide AUS
Posts: 9,207
Default

I think Ill stick with my Aura Spectrum and Fishman UST..
__________________
The Big Fat Lady 02' Gibson J-150
The Squares 11' Hummingbird TV, 08' Dove
The Slopeys 11' Gibson SJ (Aaron Lewis)
The Pickers 43' Gibson LG-2, 09' Furch OM 32SM (custom) , 02' Martin J-40
The Beater 99' Cort Earth 100
What we do on weekends:
http://www.reverbnation.com/doubleshotprague
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 12-09-2012, 12:52 PM
kydave kydave is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A Louisville transplant in Silicon Valley
Posts: 12,500
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ljguitar View Post
Hi Side Man...

This was about someone calling Baggs company Innovative for inventing a stand alone internal mic, not about which brand had it first. In the 1970 James Taylor using was masking tape with Shure Lavaliere mics (SM-11) inside the body of a Martin Dreadnaught and then taping the soundhole shut with 4X6 note cards. Sony had gooseneck ones which installed through the endpin.

K&K wasn't probably the originator of the idea, and maybe not any of the big guys...Commercially I don't care who was first. Most good ideas were sown in seed form and then improved upon. I hope they don't stop experimenting.

Long live experimentation...

Heck, also in 1970, I was playing bass in a rock band & we were opening for Iron Butterfly, but on one number I grabbed an acoustic and was the only instrument as we all sang. Huge venue and mic'ing it wasn't making the sound guy for Iron Butterfly happy, so he walked away to his bag of tricks; came back with some kind of small mic & duct tape; dropped it down inside my acoustic and taped the cable so it wouldn't clunk around and suddenly this small bodied USA '60s Epiphone was filling the arena. I like today's technology better though.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 12-09-2012, 02:55 PM
guitaniac guitaniac is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,709
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ljguitar View Post
Hi guitaniac...

Innovation?

K&Ks have had internal mics for over a decade, and this looks like the mic from the Baggs Anthem rig with perhaps a different circuit board in the preamp.

James Olson has been installing internal mics for at least 15 years (originally Crown or Sony).

While I think it's interesting and useful, it's not new, or particularly unusual.


Oops, sorry I missed this before, LJ.

Yes, I do think that Baggs is innovative to come up with a type of internal mic which is more resistant to feedback, and to preamp the signal with onboard electronics which remove that boxy inside-the-guitar sound. (That boxy sound, and the feedback susceptability, have been my greatest dislikes, with regard to internal mics.)

For the record, AKG makes a stick-on mic (c411) which appears to be similar in application to the Tru-Mic. One of my multi-instrument friends swears by it.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 12-10-2012, 03:35 PM
guitaniac guitaniac is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,709
Default

In case anyone here is curious, here is the question which I asked, and the answer which I received from the lrbaggsmedia YouTube site administrator, regarding the recording of the Sierra Hull demo of the Lyric system.

Q: "It seems like this Lyric system might serve very well for direct recording applications. Is there some place where I can find the technical details on this demo. I'm presuming that the guitar signal is being recorded directly off the Venue DI, with perhaps a little guitar bleedover into the vocal and violin mics."

A:"Hi Gary. Lyric is now our best option for direct recordings. We have a lot more recordings with Lyric that we have not made available yet. There is more cool content coming soon. I can't wait until all of you guys get to hear it for yourself. This recording used this signal path: 1960'something Martin Dread, Lyric into a Venue DI, then to an Apogee Ensemble, into a Macbook Air with Protools."

Apogee Ensemble is a FireWire audio interface for Mac.


I personally prefer to do my guitar/voice recordings "live", so I'm interested in Lyric as a direct recording option which will minimize vocal bleed onto the guitar track.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 12-10-2012, 06:09 PM
Joseph Hanna Joseph Hanna is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Belmont Shore, CA
Posts: 3,206
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guitaniac View Post
In case anyone here is curious, here is the question which I asked, and the answer which I received from the lrbaggsmedia YouTube site administrator, regarding the recording of the Sierra Hull demo of the Lyric system.

Q: "It seems like this Lyric system might serve very well for direct recording applications. Is there some place where I can find the technical details on this demo. I'm presuming that the guitar signal is being recorded directly off the Venue DI, with perhaps a little guitar bleedover into the vocal and violin mics."

A:"Hi Gary. Lyric is now our best option for direct recordings. We have a lot more recordings with Lyric that we have not made available yet. There is more cool content coming soon. I can't wait until all of you guys get to hear it for yourself. This recording used this signal path: 1960'something Martin Dread, Lyric into a Venue DI, then to an Apogee Ensemble, into a Macbook Air with Protools."

Apogee Ensemble is a FireWire audio interface for Mac.


I personally prefer to do my guitar/voice recordings "live", so I'm interested in Lyric as a direct recording option which will minimize vocal bleed onto the guitar track.
One cool thing about LR Baggs demo stuff is they've always been meticulous about video's (and audio) that are recorded direct. I suppose in most ways that's some form of "worse case scenario" demo. I feel so much better about putting stock in a demo that is direct and still sounds good as opposed to the obvious "hocus pocus" some demos provide. Some demos so bad of course and with so much room it's shameful they get away with it.

I also believe Lloyd has a pretty great gauge of the pulse of gigging guitar players. The Anthem probably doesn't sound quite as "acoustic" as some other choices but by gosh it's crazy consistent and virtually feedback proof and feedback proof in the worst of rooms. I've got a Highlander in one of my guitars that's eons and eon's more likely to feedback in bad rooms.

I know you gig fairly regularly and I'd bet you'll agree that it's very difficult (if not impossible) to recover from a nasty room with nasty feedback. It rips the wind from my sails and keeps me well away from things that are prone to those follies. I'll take a hit on the acoustic-ness of a pickup for piece of mind any day. I'm utterly positive I'll play better not tryin' to recover from that initial shock and realization a room won't provide for anything even remotely mic-like.

This system seems to be a real leap for the working acoustic guitar player.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 12-10-2012, 09:12 PM
guitaniac guitaniac is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,709
Default

I certainly agree with you on the Anthem, Joseph. It hasn't given me any feedback problems in a wide range of performance settings. I can't say the same for some of the other good sounding (under ideal conditions) pickup systems.

I'm a little skeptical that the Lyric will be as feedback resistant as the Anthem, but I'm guessing it will be excellent for moderate volume settings and direct recording applications.


On the subject of the Anthem's tone, I've been experimenting with setting the mic level a little higher in the UST/mic blend. I have to EQ a little differently with my Fishman Platinum preamp (a bass boost of 2 or 3db, and a mid boost of 3 or 4db at around 1.5KHz, I'm guessing), but it sure sounds nice.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 12-10-2012, 09:27 PM
Joseph Hanna Joseph Hanna is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Belmont Shore, CA
Posts: 3,206
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guitaniac View Post
I certainly agree with you on the Anthem, Joseph. It hasn't given me any feedback problems in a wide range of performance settings. I can't say the same for some of the other good sounding (under ideal conditions) pickup systems.

I'm a little skeptical that the Lyric will be as feedback resistant as the Anthem, but I'm guessing it will be excellent for moderate volume settings and direct recording applications.


On the subject of the Anthem's tone, I've been experimenting with setting the mic level a little higher in the UST/mic blend. I have to EQ a little differently with my Fishman Platinum preamp (a bass boost of 2 or 3db, and a mid boost of 3 or 4db at around 1.5KHz, I'm guessing), but it sure sounds nice.
It's a fine line (the mic level) to be sure. I find if I set it too high there is a very uncomfortable "clack". There again and as with any good system the more I finesse my right hand technique and adjust to the pickup system at hand, the better things sound.

As to feedback issues with the Lyric (and as I said earlier) I think Lloyd has always been tuned in to some of the trials and tribulations of everyday gig folk and I suspect feedback rejection is still a design concern for him. As good as the iBeam can sound under perfect conditions you've seen him steadfastly move away from that technology and I suspect that has to do with it's finickiness. I'm guessing the Lyric won't be feedback proof but I bettin' it'll be much better than the current crop of SBT's.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 12-10-2012, 09:34 PM
Turp Turp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: likely somewhere I shouldn't
Posts: 3,168
Default

The Lyric may be an option for a guitar I didn't want to drill for a UST and also save some acoustic tone.

Question I have for alohachris. With your strong opinion of LR Baggs products, I have t ask from my experience, what are some alternatives for an instrumentalist seeking acoustic accuracy without mic stands and mics bunched up in front of the instrument requiring correct position of the guitar?

The internal mic method dual source works well and my experience is the Anthem is a workable and price competitive option for discriminating ears.
__________________
Martin 000-28EC, Taylor 12fret Cedar/Mahogany, Taylor GC8, Carvin AC275,
Takamine TC135SC, Yamaha APX5na
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 03-29-2013, 02:00 PM
Bm7b5 Bm7b5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,040
Default Lyric

So, I get an email from AG, hyping this mic. I review the promo info, and then as I always do, set out to research for reviews, opinions, etc.

The 1st link in my search is to this forum, of which ive been a member for a long time, but haven't frequented of late, due to life.

How surprised am I, when I come across a post by none other than myself.

So, I now know its $199.

Yeah, internal mic's are not new. My 514ce came with the Fishman Blender, which I liked. But most mic's have been on a gooseneck for adjustable placement.

I think that this products innovation, is A., The specific placement of the mic/mic's, specifically the closeness to the soundboard, AND B.,the circuitry involved, which many have minimized, but my opinion is that if TWO of the circuitry designs are "patented" and proprietary, they are definitely not not small, insignificant tweaks to anything.

My guess, this system is going to sound VERY good. In which applications, gigging, direct recording, etc, I won't speculate. But I'll bet in your home, where most of us, (I would guess) play, I'm betting that the acoustic tone is going to be morse "natural" sounding. But that's just my opinion.

I don't worship at the alter of any specific mfg, on their entire catalog. But I do really like the sound of my 514 with I-Beam, and my McPherson which came with Bags UST. I also love the sound of my 812ce with Taylor's electronics, post bug years.

Just being on the verge of playing "out" having not picked guitar until my 40's, and now 53, I can't speak to those aspects of being heard in the mix, feedback, room acoustics etc, and so have no idea if the Lyric fits the bill for that.

But for my living room, and recording with my Zoom H4n, I expect it to be good, if not great.

That said, due to life at present, price alone may drive me to install another I-Beam in my beater, based solely on price.

Looking forward to those who install it, and what THEY. Have to say, as everything so far is speculation, and some highly biased at that.

The results of a blind test, including lovers, haters, and in-betweeners, would probably be interesting, and possibly entertaining.

But until I find a job, it won't be me.
__________________
Slightly off key, and a little bit late, but definitely in tune...
"Now these three remain, Faith, Hope, and Love, but the greatest of these is Love"
<><

McPherson 4.5W RW/ZI
Taylor 812ce - Taylor 514ce - NS32-ce
Adamas W-597, Epi John Lee Hooker Sig #23 of 220, Squire Black Strat
Jay Turser Maple OM
Taylor W14ce / 422-R Babies x 3
Fishman 130W Tri-Amped Performer Acoustic Amp

Last edited by Bm7b5; 03-29-2013 at 02:05 PM. Reason: Spelling/grammar
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 05-28-2013, 03:55 PM
Cellomangler Cellomangler is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 109
Default

I just installed the Lyric in an Epiphone Masterbilt EF-500RCCE. (orchestra sized) This guitar already had a LR Baggs Element pre-installed. I did not want to remove it because the action was perfect and it got there because I had done some work in the saddle slot with clay to level the string output and I set the action pretty low. I also like the Element. So I drilled another end pin hole just diagonal and to the rear of the existing hole and added the Lyric preamp, the lyric volume control next to the Element's in the soundhole and then attached both to the same 9 volt (lithium) battery. So...
As I was very used to the Element and my various ways of optimizing its signal, I wasn't sure at first what to make of the Lyric. It's output is MUCH lower than the Element. This makes sense as it is obviously EQ'ed to death with a dramatic slope down toward the lows. But the lows are there... and it's not noisy when cranked. But there is some boxiness. Now I just put it in the recommended spot and frankly, I can't really imagine an internal mic that wouldn't exhibit some boxiness. With a graphic EQ, I'm sure I could make it sound fantastic. It's definitely got the mic'ed sound. But - when I combine it with the Element... it's much better, IMHO. Then I tried my usual bi-amping technique and sent the Element output to a bass amp and the Lyric to an acoustic amp. Voila ! Now we are getting somewhere. Sounds like I'm promoting the Anthem here -and maybe it is a better choice for some guitars. But I'm not saying the Lyric doesn't sound great or won't sound great with certain guitars... but I do believe all these internal systems, more than with external mics, require custom EQ and processing... and then they can sound great. I still need to try a recording with the pickups on separate tracks, but I'm sure I'll still be using an external preamp with a bit of tweaking.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 05-30-2013, 05:17 AM
Doubleneck Doubleneck is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 6,427
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alohachris View Post
Aloha Friends,

No one is against true innovation, but Lloyd Baggs has a habit of introducing product after product - aimed solely at entry-level markets - that do not do a very good job of helping players (especially pro's) make their acoustic guitars sound much like acoustic guitars, IMO. We the players are much more innovative than the manufacturers like Baggs have been.

And once you get through the slick marketing, it's not much of an innovation at all. You could accomplish more with a quality external or internal condenser mic & some good EQ on your own - with more complete EQ control - than you'll ever achieve with a Lyric & it's "innovative" selective PZM EQ aimed at helping you control a mic. What rubbish! That's not innovation! It's pre-release marketing. This product has given me the ability to use the Doubleneck in a band situation with a decent acoustic tone, other solutions were much more problematic.

So much of Bagg's products are based on the same old tired, unnatural-sounding concept of UST technology which requires a lot of EQ to make it even mildy useable for players, IME.

C'mon, let's use some common sense & our ears objectively here. My ears, for many decades now, tell me that Baggs' products induce ear fatigue after a set or so. Most have been so mid-rangey my ears hurt. Even the Anthem does not allow the player full, separate EQ control of its Element UST & the factory PZM EQ controlled mic. Why not? Where's the true innovation in that limitation for the player? It's all about marketing at Baggs, not true innovation.

Therefore, Baggs is a brand that I ignore & do not trust. It's all about natural acoustic tone for me. And Baggs doesn't get me there. None of it.

So why should I trust that the PZM EQ-adjusted new mic from Baggs will improve upon my live sound in any way? He's not into mic's or noted as a mic manufacturer. It's market share he's after. And Slick Marketing to the entry-level will get it for him.

Apologies to those who love their Baggs sound. If it works for you, great. But there are simply too many who fawn over the latest from Baggs & don't ask the basic question: will it help me achieve a more natural, amplified acoustic sound in the venues I play.

So far, for me? Not at all.

alohachris

PS: There has NOT been much innovation at all in pickup systems for acoustic or electric guitars in the last 40 years in terms of the basic technologies. It's pretty much the same: UST's, piezo's & magnetic's (& modeling from Fishman), That's it. It's just that some players get better use out of what's available by putting their own rigs together from parts made by different manufacturers than others do. The players are simply more innovative & creative than the manufacturers.

Heck, many of us were using cobbled-together. dual-source pickup systems decades before Baggs & Fishman packaged their proprietary ones. The innovation is by the players, not the manufacturers in terms of amplifying acoustic guitars. As it must be. Michael Hedges' live sound & signal chain did not come from a single manufacturer or stock pickup systems. Neither did Jimi's for that matter. It came from their imaginations & requirements for their music.-alohachris-

Use of a pressure zone Microphone is not true innovation? Who else has done this? I have used it in a Doubleneck acoustic and it does hear the whole soundboard balancing the two bridges when no other pickup seemed to do so. For my rather unique application it has be a awesome thing. Is it perfect no, but I actually see it as as an attempt to get pass the piezo past and into something that is truely different. As for concentrating on the mass market, that is the reality of business, nothing wrong with trying to supply the masses with simple solutions.
__________________
Steve
2020 McKnight Grand Recording - Cedar Top
2005 McKnight SS Dred
2001 Michael Keller Koa Baby
2014 Godin Inuk
2012 Deering B6 Openback Banjo
2012 Emerald Acoustic Doubleneck
2012 Rainsong JM1000 Black Ice
2009 Wechter Pathmaker 9600 LTD
1982 Yairi D-87 Doubleneck
1987 Ovation Collectors
1993 Ovation Collectors
1967 J-45 Gibson
1974 20th Annivers. Les Paul Custom

Last edited by Doubleneck; 05-30-2013 at 05:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 05-30-2013, 07:04 AM
guitaniac guitaniac is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,709
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doubleneck View Post
Use of a pressure zone Microphone is not true innovation? Who else has done this? I have used it in a Doubleneck acoustic and it does hear the whole soundboard balancing the two bridges when no other pickup seemed to do so. For my rather unique application it has be a awesome thing. Is it perfect no, but I actually see it as as an attempt to get pass the piezo past and into something that is truely different. As for concentrating on the mass market, that is the reality of business, nothing wrong with trying to supply the masses with simple solutions.

http://www.akg.com/C411-832.html?pid=968

One of our local multi-instrumentalists has been using this with string instruments. Perhaps that's what Chris is referring to. Of course, the Lyric also has the special circuitry which makes it less feedback prone.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 05-30-2013, 09:31 AM
Doubleneck Doubleneck is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 6,427
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guitaniac View Post
http://www.akg.com/C411-832.html?pid=968

One of our local multi-instrumentalists has been using this with string instruments. Perhaps that's what Chris is referring to. Of course, the Lyric also has the special circuitry which makes it less feedback prone.
That is not a pressure zone microphone? I don't think it says it is on the company site. A true pressure zone microphone is suspended just above a surface and let's the entire surface collect sound. They have be used in recording for very specific reasons and also on conference tables to pick up all voices. I think you can argue that this type of mic has inherent problems that can't be overcome but I think it is hard to argue that its use here is not innovative? But I am no expert?
__________________
Steve
2020 McKnight Grand Recording - Cedar Top
2005 McKnight SS Dred
2001 Michael Keller Koa Baby
2014 Godin Inuk
2012 Deering B6 Openback Banjo
2012 Emerald Acoustic Doubleneck
2012 Rainsong JM1000 Black Ice
2009 Wechter Pathmaker 9600 LTD
1982 Yairi D-87 Doubleneck
1987 Ovation Collectors
1993 Ovation Collectors
1967 J-45 Gibson
1974 20th Annivers. Les Paul Custom
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 05-30-2013, 09:49 PM
Cellomangler Cellomangler is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 109
Default

As I said in an earlier post, I have the Lyric installed simultaneously with an Element sharing the same lithium 9 volt, each with their own sound hole volume control and preamp/jack. The Lyric feeds back much more than the Element. It's a microphone. You are not going to get much feedback rejection from a mic, period. Not without drastically sacrificing tone. You have to point your amp away just like with any miked situation. It does sound very pleasing and inspirational, which is most important to me. I have yet to record with it, and I'm thinking some of the boxiness/ringing I'm getting (probably due in large part to the amp) will not be there with a direct recording using headphones. My goal is to have an inspirational sound for live performance and a very real sound for recording where I don't have to remain rigid in front of mics or worry obsessively about background noise. I have no buyers/installers regrets, that's for sure. It's in a concert size, cedar topped, rosewood acoustic now. I'd really like to hear it in my larger spruce topped, maple sided dread. All that aside, the comments that mean the most to me are from folks that ACTUALLY have the system installed and are describing the pros and cons and how they are getting the most out of it or why it doesn't work for them. I'm only taking the time to elaborate as I've been in that position where I'm searching for unbiased feedback on a product and I'm returning the favor as honestly as I know how.
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 04:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=