The Acoustic Guitar Forum

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 08-17-2018, 06:03 PM
Gordon Currie Gordon Currie is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Kirkland, WA USA
Posts: 2,445
Default

My opinion: #1 sounded decently balanced and full range. #2 sounded muffled and compressed, with odd bass buildup and midrange bloat. I felt the bass on both examples could cause problems live.

I was surprised to find #1 was the ADI21. Where did the high-end go in the wavemap??? (I ask this because I always end up with all the highs and clarity I need in my wavemaps.)

No offense, but I wonder if a better wavemap would have made a difference? I have found for myself that mike placement is critical and most positions closer than 12" can present issues live. And, for me, SM81 or smaller condensor only.

Character CH0 is 30% mike. I'm finding (as I get better at wavemaps) that my new minimum is CH1 (50%) although 80% is often attainable.

The ADI is nice and relatively plug and play. I can say, though, it is possible to get a much better sound from the Tonedexter than #2, although it can be a lot of effort getting to that point.
__________________
-Gordon

1978 Larrivee L-26 cutaway
1988 Larrivee L-28 cutaway
2006 Larrivee L03-R
2009 Larrivee LV03-R
2016 Irvin SJ cutaway
2020 Irvin SJ cutaway (build thread)
K+K, Dazzo, Schatten/ToneDexter


Notable Journey website
Facebook page

Where the spirit does not work with the hand, there is no art. - Leonardo Da Vinci
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-17-2018, 08:07 PM
Woodstock School Of Music Woodstock School Of Music is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Woodstock Illinois
Posts: 1,229
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon Currie View Post
My opinion: #1 sounded decently balanced and full range. #2 sounded muffled and compressed, with odd bass buildup and midrange bloat. I felt the bass on both examples could cause problems live.

I was surprised to find #1 was the ADI21. Where did the high-end go in the wavemap??? (I ask this because I always end up with all the highs and clarity I need in my wavemaps.)

No offense, but I wonder if a better wavemap would have made a difference? I have found for myself that mike placement is critical and most positions closer than 12" can present issues live. And, for me, SM81 or smaller condensor only.
I thought the same thing. I never used a Tonedexter but from what I've heard online it should sound better then the example posted. To me it sounded woolly, phasey and unrefined so maybe it's something in the process or settings that the OP is missing.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-17-2018, 08:53 PM
martingitdave martingitdave is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,292
Default Tonedexter vs Behringer ADI21

I have not read the responses or spoilers, if there are any. I presume the first was the AD21 and the second clips were the ToneDexter. I preferred the second (ToneDexter.). The first clips sound muddy and you can hear the piezo characteristic. The second clips sounded like a microphone. Some people will prefer the sound of a pickup over a microphone and vice versa.
__________________
"Lift your head and smile at trouble. You'll find happiness someday."
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-17-2018, 09:23 PM
SprintBob's Avatar
SprintBob SprintBob is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 5,253
Default

2nd sample sounds much more like a mic’d guitar to me.
__________________
Doerr Trinity 12 Fret 00 (Lutz/Maple)
Edwinson Zephyr 13 Fret 00 (Adi/Coco)
Froggy Bottom H-12 (Adi/EIR)
Kostal 12 Fret OMC (German Spruce/Koa)
Rainsong APSE 12 Fret (Carbon Fiber)
Taylor 812ce-N 12 fret (Sitka/EIR Nylon)
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-18-2018, 12:52 AM
AeroUSA AeroUSA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York
Posts: 2,168
Default

I don’t feel this is about the Behringer vs Tone Dext but more about raw pickup vs IR. There are many reasons to use. It’s if you have a good pickup like a SBT. If your guitar had a cheap UST it would be a different story. The Tone Dexter would make it sound much better than the Behringer. The Behringer is good for the price though. No doubt about it.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-18-2018, 04:06 AM
Monsum Monsum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 475
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon Currie View Post
Where did the high-end go in the wavemap??? (I ask this because I always end up with all the highs and clarity I need in my wavemaps.)
Out of all wavemaps I made, for this comparison I chose the one that sounded the most natural not the brightest. You might prefer a wavemap with more highs but for this particular guitar which has a very warm sound, I tried to get similar tone.

The other thing that contributed to the 'muddiness' of the Tonedexter sample is the speaker, the microphone and the room. It is easy to find a Tonedexter wavemap which sounds good or great on headphones or in direct recording but one that works through a PA not so much.

In the audio clip below I recorded another (brighter) wavemap directly (first clip), do you prefer that one?

So the order of samples below is:
1) a different (brighter) wavemap - direct recording
2) the same wavemap as in the my first post but recorded directly
3) the same wavemap as in 2) but through a speaker and microphone
4) Behringer ADI21 through a speaker an microphone (for reference)



For me, I would probably go for 2) rather than 1) as I said, it sounds a bit more natural.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon Currie View Post
Character CH0 is 30% mike. I'm finding (as I get better at wavemaps) that my new minimum is CH1 (50%) although 80% is often attainable.
Is this correct? The Tonedexter manual says that CH0 is the 'focused sound'. You're saying that it's 30% mike so what's the other 70%?
It cannot be 70% of the pickup because to get a blend of both signals, you turn the knob further anti-clockwise and it displays the blend percentage.
It would be good to know what the 'focus sound' is. I always thought it's a mic'ed sound but with some resonances removed to deal better with feedback.

Last edited by Monsum; 08-19-2018 at 06:14 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-18-2018, 04:18 AM
Monsum Monsum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 475
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroUSA View Post
I don’t feel this is about the Behringer vs Tone Dext but more about raw pickup vs IR. There are many reasons to use. It’s if you have a good pickup like a SBT. If your guitar had a cheap UST it would be a different story. The Tone Dexter would make it sound much better than the Behringer. The Behringer is good for the price though. No doubt about it.
You're right, it's not really about the Behringer vs the Tonedexter. It's about how much the Tonedexter improves a tone of your pickup in a live situation. Not through headphones, not through a direct recording but where it matters the most, at a gig.

Aaron, I like the sound you achieved in your video on the Ultra Tonic through the Tonedexter. It sounds better than mine but whether one prefers it over a combination of a good SBT (or UST) pickup with a good preamp/EQ is in my opinion arguable.
In most of demos I heard, the Tonedexter gives that 'resonator-like' sound, if people like it that's fine.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-18-2018, 04:37 AM
Monsum Monsum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 475
Default

What I found is that generally the Tonedexter sounds convincing for fingers-style, flat-picking or very light strumming. But heavy strumming is a completely different story. I haven't heard any Tonedexter demonstrations with heavy strumming which sounded like a microphone. Someone might have got excellent results but from all the audio demos I heard, they don't sound much different from mine samples when recorded directly.

I hope Doug Young doesn't mind me posting his demo (it was posted here on AGF a while ago):



As we know, Doug is very experienced with pickups and from this example, in my opinion his direct recordings don't sound much better than my direct recording. So it doesn't seem like I'm doing something terribly wrong with the Tonedexter.

It's worth to notice on the Doug's samples, some of the microphones cost a couple thousands dollars and they don't give better results than $100-$200 microphones.


Would anyone like to post their strumming samples using the Tonedexter, ideally through a PA, not a direct recording?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-18-2018, 05:53 AM
Peter Z Peter Z is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 1,423
Default

Sorry Monsum, i should read more carefully. Didn't get from your first post that you were recording a speaker.

Your wavemaps are very nice when recorded directly. I prefer the first one but the second is also good. The Tonedexter through the speaker is what i didnt like! But that doesn't mean anything since the involved room can't be represented correctly in a recording. The direct recoding is what counts and that is VERY nice!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-18-2018, 09:06 AM
guitaniac guitaniac is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,709
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monsum View Post
Would anyone like to post their strumming samples using the Tonedexter, ideally through a PA, not a direct recording?
Live performance recording off the house PA. Recorded from out in the room.

https://youtu.be/oG0s5V21Pxg


And here's the home recorded version with the same song. This also uses ToneDexter, but with a different guitar. The pickup is almost the same, as its the updated version of David Enke's I/O UST.

https://soundcloud.com/guitaniac/january-moon-update


BTW, kudos on a very provocative thread title, especially to those of us who've used both devices.

Last edited by guitaniac; 08-18-2018 at 09:40 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-18-2018, 09:23 AM
AeroUSA AeroUSA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York
Posts: 2,168
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monsum View Post
You're right, it's not really about the Behringer vs the Tonedexter. It's about how much the Tonedexter improves a tone of your pickup in a live situation. Not through headphones, not through a direct recording but where it matters the most, at a gig.

Aaron, I like the sound you achieved in your video on the Ultra Tonic through the Tonedexter. It sounds better than mine but whether one prefers it over a combination of a good SBT (or UST) pickup with a good preamp/EQ is in my opinion arguable.
In most of demos I heard, the Tonedexter gives that 'resonator-like' sound, if people like it that's fine.
The reason I love the UTP and TD combination is that I can either have the dry pickup which sounds great or the map or a blend. It’s given me excellent results. The problem with using a UST and the wrong mic and position is that you won’t want to blend that horrible pickup back in and it doesn’t sound as 3D as a SBT.

No one is denying that a good pickup sound can be more or less desirable that a mic sound. It all depends on what you are used to hearing and what works best for you. Did you see my Wonderwall live cover on my channel? That’s the kind of tone I personally enjoy.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-18-2018, 03:54 PM
James May's Avatar
James May James May is offline
AGF Sponsor
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Nevada City, CA
Posts: 711
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monsum View Post
Out of all wavemaps I made, for this comparison I chose the one that sounded the most natural not the brightest. You might prefer a wavemap with more highs but for this particular guitar which has a very warm sound, I tried to get similar tone.

The other thing that contributed to the 'muddiness' of the Tonedexter sample is the speaker, the microphone and the room. It is easy to find a Tonedexter wavemap which sounds good or great on headphones or in direct recording but one that works through a PA not so much.

In the audio clip below I recorded another (brighter) wavemap directly (first clip), do you prefer that one?

So the order of samples below is:
1) a different (brighter) wavemap - direct recording
2) the same wavemap as in the my first post but recorded directly
3) the same wavemap as in 2) but through a speaker and microphone
4) Behringer ADI21 through a speaker an microphone (for reference)



For me, I would probably go for 2) rather than 1) as I said, it sounds a bit more natural.





Is this correct? The Tonedexter manual says that CH0 is the 'focused sound'. You're saying that it's 30% mike so what's the other 70%?
It cannot be 70% of the pickup because to get a blend of both signals, you turn the knob further anti-clockwise and it displays the blend percentage.
It would be good to know what the 'focus sound' is. I always thought it's a mic'ed sound but with some resonances removed to deal better with feedback.
I'm going chime in here and express some opinion, not for the purpose of changing anyone else's, but rather to share a little of my experience with live amplified sound and of course ToneDexter.

This latest set of samples clears up a couple of things I wondered about hearing your original samples. I would say you are certainly not doing anything wrong in the creation process.

To my ear:
The first WaveMap sounds excellent and very realistic, with a lot of articulation.

The second is somewhat duller, but still sounds like a guitar. (That's JM-speak for good.) I think either of these could be made to work well live, the first probably as is, the 2nd with a touch of EQ. Of course I know it really does depend on what sound you're going for.

The 3rd colors the sound of the 2nd with the speaker and the room. And I think you had verb on the first clip. (I think) I can hear the room modes, and I wonder about the 10" active speaker. Was it something like a Mackie powered monitor?

The 4th is certainly respectable, and a cut above most of what I hear amplified acoustic guitars sounding like. Not very natural to my ears, but certainly a good usable sound.

I suspect if you'd used the 1st brighter WaveMap through the speaker, with no verb, it would have changed the discussion. IMHO, adding reverb usually just muddies things up in the context of a typical performance space, since the space usually has plenty of its own verb going on.

As to the last point, no, that statement is not correct. CH0 is all WaveMap, no blend. CH0 strips the excess phase and time information out of the full mic sound CH2. CH1 splits the difference. There are no tonal balance differences between CH0, CH1, Ch2, only the sense of dryness or closeness. CH0 is often a good choice for live. In order to blend you need to go CCW from the straight up CH0 position.
__________________
James May
Audio Sprockets
maker of ToneDexter
James May Engineering
maker of the Ultra Tonic Pickup
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-18-2018, 09:10 PM
The Kid! The Kid! is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 1,649
Default

I will have to listen to these when I get home. I have been extremely happy with my Tonedexter live and in the studio. I have a few wave maps that I go to depending on what I want at a given moment.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-19-2018, 05:42 AM
Monsum Monsum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 475
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guitaniac View Post

And here's the home recorded version with the same song. This also uses ToneDexter, but with a different guitar. The pickup is almost the same, as its the updated version of David Enke's I/O UST.

https://soundcloud.com/guitaniac/january-moon-update
Thank you for the link. It sounds good. I listened to your other demos on the soundcloud and I like the Zoom A3 sample a bit better.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-19-2018, 05:49 AM
Monsum Monsum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 475
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroUSA View Post
Did you see my Wonderwall live cover on my channel? That’s the kind of tone I personally enjoy.
Yes I did, but I wish it was recorded not via a phone, I could hear the guitar in more detail. But with your great singing any pickup would do.
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 05:09 AM.


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=