The Acoustic Guitar Forum

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #31  
Old 08-19-2018, 05:57 AM
Monsum Monsum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 473
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James May View Post
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.
Thank you James for your valuable contribution.
I will try to play around with the other wavemap (the less muddy one) and see if I get better outcomes through a PA. I agree that adding reverb made things worse in this scenario, lesson learnt.

Regarding CH0, thanks for the explanation, now it makes more sense to me, what the character control is doing. Just a suggestion - it could be worth to include that information in the manual.

Last edited by Monsum; 08-19-2018 at 06:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-19-2018, 06:07 AM
Monsum Monsum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 473
Default

As suggested above, the room and the speaker (and added reverb) had too much effect on the comparison to make it fair, so here is a direct recording of both, first Tonedexter and then Behringer ADI21.

Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-19-2018, 06:12 AM
varmonter varmonter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: The heart of Saturday night..
Posts: 3,645
Default

These results don't surprise me.
I too liked the first test better.
in your first recording with the speaker.
And in the second recording as well i liked
the first one . So one vote for the behringer
and one for the TD. I am no help sorry ha,,
I thought the second song(strumming) on the first recording
was overdriven a bit with some distortion
just a tad too hot for my tastes.
i too don't see what the TD hype is all about.
I bought one played live with it 3 times and
sold it.. no regrets. I've never heard the
behringer unit before. Is it a straight up preamp
or does it do the IR thing like the TD ?
Never been a fan of anything Behringer.
Always seemed like lower quality stuff.
But this thing sounds decent.
Again Both units sound good .
As usual my comments are purely subjective.

Last edited by varmonter; 08-19-2018 at 06:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-19-2018, 06:21 AM
Monsum Monsum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 473
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by varmonter View Post
These results don't surprise me.
I too liked the first test better.
I thought the second song(strumming) on each test
was overdriven a bit with some distortion
just a tad too hot for my tastes.
i too don't see what the TD hype is all about.
I bought one played live with it 3 times and
sold it.. no regrets. I've never heard the
behringer unit before. Is it a straight up preamp
or does it do the IR thing like the TD ?
Never been a fan of anything Behringer.
Always seemed like lower quality stuff.
But this thing sounds decent.
It's hard to trust a device which sells for $30 new
I think it's meant to be a Behringer clone of the SansAmp Acoustic DI (discontinued now) with its microphone/tube emulation, whatever it does.
Definitely the ADI21 is worth to keep as a backup preamp or if you're on a budget.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-19-2018, 09:25 AM
guitaniac guitaniac is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,709
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monsum View Post
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.
For what its worth, my best results with the A3 have been with blending the iRig Acoustic Stage mic with a bit of UST signal from a PUTW I/O UST. Unfortunately, this only works well for home recording. The iRig/UST/A3 setup is too cumbersome for quick setups and too feedback prone for most of my gig environments.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-19-2018, 01:57 PM
jonfields45 jonfields45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Allentown, PA
Posts: 4,598
Default

I think Doug Young has pointed this out many times in the past, that a direct recording of a pickup can sound pretty marginal where the same pickup into a sound system and live room (or reverb) can sound pretty good. Add the background noise of a restaurant gig and you'll understand why so many live guitarists are using the UST shipped with their guitar.
__________________
jf45ir Free DIY Acoustic Guitar IR Generator
.wav file, 30 seconds, pickup left, mic right, open position strumming best...send to direct email below
I'll send you 100/0, 75/25, 50/50 & 0/100 IR/Bypass IRs
IR Demo, read the description too: https://youtu.be/SELEE4yugjE
My duo's website and my email... [email protected]

Jon Fields
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-19-2018, 04:42 PM
AeroUSA AeroUSA is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York
Posts: 2,164
Default

I agree, a direct recording of a pickup proves nothing...
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-19-2018, 08:00 PM
Gordon Currie Gordon Currie is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Kirkland, WA USA
Posts: 2,445
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James May View Post
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.
My bad, I took a look at the manual quickly and posted my misunderstanding. I thought the CH0-2 had to do with preset blend amounts. So the 99% blend (almost straight up) seems equivalent to CH2? I am actually using the blend only, between 50 and 80, with nice results.
__________________
-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
  #39  
Old 08-20-2018, 01:38 AM
Peter Z Peter Z is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 1,423
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroUSA View Post
I agree, a direct recording of a pickup proves nothing...
It depends ...
if someone posts a direct recorded pickup I can run that recording through my speaker system and get an impression how it sounds in a (my room).

If a speaker and a room is recorded I don't think I can get any useful information out of this beacause a mic hears the room totally different that the ear.

It is true that a pickup that sounds bad through phones CAN sound nice or acceptable through speakers in a room.

On the other hand it's never wrong if you use a signal that sounds right through phones! A good recording will never sound bad - through phones or speakers, in every room.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-20-2018, 01:46 AM
Peter Z Peter Z is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 1,423
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon Currie View Post
My bad, I took a look at the manual quickly and posted my misunderstanding. I thought the CH0-2 had to do with preset blend amounts. So the 99% blend (almost straight up) seems equivalent to CH2? I am actually using the blend only, between 50 and 80, with nice results.
In my understanding there is no blend in the settings CH0, CH1, CH2. All of those are the pure wavemap in different configurations. CH2 takes the longest version of the wavemap with the most information of the mic recording, CH0 is the same wavemap without too much room information.

If you want to blend in your original pickup signal you have to turn the knob to the left. The more left the more you mix in the pure pickup to wavemap.
So it looks like you cannot mix CH1 or CH2 with the pickup signal, just CH0.

If I'm not right with this, please let me know. I don't want to spread nonsense here.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 08-20-2018, 04:53 AM
Monsum Monsum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 473
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonfields45 View Post
I think Doug Young has pointed this out many times in the past, that a direct recording of a pickup can sound pretty marginal where the same pickup into a sound system and live room (or reverb) can sound pretty good. Add the background noise of a restaurant gig and you'll understand why so many live guitarists are using the UST shipped with their guitar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroUSA View Post
I agree, a direct recording of a pickup proves nothing...
A direct recording is a compromise in an accurate representation of what a pickup sounds like but at least other variables such as a room, a mic and its position, speakers don't come into the equation.
Direct recordings won't tell you how a particular sound will translate in a live setting but it definitely gives you an idea what a pickup sounds like.

On his website, Doug posts a direct signal for a reason.

Fortunately, in this thread the OP cleverly included both a direct and a room recording.

I much prefer to have a demo of a direct recording rather than a demo (quite common on YouTube) when someone wants to show a pickup or a preamp or an amp/PA and records a room sound with an acoustic sound of a guitar bleeding into the final signal. That's why I placed the speaker in a different room from where I was with my guitar for the sample in my first post in this thread.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 08-20-2018, 05:02 AM
AeroUSA AeroUSA is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York
Posts: 2,164
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Z View Post
It depends ...
if someone posts a direct recorded pickup I can run that recording through my speaker system and get an impression how it sounds in a (my room).

If a speaker and a room is recorded I don't think I can get any useful information out of this beacause a mic hears the room totally different that the ear.

It is true that a pickup that sounds bad through phones CAN sound nice or acceptable through speakers in a room.

On the other hand it's never wrong if you use a signal that sounds right through phones! A good recording will never sound bad - through phones or speakers, in every room.
Yes of course if you play it through your PA it’s a great way to test for yourself but I imagine people listing on their iPhone and saying ‘it doesn’t sound like the microphone comparison’.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 08-20-2018, 05:28 AM
Peter Z Peter Z is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 1,423
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroUSA View Post
Yes of course if you play it through your PA it’s a great way to test for yourself but I imagine people listing on their iPhone and saying ‘it doesn’t sound like the microphone comparison’.
I'm afraid, you are completely right. Haven't thought about this.
I'm too old to even think that an iPhone could be the appropriate gear to check a sound. A dinosaur like me thinks in PA speakers, studio monitors and good headphones. Poor me!!! :-)
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 08-20-2018, 05:45 AM
AeroUSA AeroUSA is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York
Posts: 2,164
Default

Actually everything sounds the same through my iPhone Speakers anyway lol
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 08-20-2018, 06:03 AM
RedJoker RedJoker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Z View Post
I'm afraid, you are completely right. Haven't thought about this.
I'm too old to even think that an iPhone could be the appropriate gear to check a sound. A dinosaur like me thinks in PA speakers, studio monitors and good headphones. Poor me!!! :-)
Just last night, I was thinking about the new studio monitors I bought a couple of months ago. I hooked them up to make sure they worked and haven't touched them since. Nor my good headphones.

I simply haven't had the time to sit down near that stuff to do some quality listening. On the other hand, I've always got my Bluetooth headphones and phone and listen to hours of music every day. It's funny how life keeps us all busy...
__________________
Original music here: Spotify Artist Page
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 06:43 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=