Fishman Aura question

[Pegleg]

I've visited the Fishman website, read most of it, watched all the video clips. Seems to promise a significant improvement in tonal quality more closely matching the natural sound of the acoustic guitar. Just what I'd like to replicate, but they kept referring to the 1/4 out to a "board". I don't have a board, I plug directly into a Peavy Ecoustic 112 (Gibson J45 Rosewood or Alvarez Yairi with a Baggs after market bridge pickup). Does the Aura represent an opportunity for a significant improvement given my setup? Should I expect to be "wowed" or is this a "ho hum" situation? Any advice is much appreciated. Thanks!

[lfyost]

You'll be fine on the output to your acoustic amp from the aura. If you have a piezo pickup you'll be impressed with the results. Make that very impressed. Be certain to get the right model aura.

Magnetic sound-hole pickup gave me only a so-so improvement.

[makikogi]

Which baggs system do you have? I'm assuming you have the IBeam pickup. The Aura was designed to work with a UST system like the Baggs Element. I haven't heard any reports on under bridge systems and the Aura. I posted a while back how it turned out with my Baggs M1 and it was pretty bad to my ears. If you decide to get it, give us a full report on your take....I'm very interested to see how it pans out....G'luck and welcome to AGF!!!

[rainsong]

If you have an undersaddle pickup the Aura will help but don't think it's going to be night and day. Yes, it is an improvement over an unassisted UST but it is a spice, not the main course. You need a pickup that you basically like the sound of, except for the quacky-ness, then the Aura will not dissappoint. Also, unless you just get a generic pedal, be prepared to take some time to find the correct sound image and fine tune your settings. The original blender is not just a plug n play device.

[Pegleg]

Makikogi - Not sure what Baggs I have, it was installed so many years ago, but it is a bridge pickup. It is passive. My J45 has an active pickup, not sure if it is a bridge or under saddle.

Rainsong - My understanding of the Fishman Aura website was that the only difference between buying the $199 box and the $350 was that the $199 model was for one generic (dreadnaught, concert, etc.) guitar model and the Aura had 16 presets which encompassed all of the different generic models. Then if you wanted to be more specific by brand, like J45, then you downloaded it from their website, and if you wanted to be more specific by sending them your guitar, you could actually get it "imaged". I sure for a fee.

Either one of my acoustics sound decent plugged into the 112 amp, but there is a much greater degree of tonal quality difference playing them unplugged, as opposed to pluged in. My hope was that this device would maintain the same degree of difference pluged in as unpluged.

Not sure if I am "barking up the right tree" or not?

[makikogi]

Pegleg, it sounds like you have an Ibeam. Is the pickup inside your guitar? or is it under your saddle? Next time you change your strings, look under the white plastic thing (that is your saddle) in front of your string pegs if there is a braid looking thing that you have an undersaddle pickup, if you don't and the pick up is mounted underneath the guitar top than you probable have the Ibeam pick up.

also you cannot download images onto the $199 pedal. You can only do that with the $350 version.

I would first start off by finding out what kind of pickup you have. If you have a UST the Aura is a nice investment, otherwise I think you're just wasting your efforts....again I tried the aura with something other than a UST and it did not pan out....

[whamonkey]

I had an Aura (large floor model) and a DTAR Mama Bear and my impressions are thus:

The Aura is more difficult to set up but gives a more natural sounding "enhancement" to you rig. It is designed to complement a specific guitar by using sound images of that particular model recorded with different mics.

The Mama is another animal altogether; it's truly a plug and play device, there are no real adjustments to the sound other than gain and level. I found it to be a lot of fun and could see the possibilities of changing sounds during a live performance very interesting.

Overall....I sold both to folks more interested in tweaking than I am. I have an LR Baggs PADI and that gives me exactly the tone enhancement I desire.

Some people take the search for perfect acoustic tone to the edge of obsession and to those gents I say, "Go for it!". (Reminds me of that movie "National Treasure" ) I am not that particular, meaning I like quality gear and I like good tone but I have found a tone I am content with so I'm done.

Anyhow, all this to say that through a small amp I don't think you'll hear a tremendous difference but if you insist get a used full sized Aura.

[Pegleg]

Makikogi - The pickup is the bridge, so I guess it would be the Ibeam you referred to, that is on the Alvarez, the J45 is a Fishman UST transducer type pickup, if I understand the Gibson's website (although I can't find any soundhole volume adjustment on mine).

Whamonkey - Not looking for the "holy grail"; based on all the threads I've read here and other websites, the observation I've come away with is that it's "in the ear of the beholder" anyways. Just would like to replicate the acoustic differences between guitars....plugged in.

This is a great website; Subject matter ignorance is "tolerated" (which in my case is a **** good thing), a much appreciated attribute. Thanks for the feedback, if I decide to proceed with the grand experiment, I will post my results.

[rainsong]

[QUOTE
Rainsong - My understanding of the Fishman Aura website was that the only difference between buying the $199 box and the $350 was that the $199 model was for one generic (dreadnaught, concert, etc.) guitar model and the Aura had 16 presets which encompassed all of the different generic models. Then if you wanted to be more specific by brand, like J45, then you downloaded it from their website, and if you wanted to be more specific by sending them your guitar, you could actually get it "imaged". I sure for a fee.

[/QUOTE]


Actually there are a lot more differences. The Aura blender has EQ, XLR out, feedback control, the ability to download other images that may sound better with your guitar than the 4 that are stock on the pedal, just to name a few. It sounds like the J-45 would be a fine candidate for the Aura because it has a Fishman UST. I'm still not sure if you have an Ibeam or a Baggs UST in your other guitar. by your discription "the pickup is the bridge" do you mean the pickup is the saddle? IF so, you probably have an LB6 which would a good match for an Aura. I have not heard the pedal version of the Aura, but finding the right sound image is imperative to get a good sound. The closer the image to your exact guitar the better the sound. I know they have a J-45 in the image library. I would spend the extra $150.00 and get the blender. That way you could use it on numerous guitars and choose the exact sound images you want. I don't think it is necessary to get a sound image recorded of your exact guitar if you can find that model (or close) in the image library.

[guitaniac]

Originally Posted by rainsong

[QUOTE
Rainsong - My understanding of the Fishman Aura website was that the only difference between buying the $199 box and the $350 was that the $199 model was for one generic (dreadnaught, concert, etc.) guitar model and the Aura had 16 presets which encompassed all of the different generic models. Then if you wanted to be more specific by brand, like J45, then you downloaded it from their website, and if you wanted to be more specific by sending them your guitar, you could actually get it "imaged". I sure for a fee.

Actually there are a lot more differences. The Aura blender has EQ, XLR out, feedback control, the ability to download other images that may sound better with your guitar than the 4 that are stock on the pedal, just to name a few. It sounds like the J-45 would be a fine candidate for the Aura because it has a Fishman UST. I'm still not sure if you have an Ibeam or a Baggs UST in your other guitar. by your discription "the pickup is the bridge" do you mean the pickup is the saddle? IF so, you probably have an LB6 which would a good match for an Aura. I have not heard the pedal version of the Aura, but finding the right sound image is imperative to get a good sound. The closer the image to your exact guitar the better the sound. I know they have a J-45 in the image library. I would spend the extra $150.00 and get the blender. That way you could use it on numerous guitars and choose the exact sound images you want. I don't think it is necessary to get a sound image recorded of your exact guitar if you can find that model (or close) in the image library.[/QUOTE]

One of the many differences is that the Aura floor preamp/blender has LED lights which make it easier to switch programs in a darkened room. I've noticed that Joe M. (over on AG mag's gear forum) is complaining of not having enough light (at the church services which he plays for) to see his pedal for sound image changes.

The biggest difference for me would be that custom sound images can be used with Aura preamp/blender. I doubt that the pedal (with its stock sound images) would offer any advantages (aside from portability/battery operation) over the Mama Bear which I'm using now.

Gary

[mainusch]

Originally Posted by guitaniac

I've noticed that Joe M. (over on AG mag's gear forum) is complaining of not having enough light (at the church services which he plays for) to see his pedal for sound image changes.

You're making me sound like some kind of whiner!

[rmyAddison]

I am in love with Aura images, to me they really are the next best thing to miking. I agree if you go pedal get the image blender, the parametric EQ and ability to have images for multiple guitars alone is worth the price difference.

There absolutely is a decent learning curve, no way it's plug and play, but the reward is well worth it, and once you have it dialed in, then volume is all you mess with.

I am going to post an Aura versus mike comparison soon, along with Aura setup techniques, hopefully somebody will find it interesting.

[guitaniac]

Originally Posted by mainusch

You're making me sound like some kind of whiner!

Joe,

In the interest of total fairness, here's the directly quoted observation (as opposed to complaint) which you made in that post.

"During setup, the lighting was really dim, and I could not tell if I had the correct image selected without physically picking the box up and bringing it very close to my eyes. I think if I wanted different images for different songs, this would be pretty much impossible to do for that reason."


It should be mentioned that the floor preamp/blender allows one to change entire programs (as opposed to only the sound images) with a foot switch. The programs are comprised of multiple parameters: sound image, blend level, EQ, compression, phase, etc.)

Gary

[Acoustic Rick]

I really love the Fishman Aura system in my Martin OMC. Very easy to tame feedback and has great amplified tone.

[HHP]

Originally Posted by guitaniac

Joe,

In the interest of total fairness, here's the directly quoted observation (as opposed to complaint) which you made in that post.

"During setup, the lighting was really dim, and I could not tell if I had the correct image selected without physically picking the box up and bringing it very close to my eyes. I think if I wanted different images for different songs, this would be pretty much impossible to do for that reason."


It should be mentioned that the floor preamp/blender allows one to change entire programs (as opposed to only the sound images) with a foot switch. The programs are comprised of multiple parameters: sound image, blend level, EQ, compression, phase, etc.)

Gary

$2.00 flashlight from Walgreen's-problem solved