Help choosing DI

  • Thread starter Thread starter sipleybeck
  • Start date Start date
S

sipleybeck

New member
I asked this question on the Recording Techniques forum and got no takers, so I apologize to those of you who have seen it already.

I have been trying to decide which of three DI boxes to buy. I will be connecting it to a 528E and using it to track bass guitar and acoustic guitar. These are the three:



The BSS AR-133. The specs on this DI look good. Post on HR Forums are favorable.

http://www.bss.co.uk/products/acces.../techspecs.html


The Klark Teknik LBB100. Specs on this look good, too. And this box has a 150 ohm output impedance, which matches precisely the mic input specs on the 528E.

http://www.klarkteknik.com/pages/set_products.html


The Countryman Type 85. This box is touted as the industry standard. Many members of this forum stand by it.

http://www.countryman.com/html_data_sheets/t85data.html



One thing I don’t know what to make of is this: The Type 85 requires “48v @ 0.4 ma”, while the LBB100 lists a “power consumption” of “10 mA”, at 48v +/- 10%. Why the difference in current draw?


Also, both the AR-133 and LBB100 have an XLR input. Why would I need that if the 528E has an XLR line input as well?


On the one hand: I would feel safe with the Type 85. On the other: the other boxes seem about equal in quality and reliability, but are newer and therefore, might incorporate improvements in technology or compatibility. I don’t know; I’m just guessing.


With my particular application in mind, which of these would be good, better, best? Any advice will be appreciated.
 
sipleybeck said:
One thing I don’t know what to make of is this: The Type 85 requires “48v @ 0.4 ma”, while the LBB100 lists a “power consumption” of “10 mA”, at 48v +/- 10%. Why the difference in current draw?
Click to expand...

Different circuits, different designs have different requirements. The one that draws the most current will most likely have the most headroom... but not necessarily.

As for direct boxes... one of my favorites is to just use a Jensen JT-DB-E transformer in a project box... very full, very rich tone... not a boatload of money... and Jensen's helpful directions make is a snap to assemble.

Best of luck with it.
 
A DI that I really like and is affordable is the LR Baggs Para-acoustic DI. Obviously it is gear at acoustic guitar so I'm not sure about the Bass DI function although I would really think it would excel there too. You might want to check out the Avalon U5 if you have a bit more money.
 
:cool: Just an opinion: Countryman is Muttley's choice. Reliable,take abuse,sound good.



da MUTT
 
Fletcher,

Are you suggesting the Klark Teknik may have more headroom than the Countryman? How would one find out? And what does it mean in terms of perceptible results?

I looked at the JT-DB-E. Very impressive in appearance; however, I have concerns about its signal-to-noise ratio: -86dB; and its T.H.D: 0.06% / 20Hz, 0.04% / 1kHz, 0.035% / 20kHz at 0dBv output (the Type 85 claims 0.018% at 1kHz and 1 v P-P; the LBB100: <0.01 % at 1KHz and 4dBu; the AR-133: <0.005 % at 1kHz and 0dBu).

To me, one who has no electronics background, 0.04 % distortion seems like a lot for 0 dBu output.



John Mayes,

I have looked at the L.R. Baggs Para Acoustic DI and am of the opinion, right or wrong, that it is designed more for use live than recording. It boasts a signal-to-noise ratio of –88dB, which is similar to the JT-DB-E and less impressive than the LBB100, AR-133, and Type 85, which boast s/n ratios of –100dBu, <-105dB, and –149dB SPL at 1% T.H.D., respectively.



Muttley,

Yes, the Type 85 seems to be the eternal favorite. Have you used it on bass guitar? What, in your opinion, makes the Type 85 preferable to the Klark Teknik or the BSS?



Wide Awake,

Your post disappeared!!?

Were you referring to the SansAmp Acoustic DI or to the SansAmp Bass Driver DI?

The SansAmp promo material sounds good, but I could not find specs re: Freq response, distortion, noise, and output.

And I don’t know how to interpret this description of the SansAmp Acoustic DI:

“There are two high-impedance input jacks available, the first of which, labelled Input, will usually feed both the” (1/4?) “jack and XLR outputs through the sound-shaping circuitry. However, if a jack is inserted into the second input, labelled Input To XLR, the buffered signal from the second jack will be fed directly to the XLR output, while the processed signal from the first input will only feed the unbalanced output. This configuration allows an insert point to be implemented between the unbalanced output and the Input To XLR input if required.”


It goes on to say, “The Active switch functions as a bypass, though the unit still acts as an active buffer in bypass mode.” Does the active buffer tend to reduce signal loss over distance in an unbalanced line?

Furthermore, “The Phantom & Ground Connect switch makes the unit ready to accept external phantom power in one position, while acting as a ground lift in the other.” Im I to understand that with phantom power, a ground lift is unnecessary?



One last question: Why are some DI boxes Class A, and others FET? What is the difference?


Thanks to all for your indulgence, past and future.
 
sipleybeck said:
Wide Awake,

Your post disappeared!!?

Were you referring to the SansAmp Acoustic DI or to the SansAmp Bass Driver DI?.
Click to expand...

I deleted my post because I didn't want you to look at too many direct boxes and get a case of "too many options".

I have some experience playing through the SansAmp Acoustic DI, because a friend of mine uses it for his acoustic/electric Taylor 714 and it sounds great. I don't know much about the details and specs though.

Bass Player Magazine did a shootout of direct boxes for bass guitar about 2 years ago, and the SansAmp Acoustic DI, Bass Driver, and the Countryman 85 took top honors. The Sansamps are a little different because they try to emulate a miked amplifier, but the Acoustic DI can also get a "straight uncolored" direct sound too and it might be a good choice for someone trying to record both acoustic guitar and bass. You might find some reviews online to tell you more.

Good luck.
 
sipleybeck said:
Fletcher,

Are you suggesting the Klark Teknik may have more headroom than the Countryman? How would one find out? And what does it mean in terms of perceptible results?

I looked at the JT-DB-E. Very impressive in appearance; however, I have concerns about its signal-to-noise ratio: -86dB; and its T.H.D: 0.06% / 20Hz, 0.04% / 1kHz, 0.035% / 20kHz at 0dBv output (the Type 85 claims 0.018% at 1kHz and 1 v P-P; the LBB100: <0.01 % at 1KHz and 4dBu; the AR-133: <0.005 % at 1kHz and 0dBu).

To me, one who has no electronics background, 0.04 % distortion seems like a lot for 0 dBu output.



John Mayes,



Alot of Qs So:
Class "A" amplifiers have nothing to do with FETs. It simply means that tha Amplifier has a 100% duty cycle. The Class "A" amp is always on (drawing current). You can make amplifiers out of FETs, PNP (NPN) junction transistors or Cmos. These are different types of technology to make a Class "A" amp. FETs draw extremely low current. The Type 85 is probably FET based. Op-amp based DI circuits will draw ~10 mA. Headroom can be the same in both cases if they are well designed.

Hope this helps.
Click to expand...
 
acorec,

Here’s what the sheet says about the Type 85:

“Power Requirements :

48 V @ 0.4 ma Phantom or 9 V battery

The Type 85 doesn't use a cheap FET opamp. It uses only hand selected high quality discrete components woven into a single ended class A circuit much like the classic tube microphone preamp.”



So, a circuit can be both FET and Class A. And the Type 85 may be FET-based; just not with a “cheap FET opamp”.

I don’t know what an opamp is. I don’t know what a Cmos is. I am curious about these things but have no aptitude for electronics. I tried studying it, but got lost on about page four.


I don’t know what to make of the big difference in s/n ratios between the SansAmp and the three “straight through” boxes mentioned above. I like the idea of modeling, but I also like the idea of unadulterated sound. Maybe I could get one of each and return the one I like least.

If Bass Player Magazine gave the Type 85 top honors, I have to assume they tested it on bass. Since others have convinced me that miking an acoustic/electric will always produce superior results to using a DI box, maybe I should choose a box for its integrity on bass, and let the a/e chips fall where they may.

Where can a guy get a good price on a Type 85?
 
:) " Have you used it on bass guitar? What, in your opinion, makes the Type 85 preferable to the Klark Teknik or the BSS? "

sipley;

We used it on accoustic guitar, electric guitar, It was what everyone had brought to use. It sounded way better than going in direct in mixer, I have not been introduced to K/T or the BSS.
Most of the touring pro's that I know used the countryman, that was How I learned about it.


da MUTT
 
:cool: " Where can a guy get a good price on a Type 85? "

AMS, Full Compass, might try Rock/Rythm catalogue.


da MUTT
 
I checked Full Compass' on-line catalog yesterday, but could not find the Type 85 in it. I know it's in the 2002 catalog.
 
sipleybeck said:
acorec,

Here’s what the sheet says about the Type 85:

“Power Requirements :

48 V @ 0.4 ma Phantom or 9 V battery

The Type 85 doesn't use a cheap FET opamp. It uses only hand selected high quality discrete components woven into a single ended class A circuit much like the classic tube microphone preamp.”



So, a circuit can be both FET and Class A. And the Type 85 may be FET-based; just not with a “cheap FET opamp”.

I don’t know what an opamp is. I don’t know what a Cmos is. I am curious about these things but have no aptitude for electronics. I tried studying it, but got lost on about page four.


I don’t know what to make of the big difference in s/n ratios between the SansAmp and the three “straight through” boxes mentioned above. I like the idea of modeling, but I also like the idea of unadulterated sound. Maybe I could get one of each and return the one I like least.

If Bass Player Magazine gave the Type 85 top honors, I have to assume they tested it on bass. Since others have convinced me that miking an acoustic/electric will always produce superior results to using a DI box, maybe I should choose a box for its integrity on bass, and let the a/e chips fall where they may.

Where can a guy get a good price on a Type 85?
Click to expand...

Huh? Where did the "cheap FET opamp" come from? FETs are discreet transistors. They are not cheap, but are voltage controlled UNLIKE op-amps. FETs draw very little current. Op-amps are current controlled and use much more current. I am only saying that the current specs of the 85 look like it is a FET based design. I have one and have had it for 20 years. It is an excellent box. DI boxes are not amplifiers per se. They match the impedance of two circuits. Usually, guitars are high impedance and tend to get "loaded" down by low impedance circuits. In other words, the guitar pickups don't have the current to drive the next stage. The DI box takes the low current of the guitar pickup and amplifies the current to drive the next low impedance stage. There is no voltage gain. The DI box does not make the signal "louder".
 
You could point to a dishwasher and tell me it was an opamp and I would believe you. The "cheap FET opamp" quote comes direct from the Countryman web site. I thought it was a little tacky, but who am I to judge.

What do you find your Type 85 works best on?
 
:cool: Sipley a lot of times I call them, not everything they have is in the book, also it may not be available anymore, but I would call anyway.



da MUTT
 
sipleybeck said:
You could point to a dishwasher and tell me it was an opamp and I would believe you. The "cheap FET opamp" quote comes direct from the Countryman web site. I thought it was a little tacky, but who am I to judge.

What do you find your Type 85 works best on?
Click to expand...

I use it for guitar and bass. It does a great job on both. I have used it for so long I don't even think about it anymore. I got it in 1983 I think. It still goes strong.
 
I'm going with the Countryman. Found it for $154. Thanks for the help, everyone!
 
I placed the order today. It's so great to be one item closer to a full complement of gear. Thanks, everybody!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top