Bass di+preamp or no?

[DonaldR]

Ok. Now I'm confused if I really need a cab sim as well? What do you guys think?

I have used an Avid Eleven Rack direct to FOH, for guitar and bass, for 10 years. Guitar needs cab sims but I don't use it for bass.
I used a Peavey tube preamp for 10 years direct to FOH, no cab sim either.
IMHO, cab sims are useful when you are playing alone. In a band mix not that much. Just cut some highs and lows at the mixer board, if needed.

 

[Zbysek]

Passive DI is fine. Cab sims are way overrated. Any sound engineer worth his salt will spray some bug spray for the bees.

+1

 

[PhatBottomBass1]

Most DI's are going to have:

(a) XLR lowZ output

(b) Thru hiZ output

Run your Bass into the DI and send a clean signal to FOH AND use the Thru output to you effects and send a 1/4" hiZ EFX signal to FOH also.

Let the board do the work and mix or punch your distortion parts in/out...best of both worlds!

 

[Sunny Mahat]

Most DI's are going to have:

(a) XLR lowZ output

(b) Thru hiZ output

Run your Bass into the DI and send a clean signal to FOH AND use the Thru output to you effects and send a 1/4" hiZ EFX signal to FOH also.

Let the board do the work and mix or punch your distortion parts in/out...best of both worlds!

Wow! I've never had this idea before. I thought the Thru was for amp only. Will definitely try this. Thanks a lot of the suggestion.

 

[PhatBottomBass1]

Wow! I've never had this idea before. I thought the Thru was for amp only. Will definitely try this. Thanks a lot of the suggestion.

Telefunken has some nice DI's that aren't too expensive and possibly easy to obtain in the EU.

Good luck!

 

[Sunny Mahat]

Telefunken has some nice DI's that aren't too expensive and possibly easy to obtain in the EU.

Good luck!

Thanks. I'm based in Kathmandu, Nepal. So everything is expensive and difficult to obtain for me. But I'll definitely look it up. (Love your username!)

 

[amper]

I don't know why anyone would choose a passive DI over an active DI, but my Countryman Type 85 goes everywhere with me, whether I'm playing or engineering.

 

[agedhorse]

I don't know why anyone would choose a passive DI over an active DI, but my Countryman Type 85 goes everywhere with me, whether I'm playing or engineering.

Because often a passive DI ends up being a better choice. Provided you have an active bass, or place the DI after a pedal(s), the active portion of an active DI is already present in an active bass pedal. The benefit can be a lower noise floor with a passive DI.

 

[amper]

Because often a passive DI ends up being a better choice. Provided you have an active bass, or place the DI after a pedal(s), the active portion of an active DI is already present in an active bass pedal. The benefit can be a lower noise floor with a passive DI.

I have been in professional audio for over 35 years. I have never once encountered a situation where a passive DI would have been superior.

The noise floor of a Countryman Type 85 is -122 dBu.

 

[agedhorse]

I have been in professional audio for over 35 years. I have never once encountered a situation where a passive DI would have been superior.

The noise floor of a Countryman Type 85 is -122 dBu.

In general a passive DI is quieter because there is no additional noise floor generated by the active electronics driving the isolation transformer. With quality active DI's the difference in noise floor is small because the input stage is a buffer, but there are some pretty high noise floor active DI's out there too. If you take an identical active DI and remove the input buffer, the noise floor will always drop compared with the active driven version.

I've been in the touring pro audio world for over 40 years and have designed many of these products over the course of my career. Where the active DI is a huge (almost essential) benefit is when interfacing a high impedance source with a low impedance balanced load. Transformers lose audio performance when the winding ratios between primary and secondary are large (in an attempt to achieve high input impedance), bandwidth, linearity and distortion suffer.

 

[amper]

In general a passive DI is quieter because there is no additional noise floor generated by the active electronics driving the isolation transformer. With quality active DI's the difference in noise floor is small because the input stage is a buffer, but there are some pretty high noise floor active DI's out there too. If you take an identical active DI and remove the input buffer, the noise floor will always drop compared with the active driven version.

I've been in the touring pro audio world for over 40 years and have designed many of these products over the course of my career. Where the active DI is a huge (almost essential) benefit is when interfacing a high impedance source with a low impedance balanced load. Transformers lose audio performance when the winding ratios between primary and secondary are large (in an attempt to achieve high input impedance), bandwidth, linearity and distortion suffer.

Far be it from me to argue with you, Andy. I know your pedigree. But my point still stands: the Countryman Type 85 is one of the best DI boxes ever made and is, as I'm sure you are aware, a benchmark for the industry. I see no reason to use a passive DI when I can use a Countryman.

 

[agedhorse]

Far be it from me to argue with you, Andy. I know your pedigree. But my point still stands: the Countryman Type 85 is one of the best DI boxes ever made and is, as I'm sure you are aware, a benchmark for the industry. I see no reason to use a passive DI when I can use a Countryman.

Yes, it's a very good DI for sure and quiet for an active DI, but there are passive DI's that are even quieter (which only applies when driven from a low impedance/buffered source).

As an example, The active Radial J48 has a dynamic range (between the noise floor and rated saturation) of 109dB and an EIN of -103dBu, the passive JDI has a dynamic range of 135dB, there is no EIN because there's no active electronics, and the noise floor is dominated by whatever the noise of the source is.

The active Countryman 85 has an OUTPUT noise floor of -122dBV which is different than the EIN. If you take the noise and divide it by the gain, and since the gain is negative (attenuation), for an attenuation level of -10dB in the pickup mode, this number gets subtracted from the output noise and the result is -122dB - (-10dB) = -112dBV (could also be done in dBu) which is still a good number.

The Jensen JT-DB transformer does not show a noise floor spec because it's quieter than the measurement preamps themselves.

In the good 'ol days, it was common to use a +20dB mic input transformer because it was quieter than the equivalent active circuitry. When active circuits (and their architectures) because quieter, the considerable cost of the transformer negated its benefits.

It's a lot more complicated than the common lore suggests.

 

[amper]

the passive JDI has a dynamic range of 135dB

Where did you find this number? The only thing I could find said the JDI had a dynamic range of 116 dB. The webpage for the JDI doesn't list a number.

 

[Zbysek]

Where did you find this number? The only thing I could find said the JDI had a dynamic range of 116 dB. The webpage for the JDI doesn't list a number.

You can find it on Radial Eng web page under "specifications"-see the link

JDI Specifications - Radial Engineering

 

[amper]

You can find it on Radial Eng web page under "specifications"-see the link

JDI Specifications - Radial Engineering

I would have sworn that was the page I looked at, and didn't see it. Thanks.

 

[Naack]

Yes, it's a very good DI for sure and quiet for an active DI, but there are passive DI's that are even quieter (which only applies when driven from a low impedance/buffered source).

As an example, The active Radial J48 has a dynamic range (between the noise floor and rated saturation) of 109dB and an EIN of -103dBu, the passive JDI has a dynamic range of 135dB, there is no EIN because there's no active electronics, and the noise floor is dominated by whatever the noise of the source is.

The active Countryman 85 has an OUTPUT noise floor of -122dBV which is different than the EIN. If you take the noise and divide it by the gain, and since the gain is negative (attenuation), for an attenuation level of -10dB in the pickup mode, this number gets subtracted from the output noise and the result is -122dB - (-10dB) = -112dBV (could also be done in dBu) which is still a good number.

The Jensen JT-DB transformer does not show a noise floor spec because it's quieter than the measurement preamps themselves.

In the good 'ol days, it was common to use a +20dB mic input transformer because it was quieter than the equivalent active circuitry. When active circuits (and their architectures) because quieter, the considerable cost of the transformer negated its benefits.

It's a lot more complicated than the common lore suggests.

If you are running a passive bass into a pedalboard and some pedals likely have a buffer stage, would it be redundant to put a dedicated buffer pedal in front of a passive DI?

 

[agedhorse]

If you are running a passive bass into a pedalboard and some pedals likely have a buffer stage, would it be redundant to put a dedicated buffer pedal in front of a passive DI?

Yes, there's no need for an additional buffer. The only exception is if they are all true bypass and you bypass all the pedals, but this is trying pretty hard to find a reason.

 

[J-phatt]

I have used an Avid Eleven Rack direct to FOH, for guitar and bass, for 10 years. Guitar needs cab sims but I don't use it for bass.
I used a Peavey tube preamp for 10 years direct to FOH, no cab sim either.
IMHO, cab sims are useful when you are playing alone. In a band mix not that much. Just cut some highs and lows at the mixer board, if needed.

How did you set up the Avid Eleven for bass? You skip the amp sims?

 

[DonaldR]

How did you set up the Avid Eleven for bass? You skip the amp sims?

There are two bass amp models (Ampeg SVT model plus an Avid model derived from the SVT) and an 8x10 cab sims in the Eleven Rack (plus studio compressor/delay/reverb/4-band parametric EQ). I'm using the 8x10 cab sims at home, but I disable it when playing with other members. I prefer a punchier bass sound when mixed live.

 

[J-phatt]

There are two bass amp models (Ampeg SVT model plus an Avid model derived from the SVT) and an 8x10 cab sims in the Eleven Rack (plus studio compressor/delay/reverb/4-band parametric EQ). I'm using the 8x10 cab sims at home, but I disable it when playing with other members. I prefer a punchier bass sound when mixed live.

You using the Eleven Rack hardware unit? Mine doesn’t have those features, just guitar amp and cab models, a rather limited pallet. My unit must be older than yours, or you are talking about software. I was playing it today using the Plexi modeler to good effect. I ran the front panel ‘amp-out’ to the front end of my Hartke and it sounded good. I might continue exploring this route since I already own the Eleven Rack and ought to try to utilize it for bass as well as guitar.