DI box

[scooteraz]

My long time LR Baggs Para Acostic DI box died a couple of weeks ago. It was a good box, and if I replace with the same thing, would be ok. But, I was wondering what others were using to get from stage to PA for their acoustics. Oh, and the good and bad about them.

[BuckyB]

I just use my trusty old Zoom Acoustic pedal (the original 504 model) into whatever DI is available. Sounds good to me.

[Micter]

The LR Baggs is the only way to go if you don't have one of their systems in the guitar. If you do any passive DI will work.

[Jaybo]

Radial direct boxes rule. Pricey, but great for tone, and pureness of signal, ground lift etc. There seems to be a few multi units that you can run xlr direct out of. Not a bad option, for having a tuner, and going silent.

But Radial's I like.

[BuckyB]

Do different DI's really sound THAT different? Really?

[Micter]

Do different DI's really sound THAT different? Really?

Transformers in DI boxes affect sound and impedance. So, yes they do.

[Crunchyriff]

Transformers in DI boxes affect sound and impedance. So, yes they do.

+1. I too have the LR Baggs PADI and I like it a lot. Both Philip and I use them, and we're both pretty happy with them.

[BuckyB]

Transformers in DI boxes affect sound and impedance. So, yes they do.
So then, passive DI's are bad?

[scooteraz]

It is not a matter of passive or active being good or bad. There are plenty of good and bad examples of both. For quite a while, we were having problems with getting the POD XL Live into the the board without a bunch of artifacts and distortions that were not part of the models. We were always driving the fine line between having enough signal and overdriving the DI boxes. Tried both active and passive boxes. Then I broke down and bought the Radial JDI passive. Something like $200 for the box. But it solved our problems. It is just a really clean passive box that can take a lot of signal.

Transformer coupled boxes allow for isolation of the signals. Active boxes can do that too, but it is tricker do design in and keep the signal clean and have a wide dynamic range. However, if you need a signal boost, then active is the only way to go.

I have used several DI boxes, as well as some that "add acoustic tone" boxes. I have an Aura, and it is useful for certain things. But, as it turns out my McPherson sounded best going trough the Para Acoustic DI. Not sure how they do it, but apparently they do some filtering in the onboard preamp to kill most of the piezo quack. So, the need for a modeler is reduced, or IMHO, eliminated.

I was up on Baggs website, and they have a new DI, the Venue. It appears to be the original with a couple of upgraded features (on board tuning and a boost). I'm thinking that might be perfect, since I have used my Zvex SHO to boost the signal when I go from strummed to finger picking. However, it does not do one thing that the Para Acoustic DI does, and that is it doesn't run off of phantom power. It is also about twice the price of the smaller box.

If you guys had experiences with other things that were really great, I might look at something else, but, looks like I will be looking at a LR Baggs two products.

[BuckyB]

I guess either I've been real fortunate or I just don't have real discerning hearing. To me, all DI's have either worked fine or not at all. Are these differences subtle?

[scooteraz]

I guess either I've been real fortunate or I just don't have real discerning hearing. To me, all DI's have either worked fine or not at all. Are these differences subtle?

No, they are not subtle when they occur. At least not usually. A distorted acoustic guitar signal, to me, is about as subtle as having AC/DC play your worship. But when it doesn't occur, then no problem. We just have pretty long cable pulls from our stage to the mixing board. And, the church we are in was not designed with this sort of thing in mind, so it is a bit noisy, electrically. So, we have maybe pushed the envelope a bit more than others.

Also, live is usually a whole lot more forgiving than if you are recording. In the latter environment, each signal is analyzed. In the former, usually you are only looking for the final mixes. But if a product produces a signal clean enough for recording, then it should be fine for live.

For me, the two things a DI box has to do are, 1) give the signal enough gain so that we don't have to amplify a lot of noise at the board (stronger signal overcomes induced noise along the way) and 2) go from high impedance single ended cables (think guitar cable) to low impedance differential signal cables (microphone cables). It has to do those two things cleanly. For me, number 1 mandates an active box. I don't believe the fishman in the guitar has enough power to make a Radial JDI a good option (but since we have a JDI to try, I may do just that).

[Micter]

A DI box above all things changes the impedance from high to low. This allows the high impedance guitar signal to travel through long cable runs without a huge loss of signal. Amplification (gain) is not what a DI box is designed to accomplish. Processors on the other hand.......

[Jaybo]

I don't believe the fishman in the guitar has enough power to make a Radial JDI a good option (but since we have a JDI to try, I may do just that).

I used a few acoustics right into the radial and always had good results. In that church, it was an old building, bad electronics, and a radio station near by. Talk about fun times trying to eliminate noise!

[scooteraz]

A DI box above all things changes the impedance from high to low. This allows the high impedance guitar signal to travel through long cable runs without a huge loss of signal. Amplification (gain) is not what a DI box is designed to accomplish. Processors on the other hand.......


True. But, acoustic DI/Preamps have been around so long that I tend to think of them together. And it gives me some small part of control over my sound (whereas, just putting in a passive DI will give total sound control to the board...I know, he can always override my tweaks). Still not sure what I am going to do, but I have looked at a bunch of stuff. So far, my old box seems the best choice. All of the other things I have seen either are not as good, or are more expensive (usually with more features).

[MusicChad]

I've never used the L. R. Baggs PADI for more than a quick audition from time to time... I've just always used whatever the church had on hand... However, I bought a Peterson StroboStomp II a little while ago and have been very pleasantly surprised at the quality of the active DI in it... Again, I couldn't offer any comparison to the PADI, but compared to the normal DI boxes our church uses, the Peterson's is a BIG upgrade! Sufficient to say, to some degree the DI does play a role...

[dmock66]

I also use the LR Baggs Para DI, as does the other guitarist in my band (he turned me on to it and I had to have one of my own). GREAT DI box!!!