avalon U5 vs. Sansamp BDDI

contrabassie · #1 04-30-2007, 05:08 PM

I'm doing some recordings in the studio next weekend and I can choose between an Avalon U5 and a sansamp BDDI to do the recordings. Which one would you choose?

Toasted · #2 04-30-2007, 05:21 PM

SteveC · #3 04-30-2007, 06:13 PM

Not even close - Avalon.

JanusZarate · #4 04-30-2007, 06:32 PM

From what I know, the Avalon U5 is a top-notch DI that seems ideal for those who want their instrument's tone to shine through. The SansAmp is best used as an Ampeg rig replacement - it's best function is tone coloration, since it's a really good SVT substitute, IMO.

While I have yet to have the pleasure of trying out a U5, I hear plenty of good things. I'd check out the "Recording Gear and Equipment" forum for more info on the U5, as it's not a pedal like the SansAmp is.

cabcreaser · #5 04-30-2007, 07:15 PM

I would vote, both. Send the input thru of the U5 into the Sansamp and run the Sansamp with a little amplike edge (nothing too hairy) and blend it with the fat, clean sound of the U5. You will get the best of both worlds.

bongomania · #6 04-30-2007, 08:51 PM

+1000. In fact, if you go over to the Amps forum, you can read several posts about Nashville/country music pros using that exact two-channel setup (or similar, with a REDDI or 6176 instead of the U5).

joelb79 · #7 04-30-2007, 09:02 PM

Yeah, it would be ideal to track your bass with a U5, and use the pass through to record a separate 'dirty' track. Keep in mind, a sansamp is only good for scoped sounding grit.

It all boils down to what the song needs.

all that being said, i love my U5.

thejohnkim · #8 04-30-2007, 09:43 PM

there is a popular myth that the sansamp is only good for scooped sounds. if you just read the manual you will see that even tech 21 nyc will inform you that turning down the treble and bass will result in a boost on the 750 hz mid range region.

that said, i also think both will be useful.

contrabassie · #9 05-01-2007, 02:02 AM

Thanks! I'll go for both: U5 and BDDI.
Strange I didn't come up with this myself

bassicinstinct · #10 05-01-2007, 03:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thejohnkim

there is a popular myth that the sansamp is only good for scooped sounds. if you just read the manual you will see that even tech 21 nyc will inform you that turning down the treble and bass will result in a boost on the 750 hz mid range region.

that said, i also think both will be useful.

Too true.

I've repeated this advice until my brain has almost exploded!!

I cannot believe that there are STILL those who don't know. Truly amazing.

i_got_a_mohawk · #11 05-01-2007, 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thejohnkim

there is a popular myth that the sansamp is only good for scooped sounds. if you just read the manual you will see that even tech 21 nyc will inform you that turning down the treble and bass will result in a boost on the 750 hz mid range region.

that said, i also think both will be useful.

That happens simply because the mid is flat, if the bass and treble are flat too, its alright, turn the bass and treble up, its like doing that on your amp, the mids sound scooped by comparison.

One thing i dont get, the sansamp is meant to sound like the SVT yeah?

And people always go on about the sansamp being scooped

But SVTs are known for the mid!

bassicinstinct · #12 05-01-2007, 05:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by i_got_a_mohawk

That happens simply because the mid is flat, if the bass and treble are flat too, its alright, turn the bass and treble up, its like doing that on your amp, the mids sound scooped by comparison.

One thing i dont get, the sansamp is meant to sound like the SVT yeah?

And people always go on about the sansamp being scooped

But SVTs are known for the mid!

Exactly!!

Go figure eh?

joelb79 · #13 05-01-2007, 07:12 AM

I think its because the SVT has a different preamp layout that guys like me try these "SVT" devices, and as soon as I touch the bass/treble knobs and boost them like I would on an SVT, i go "Where'd my sound go?"

Good to know. I'll have to try another one some day.

Andy V. · #14 05-01-2007, 11:21 AM

I love my U5.
But I don't really get the BDDI.
I prefer the MXR M-80.

scotch · #15 05-01-2007, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thejohnkim

there is a popular myth that the sansamp is only good for scooped sounds. if you just read the manual you will see that even tech 21 nyc will inform you that turning down the treble and bass will result in a boost on the 750 hz mid range region.

that said, i also think both will be useful.

While this is certainly true, I still have a hard time recording with the unit. When you start cutting the bass & treble, in order to reveal decent midrange, a lot of overall channel volume is lost.

With my BDDI if I manage to get the mids up to an acceptable comparable level - I end up with rather low overall output from both the 1/4" and xlr jacks. This results in having to use another piece of outboard gear to bump up the level to the interface. It works, but can be a little noisy. Still, in my opinion, the BDDI isn't the best choice for a mid-centered tone.

I still use it occasionally at sessions & occasionally for live gigs. It is a great piece of gear that I always keep on hand (especially for amp-related emergencies). I just wish that the output was a lot hotter. A true mid boost/cut would probably have perfected the unit.

and before the flame-up occurs:
Yes, I am aware of how easy it is to "abuse" mid-frequencies by over-emphasizing them.
Yes, I am adept at using mid-cut only eq structures (such as vintage bassman preamps).
Yes, the Sansamp BDDI is a great piece of gear that many professionals use every day.
No, mine is not for sale!

scotch · #16 05-01-2007, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by contrabassie

I'm doing some recordings in the studio next weekend and I can choose between an Avalon U5 and a sansamp BDDI to do the recordings. Which one would you choose?

What kind of material are you recording?
Having both on hand would be ideal. But if you have to choose, the Avalon has a purer overall signal with some flexibility. The SansAmp will give you some grit, if called for.

It depends on what tone will work the music.

contrabassie · #17 05-01-2007, 03:38 PM

It's a kind of alternative rock we're recording. You can hear some samples on our myspace: www.myspace.com/lemonsite

scotch · #18 05-01-2007, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by contrabassie

It's a kind of alternative rock we're recording. You can hear some samples on our myspace: www.myspace.com/lemonsite

I really like that first song!

Normally, I'd suggest the Avalon over the SansAmp but, for this stuff, the SansAmp could be perfect. Unless you're going to use some sort of light O.D. before the DI - in which case I'd recommend the Avalon.

ibnzneksrul · #19 05-01-2007, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cabcreaser

I would vote, both. Send the input thru of the U5 into the Sansamp and run the Sansamp with a little amplike edge (nothing too hairy) and blend it with the fat, clean sound of the U5. You will get the best of both worlds.

+1, blend to taste.

bongomania · #20 05-01-2007, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scotch

Having both on hand would be ideal. But if you have to choose, the Avalon has a purer overall signal with some flexibility. The SansAmp will give you some grit, if called for.
It depends on what tone will work the music.

I agree IF he has to choose. But in the studio, especially in the modern digital world, it's no big deal to record two simultaneous channels with different tones. That way you get to A/B them in the actual mixed track, instead of trying to imagine what will sound best beforehand based on a genre or whatever.