I figured I'd post my running experience with the Ehrlund here rather than polluting the existing giant thread with my details. If this doesn't sit well with the mods, then my apologies, and please fold this into the main thread.
Thanks to Ric Vice, engedi1, Pastor Hal, and MrSidecar for all of heir great tips and suggestions via PM. Thanks to all who posted in the main thread. Here goes:
Day 1: I set my iamp200/Wizzy 12 up on an end table so that I could hear the direct sound. I engaged the tone defeat switch on the amp so that it was set "flat." In real-world gig settings, I don't believe that there's anything special about a flat setting as the room etc., virtually always calls for some compensation. Still, this seemed to be a good place to start.
First, I listened to my Rev Solo2 buffered by the Fdeck pre/hpf. A fine sound with a touch of the nasal quality characteristic of every piezo bridge wing pickup I've ever used. Out in the real world, a bit of compensation using the parametric tone-shaping on the iamp200 and I'm off and running with very good results. On to the Ehrlund...
I placed the Ehrlund in the recommended area on the E-side lower bout. At first, the output seemed quite low and the sound was muffled and unimpressive. A few adjustments in the position and "Oh mama," sounds like a double bass coming from that Wizzy! Moving a bit horizontal toward the E-side f-hole produced a bit more articulation to the sound. Moving to tge G-side bout... awful. An inch or two up or down from the sweet spot results in large changes that can make it sound like an overgrown BG.
The Ehrlund has a more "indirect" sound than does the Rev Solo. That maks perfect sense given that it responds to both acoustic and vibrational energy while the Rev Solo responds essentially to only the latter. Of course, that's what makes the Ehrlund sound more like a microphone.
The down side? The Ehrlund is waaaaay more prone to feedback than is the Rev Solo even when the Ehrlund is placed at a location that drives it well.
None of this matters until I get it to a gig.
In the meantime, below are a couple of pics showing the current sweet spot and how I have the cable mounted. For now, I have a 1/4" female-to-female adapter on the tailpiece (thanks, Ric). If I end up keeping the Ehrlund, I'll switch to a female jack.
Here are sound clips of some noodling. The Rev Solo was recorded straight out of the Fdeck; the Ehrlund was reorded straight out of its pre-amp.
Rev Solo clip
Ehrlund clip
Stay tuned... or switch to another channel if you wish.
Thanks to Ric Vice, engedi1, Pastor Hal, and MrSidecar for all of heir great tips and suggestions via PM. Thanks to all who posted in the main thread. Here goes:
Day 1: I set my iamp200/Wizzy 12 up on an end table so that I could hear the direct sound. I engaged the tone defeat switch on the amp so that it was set "flat." In real-world gig settings, I don't believe that there's anything special about a flat setting as the room etc., virtually always calls for some compensation. Still, this seemed to be a good place to start.
First, I listened to my Rev Solo2 buffered by the Fdeck pre/hpf. A fine sound with a touch of the nasal quality characteristic of every piezo bridge wing pickup I've ever used. Out in the real world, a bit of compensation using the parametric tone-shaping on the iamp200 and I'm off and running with very good results. On to the Ehrlund...
I placed the Ehrlund in the recommended area on the E-side lower bout. At first, the output seemed quite low and the sound was muffled and unimpressive. A few adjustments in the position and "Oh mama," sounds like a double bass coming from that Wizzy! Moving a bit horizontal toward the E-side f-hole produced a bit more articulation to the sound. Moving to tge G-side bout... awful. An inch or two up or down from the sweet spot results in large changes that can make it sound like an overgrown BG.
The Ehrlund has a more "indirect" sound than does the Rev Solo. That maks perfect sense given that it responds to both acoustic and vibrational energy while the Rev Solo responds essentially to only the latter. Of course, that's what makes the Ehrlund sound more like a microphone.
The down side? The Ehrlund is waaaaay more prone to feedback than is the Rev Solo even when the Ehrlund is placed at a location that drives it well.
None of this matters until I get it to a gig.
In the meantime, below are a couple of pics showing the current sweet spot and how I have the cable mounted. For now, I have a 1/4" female-to-female adapter on the tailpiece (thanks, Ric). If I end up keeping the Ehrlund, I'll switch to a female jack.
Here are sound clips of some noodling. The Rev Solo was recorded straight out of the Fdeck; the Ehrlund was reorded straight out of its pre-amp.
Rev Solo clip
Ehrlund clip
Stay tuned... or switch to another channel if you wish.
We can move this "off air" to a P.M. As others may not be all that interested in my confusion and befuddlement.