• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

cheap DI vs. expensive DI

#61
Juniorkimbrough, referring to your question about the difference between the ProDI and the JDI, the JDI just has some extra goodies. In addition to the Jensen output xformer, the JDI also has dual-function inputs that can sum stereo sources, a polarity reversal switch (which doubles as a pin-2/pin-3 hot selector) and a speaker level input circuit.

I got my JDI from the same guy that sold me his WWU and I've used it a ton since then. I now prefer it over the Countryman 85 for most situations. The active Countryman has a 10Mohm input impedance while the passive ProDI/JDI's are only 10Kohms. The Demeter 201 falls somewhere in between at >1Mohm. The Countryman's high input impedance is great for buffering lots of different types of signals, particularly old guitar pickups and piezo pickups but it can't do everything perfectly and it has its weaknesses just like anything else. No doubt due in part to its very high input impedance, the 85 can be a little harsh with my low-impedance active basses, even inherently-dark instruments.

My Raven Labs MDB-1 also has a 10Mohm input impedance but it somehow always seems smoother than the Type 85. For my old Hofner and other passive basses the 85 does a fine job, no question. The JDI may not boast a super-high input impedance but it's high enough that I've never noticed any loading of my pickups or any other issues with my passive basses. In the end I prefer the way the JDI handles my active signal, being as that's what I use the most.

I snagged one of those Epifani Quest preamps that were being blown out at MF and I remember asking in that thread whether anyone knew whether the units would be shipping with Jensen transxmers or not. One of the responses was that Jensens were not necessarily the end-all, be-all and that the Epifani xformer most likely matches (or even exceeds) the Jensen's performance! Taken with a grain of salt, that got me thinking how it might be a nice sometimes not to have a Jensen xformer in every piece of gear I own.

The ProDI should do ya just fine!
 
#62
Juniorkimbrough said:
any particular reason why you don't like passive bass + passive DI?

reason I ask is because I play ALL passive basses and am considering the Radial ProDI.
Click to expand...

Very often the input impedance of a passive DI is too low for a passive bass. Usually a passive bass needs to " see" a minimum load of 1MegOhm. Passive DIs often have an input load of +- 100 kohm or less. So the loads on the bass is too high. Result is missing high end...

Active basses need to see a lower impedance in order to "get all the highs through". So there passive DI are not as problematic
 
#65
I'm going to bump this old thread, I hope that's not an issue for anyone.

I just bought a Behringer Ultra DI DI100 for $30, to compare with my $250 or so Radial JDI Duplex. How do they compare? They don't. The JDI is fuller, smoother, with a nice overall tonality. The Behringer DI100 sounds thinner in the low end, and sounds kind of grainy or something. I thought something was screwy with my bass tone when I just tracked a demo with it. I guess I didn't know how good I already had it with the JDI, and my API style preamps.

I'm not sure what to do with the Behringer, maybe take it out live where I don't want to lose my JDI to sticky fingers or forgetfulness.
 
#66
Juniorkimbrough said:
Thanks again for the responses! I'm pulling the trigger today on the ProDI. I play flats almost all the time so needless to say a little missing high end won't bother me at all.
Click to expand...
If you're still around, what is your impression of the ProDI, now that you have had it (presumably) for a few years? I have the ProD2 and have been very happy with it for my basses, and other instruments, too.
 
#68
Form factor is an issue for live play. I had a very nice DI - a REDDI - and it was a bear to lug around on top of the basses, cab, amp, mics, mic stands, video stands, video gear, etc. So I repurchased a used Radial JDV Super Direct Box, which I also love. Much smaller, equal performance (albeit cleaner than the REDDI, which adds its own "tubey" tone), and the active aspect adds presence to my passive bass. I also have a Radial JDI and it's also great, and simpler to use because it doesn't require power input. Some players swear by REDDI and take it with them on fly dates. Its large size and weight is probably not an issue unless you're a typical player lugging around your own slew of other gear. In that case I say go with what's easiest to transport - and provide quality performance.
 
#70
Oops. Turns out there's a bit of design flaw in the Behringer DI100. It puts out a massive amount of gain compared to a passive DI, so you need to use some sort of pad, even with a passive guitar or bass. The two -20 pads on the front of the box are NOT the ones to use, they make the noise floor go WAY up with a single coil guitar or bass. If you pad your mic pre down the line, or use an inline barrel pad on the output, it's just as quiet as my Radial. All of the sudden I am actually kind of impressed with it. It's got a little more high end clarity than the JDI, which for example, is really nice with my electric guitar. Pretty impressive for $30.

They really messed up with the pad situation though, I think the pads should have been on the output, or maybe both output and input.

I have to say I'm impressed with the build quality as well. It's really clean and tight, and everything is securely fixed, except for the buttons. But they are not really any looser than the JDI Duplex's buttons, so it's all right.
 
#72
JimmyM said:
Equal performance? OK...

:D
Click to expand...

Absolutely! The only thing different about REDDI is the fact that it artificially colors the recorded tone. The sonic recording quality of the JDV and REDDI are equal - including the "sweetness" and "weight" of the mid- and high-neck notes you frequently post about in other DI threads. I've done my own tests and listened to tests of others. I owned the JDV, sold it for a REDDI, and ended up selling the REDDI and buying another JDV after personal experience using each DI. That JDV is a sleeping giant, includes far more functionality/options, comes in a much smaller form factor so it's easier to transport, and costs less too. What's not to like except being jeered at by members of the REDDI-only club? :D :D :D
 
#74
N. Kentucky Bass said:
Absolutely! The only thing different about REDDI is the fact that it artificially colors the recorded tone. The sonic recording quality of the JDV and REDDI are equal - including the "sweetness" and "weight" of the mid- and high-neck notes you frequently post about in other DI threads. I've done my own tests and listened to tests of others. I owned the JDV, sold it for a REDDI, and ended up selling the REDDI and buying another JDV after personal experience using each DI. That JDV is a sleeping giant, includes far more functionality/options, comes in a much smaller form factor so it's easier to transport, and costs less too. What's not to like except being jeered at by members of the REDDI-only club? :D :D :D
Click to expand...
Hey, that's a pretty big stigma ;) But if you found what works for you, salut. As for me, I'm not giving up the REDDI ever, unless Peter makes a better version of it.
 
#75
Equal performance???? I'm not allowed to say what's in my head right now. Haha. It's like comparing a mackie input channel to a neve 1073. Does it amplify. Yep. They are not even in the same universe though. I have been lucky to own many $$$$ DIs. UA, the brick, Avalon , evil twin , ADL, Etcetera. Sold them all about 8 years ago and kept the REDDI after a Grammy winning engineer said to ditch everything but the REDDI.



The REDDI Is in a league all by itself. It is in the league if NEVE/ API Is it fir everyone? Well everyone that I have been working with for years. I was doing a few records with a Grammy winning producer. Every time the REDDI was the one he wanted. The radial is a nice small DI but so is the countryman. The clarity , bigness and 3D of the Reddi is what puts it in a class by itself The JDI JDV WHATEVER along with the Avalon , evil twin , UAsolo610 all came in second to the a design REDDI. I'm not talking about so engineer guy that works in a home studio. Although he does but he did Kirk franklin. Metallica , worked abbey road and sky walker ranch in CA. HE said. If you want me to call you Bring that red box with you next time. TRUTH!!! He bought one. When you say the radial is the same. I think you may be trying to convincing yourself for some other reason ;). And all this from my tiny iPhone keyboard that I can't see


Sent from my iPhone using TalkBass
 
Last edited:
#77
Now that the two "REDDI lovers" have predictably defended the honor of that DI :D, back to the OPs question of cheap vs. expensive DI.

The expensive DIs need to be experienced to be appreciated. REDDI, JDV, and many others in that class are terrific DIs. They're especially valuable for recording, but some artists like JimmyM and svtb15 swear by always using a REDDI for live gigs too. To each his own.

To help YOU understand the differences, a few years back Tony Levin and Dreamland Studios did a famous test of 12 high end DIs.

Here's a teaser video about the tests:


Here's a TB thread discussing the tests:
http://www.talkbass.com/threads/di-test-with-tony-levin.953252/

And a link to Dropbox where you can download the test recordings in WAV format:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6kx71g7wtrckujg/lF9PfeGh5P

I think it would be very cool for those of you who've posted in this thread about budget DIs to share your own recordings so everyone interested can compare results of low end vs. high end DIs. It doesn't have to be anything fancy like Tony Levin's test. Could be as simple as you slowly playing a major scale through the cycle from bottom to top of the neck. It is important to play around the neck because tone generation varies significantly in various positions and we're interested in hearing those differences. The two artists mentioned, for instance, frequently post on TB how they value the REDDI's ability to record notes played in the middle and upper part of the neck with a sweet, fat, 3D quality. I, too, have experienced that result - and also hear it on the Radial JDV. Some of you might not hear any major differences on these recordings. The differences we hear are due to many factors - playback gear quality (headphones, speakers), listening environment, experience and skill as a bassist, experience with audio recording and production, or even shot ears from years of playing / listening to loud music without ear protection.

Whatever. Rather than get into a shouting match about "my DI is better than yours," this thread could provide valuable information if you share your recordings made with these lower-budget DIs. I am very interested to hear how they perform. Sometimes we tend to judge gear by its name and price tag rather than results. Let's hear the results!
 
Last edited:
#78
I always used a plain old DOD Direct box gave a good sound from the post eq out. I just bought a bdi-21 with all the knobs and switches for kicks will see what the difference is supposedly better but as long as you use post eq out all you should need is the cheapie
 
#79
svtb15 said:
Equal performance???? I'm not allowed to say what's in my head right now. Haha. It's like comparing a mackie input channel to a neve 1073. Does it amplify. Yep. They are not even in the same universe though. I have been lucky to own many $$$$ DIs. UA, the brick, Avalon , evil twin , ADL, Etcetera. Sold them all about 8 years ago and kept the REDDI after a Grammy winning engineer said to ditch everything but the REDDI.


Sent from my iPhone using TalkBass
Click to expand...

That's what is called the argument from authority. ;) Other famous producers use other boxes. You just haven't worked with them all yet. :) Reddi is great if you are looking for that Ampeg sound. Can't say I would want that sound all the time. Pretty happy with my Juice Box, but I agree that it isn't five times better that a Radial.
 
#80
The price depends on some of the features too.

A DI box, at it's core, is just to lower impedance and balance a signal to send to a mixing board input that doesn't accept high-impedance, unbalanced signals. Pretty low parts count to do that most of the time (in theory, transformers can make a difference as well, I saw Jensen's mentioned. Most Jensen transformers to use in Microphones cost about 60.00 on Small Bear).

However, the added costs comes from added features, like maybe a switchable -XX dB pad, or a parallel buffered outputs, or an EQ built into it, or a cabinet simulator, etc.

The reason different tones and colorations may come from different DI's is from different tone stacks, different frequency centers, etc. Not so much the actual balancing part.

Sometimes, I just use an ART Tube MP for a DI box after my pedal chain, and it works just fine. I notice a difference when using a cheap Behringer ULTRADI instead, but that's more because the ART has a starved-plate tube gain stage, so it's louder overall. I get some issues with noise with the ART, depending on the tube (12Au7's usually have less noise compared to 12AX7's) and whether I have the gain cranked up. Never noticed any added hiss or noise with the Behringer. Sometimes I use the second channel on the Pro MPA-II from ART as a DI as well. Just depends on what I'm doing and where I'm at. I've also used Tech 21 as a DI box as well, but I thought using the XLR output on the PBBDI was actually pretty noisy compared to using the 1/4" output from it to the Behringer DI instead.

Behringer's gear is usually not bad, just usually cheap copies of real other gear. For example, the "Bass Synth" BSY-600 is a clone of a Boss SYB-3. I have the Mini Mixer, I have the UltraDI and I have the iNuke DSP power amp, and all are three very solid pieces of equipment I haven't had issues out of.

I don't think basing noise performance entirely off the DI box itself is fair, especially if you're using it in a different environment when you change DI's. Even using the same DI's, I get 60-cycle hum in my bedroom and in the practice space, but at most of the venues in town, I have no issues with 60Hz hum, even with flourescent lighting. Also, phase issues can be a factor too. Cables can make a difference too, and having them laying against power cables, etc. In our TV studio, we've seen camera cables that were laying parallel going to the control room static arc'ing in the dark.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back