From the foh end of things, if you can guarantee that the level from the DI will be somewhere between the level of a vocal mic and the level of an FX return, then simpler is definitely better. I need clean signal a lot more than I need hot signal.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
DI Level Control - Necessary? New Poll
- Thread starter R Baer
- Start date
- Status
From the foh end of things, if you can guarantee that the level from the DI will be somewhere between the level of a vocal mic and the level of an FX return, then simpler is definitely better. I need clean signal a lot more than I need hot signal.
I like having it because it allows me to run my rig at whatever volume I deem neccessary to hear myself and still send a signal to the front that the sound guy doesn't have any reason to complain about.
I use a Sansamp RBI in lieu of an amp at many smaller gigs. It has a DI control and I've never had to change it.
+1... the LAST thing we need to worry about is how to control the soundmans volume slider. Thats his job, the most basic job.
Genz Benz amp put out a healthy signal to the board, the guy in charge of the board does the rest
I've had an Eden amp with a DI level control for 8 years, NEVER used it
I had a gig where I was providing sound for all the bands. I was running out of channels and my mixer has two channels with no gain control that want a very low signal. Everything without a control was too hot. I was able to run the bass through one channel only because I have a level control and could turn it way down (it was almost off). I ran keys through the other since they also had a level control.
The level control saved the day. Obviously this is a special case, but it sure helped.
However, to be my own Devil's Advocate, normally I could have put an active DI between one of the amps and the mixer to use as a volume control. In this case, all 4 of my DIs where in use
The level control saved the day. Obviously this is a special case, but it sure helped.
However, to be my own Devil's Advocate, normally I could have put an active DI between one of the amps and the mixer to use as a volume control. In this case, all 4 of my DIs where in use
Using the same knob for master volume and DI level is not acceptable as I don't want a change in my stage level to affect the level at the board; the amp is most often facing me for monitoring.
Likewise using the same knob for preamp level and DI level is not acceptable where either (a) preamp gain affects the tone in any way; and (b) I can not access the full range of output levels of the rig with the preamp gain turned almost all the way down, which is where lots of engineers have asked me to park it.
In a world where all engineers have proper pads on their boards, always know how to use them, are always in a good enough mood to bother to turn them on, and where I always have the political clout to convince them to do so, sure, get rid of the separate output level. I rarely encounter this ideal world, and I regularly play at medium to large venues in the Minneapolis area at semi-pro level, so I'd guess others run into the same issues. It seems more polite for me to offer the level requested by the engineer than to go through this kind of "turf battle" over it.
Though, truth be told, I've run into this kind of trouble enough times with "house amps" or other rigs I"m forced to use in emergencies, that I just bypass the whole issue, and use the XLR out on my amp modeler, which _does_ have a separate output level from the 1/4" output that feeds the effects return of my stage rig. _That_ might be an argument for getting rid of the separate DI level--if people are just using the rig as a power amp for a modeler.
The various output levels I've been asked for on my rig, vary from DI level almost all the way down, to all the way up, from a large variety of engineers, some of which were not very skilled, some of which I trust with my life. So I don't see the correlation between "requires me to change DI output level" and "bad engineer" that some people are proposing here.
Likewise using the same knob for preamp level and DI level is not acceptable where either (a) preamp gain affects the tone in any way; and (b) I can not access the full range of output levels of the rig with the preamp gain turned almost all the way down, which is where lots of engineers have asked me to park it.
In a world where all engineers have proper pads on their boards, always know how to use them, are always in a good enough mood to bother to turn them on, and where I always have the political clout to convince them to do so, sure, get rid of the separate output level. I rarely encounter this ideal world, and I regularly play at medium to large venues in the Minneapolis area at semi-pro level, so I'd guess others run into the same issues. It seems more polite for me to offer the level requested by the engineer than to go through this kind of "turf battle" over it.
Though, truth be told, I've run into this kind of trouble enough times with "house amps" or other rigs I"m forced to use in emergencies, that I just bypass the whole issue, and use the XLR out on my amp modeler, which _does_ have a separate output level from the 1/4" output that feeds the effects return of my stage rig. _That_ might be an argument for getting rid of the separate DI level--if people are just using the rig as a power amp for a modeler.
The various output levels I've been asked for on my rig, vary from DI level almost all the way down, to all the way up, from a large variety of engineers, some of which were not very skilled, some of which I trust with my life. So I don't see the correlation between "requires me to change DI output level" and "bad engineer" that some people are proposing here.
svtb15
Inactive
- Mar 22, 2004
- 13,004
- 4,741
- Disclosures
- I play it all. Whatever works for the gig. Q+
I really dont think you need a LEVEL control. But you do need a POST/ PRE switch as well as some sort of GND switch just in case..
- Feb 12, 2006
- 61,035
- 5
- 220,956
- Disclosures
- Development Engineer-Mesa Boogie, Development Engineer-Genzler (pedals), Product Support-Genz Benz
Perhaps asking if a level control is "necessary" might suggest that testing out and working with the most common consoles for the intended market would be really helpful.
Each market adheres to somewhat different standards... the real pro market's consoles won't have any problem with either a mic or full line level (limited to around +18dBu) but if you are looking at the lower end of the market, +18dBu is going to be a real problem.
Just as important (or maybe even more so) is how well the DI can drive a 300 - 500' worth of balanced line back to the console. This isn't as uncommon as you might think... add up the mic cable to the sub-snake and you can have 100' right there, add a 300' main trunk and a 50' monitor trunk and you are at 450' of capacitive load (plus the loading of the splitter) and that's a pretty common scenario. Larger venues can have longer cable runs depending on the path taken to the console and any internediate stops that it might have. How the DI behaves into these loads can have a REALLY significant impact on the sound of the DI (either a transformer or active driven DI). I have 30+ years in the pro audio side of the industry and it's essential to understand the practical aspects of the industry that you are interfacing with, including the associated personalities.
Each market adheres to somewhat different standards... the real pro market's consoles won't have any problem with either a mic or full line level (limited to around +18dBu) but if you are looking at the lower end of the market, +18dBu is going to be a real problem.
Just as important (or maybe even more so) is how well the DI can drive a 300 - 500' worth of balanced line back to the console. This isn't as uncommon as you might think... add up the mic cable to the sub-snake and you can have 100' right there, add a 300' main trunk and a 50' monitor trunk and you are at 450' of capacitive load (plus the loading of the splitter) and that's a pretty common scenario. Larger venues can have longer cable runs depending on the path taken to the console and any internediate stops that it might have. How the DI behaves into these loads can have a REALLY significant impact on the sound of the DI (either a transformer or active driven DI). I have 30+ years in the pro audio side of the industry and it's essential to understand the practical aspects of the industry that you are interfacing with, including the associated personalities.
Being you're in the boootique end of the market I'd satisfy "needs" before pinching on the price.
When using my RBI preamp, "desk guy" says "turn it up, turn it up, that'll do", and lo, there is bass in FOH. I think if I was spending big dollars on a nice amp I'd want that option, regardless of how necesssary it actually is. Given a choice of expensive amp 1 and expensive amp 2 which is 50 dollars less and has no output level control on the DI , I know I 'm going to spend the extra 50.
Mr Genz here makes some good points.
The transformer balanced DI in my D180 has a level control. It's taken right off the amp output, no pre eq DI there! I wonder why Mesa took that off the D180 when they made the 400. Perhaps they figured it wasn't necessary.
When using my RBI preamp, "desk guy" says "turn it up, turn it up, that'll do", and lo, there is bass in FOH. I think if I was spending big dollars on a nice amp I'd want that option, regardless of how necesssary it actually is. Given a choice of expensive amp 1 and expensive amp 2 which is 50 dollars less and has no output level control on the DI , I know I 'm going to spend the extra 50.
Mr Genz here makes some good points.
The transformer balanced DI in my D180 has a level control. It's taken right off the amp output, no pre eq DI there! I wonder why Mesa took that off the D180 when they made the 400. Perhaps they figured it wasn't necessary.
If the master volume control on the amp affects the DI level, then yes, I need a DI level control (hopefully amp makers will get a clue and stop doing this).
Typically I use a DI box anyway, so whatever.
Typically I use a DI box anyway, so whatever.
My amp is an EA and they believe the same thing, to the point that you can bypass all the EQ. Yet they have a level control
This is where you have to decide what your market is. Many of us "weekend warriors" have the money for a nice bass amp, but use a small powered mixer for the PA. Quite often they *do not* have a gain control. So if the signal is too hot, you cannot use the PA.
Thanks for the advise Andy. Our engineer has been designing studio and live sound gear for almost as long, so I know he has these points covered. It's just that in my 30 years of playing, I've only had a sound man ask me to adjust the direct out level from my amp maybe two or three times and I've never had FOH not be able to get a usable signal from my amp at the board. So, in my experience, a DI level control is a feature I've simply never had any use for and I was curious whether or not others have had the same experience.
The main reason for changing my GK400RB-IV to 700RB-II two years ago is the DI level control. I gig mostly in small clubs and their PA often consist some very surprising pieces of equipment. Life is a lot easier when you can control DI level separately.
I voted No, but I have been asked to adjust my level a couple of times, but not enough to warrant it really. I guess the same goes for a ground lift switch... although it has saved my rear once or twice.
you know how murphy's law goes right... as soon as you remove it, then people will want it...
a push pull or stacked knob for separate gain and DI lvl could be cool though
I stopped using my amp's DI a long time ago, and if the amp DI is too hot for the desk then slap an outboard DI in before the amp...problem solved
I would still expect a separate preamp to have a DI lvl but not a head anymore
you know how murphy's law goes right... as soon as you remove it, then people will want it...
a push pull or stacked knob for separate gain and DI lvl could be cool though
I stopped using my amp's DI a long time ago, and if the amp DI is too hot for the desk then slap an outboard DI in before the amp...problem solved
I would still expect a separate preamp to have a DI lvl but not a head anymore
I like the option but at the same time I do like as little stuff going on in an amp as possible.
It must be quite anoying for any soundman , if a bassist starts "messing " with the level all the time during a gig, so I'd rather not have it-as long as the onboard DI is a good one, with no need for adjustment.
The level would need to be independent from master out (stage level) though.
From thinking about this more, and reading the other posts, there seem to be three criteria you need to consider:
1) Purity of signal chain. This, IMO is a non-issue in this type of product (bass guitar backline). The idea that including a volume pot in a DI would significantly degrade the signal to a board or recording console just doesn't hold water, and wouldn't seem to be a believable selling point.
2) Do most players actually need, or use the level control on a DI? And, would a DI with output fixed somewhere in the 'lower line level' range work for the vast majority of players? The answer to the first question is a clear 'no' and the answer to the second is a clear 'yes'
3) The big one... on an amp at the top of the price range in the category, would many consumers feel that the lack of this particular feature is somewhat of a negative. It seems the answer is yes, even if that feeling is based on false information (i.e., that boards require various output levels, etc.).
So, to me, it is a cost benefit analysis of the resulting sales loss from point number 3, versus the cost of a volume pot for the DI. Seem like the answer is to include it, since even a lost of 1% of sales would seem to be more costly than adding what seems like a trivial circuit.
IMO!
Sad conclusion that, but true 
kinda like an eden head that has so much eq but sounds best set flat
kinda like an eden head that has so much eq but sounds best set flat
- Status
