Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

Golden Trinity X AMT

Discussion in 'Amps, Mics & Pickups [DB]' started by Bijoux, May 15, 2002.


  1. Bijoux

    Bijoux

    Aug 13, 2001
    Denver-CO-USA
    can anyone compare the Golden Trinity mic with the AMT, is it really worth those extra few hundred dollars?
     
  2. Sam Sherry

    Sam Sherry Inadvertent Microtonalist Supporting Member

    Sep 26, 2001
    Portland, ME
    Euphonic Audio "Player"
    Prior to sinking several hundred bucks into the AMT, I talked to one gent who sells them both. He analogized it to the distinction between a Ferarri and a Camaro -- one is a fast car and the other is a thing of beauty.

    Both, obviously, get a job done, and I'm not trying to slam anybody else's gear. YMMV etc.

    For me, it came down to this: I've spent a bunch of time and money getting a good-sounding bass and a hi-fi amp and speaker. I wanted a mic of equal calibre even if it costs a couple hundred more.
     
  3. Monte

    Monte

    Jan 9, 2001
    New Albany, MS
    Bijoux,

    I'll offer another point of view. I agonized for a long while over that question and eventually tried both in Austin. My analysis was that the AMT was a lot nicer looking (didn't give you that Frankenstein look w/ wires everywhere) and seemed to be very sturdy. The sound was no better IMHO, and having had good success with K & K (and Bob), I concluded that there was WAY to big of a price difference.

    As you will conclude by looking at my profile, I no longer use the K & K. This doesn't mean I had trouble, just that I realized I don't like blended pickup and microphone sound all that much, and I had a hard time getting enough volume with mic only for those loud rooms. My solution has been a good mic on a stand for good conditions or the Schertler Dyn-B when I need a pickup. For the price of the AMT, you can buy a REALLY nice mic on a stand that will be a better mic for recording.

    Monte
     
  4. Bijoux

    Bijoux

    Aug 13, 2001
    Denver-CO-USA
    Thank you guys, that helps a lot, I must have owned most pick ups out there and I just didn't want to go the same route on mics, thanks again.
     
  5. lin fung

    lin fung Supporting Member

    Oct 9, 2002
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Hey Monte

    why do you prefer a mic on a stand rather than a specialized bass mic like the AMT or K&K? How is the sound/ performance different?
     
  6. Bijoux

    Bijoux

    Aug 13, 2001
    Denver-CO-USA
    Hey guys, I've been using the Realistic the Golden trinity mic trhu a Acoustic Image for a long time and my sound was usually boomy. I even tried to sell my AI a couple of times. Finally I had to play a gig on electric and upright, well I get lazy if I need to bring a lot of equipment,blah,blah. I tried my electric bass thru the Hi Gain Input on my Contra-AI, and my upright thru the Return effects signal, well the results were amazing. The realistic performance was real good, very close to the real sound, I use the small preamp by KK sound to blend both signals(mic & pick up), for this particular gig I had to use Contra's EX speaker, but I am sure that in a concert hall with PA system and sound guy even the Contra alone would do it.
    I just wanted to tell my experience because I know of a lot of people like me that had trouble with the Realistic/Acoustic Image combination.
     
  7. Monte

    Monte

    Jan 9, 2001
    New Albany, MS
    Sorry lin,

    Just notice this. I just prefer the sound of a good quality mic, and the C3000 or AKG D112 was much more feedback resistant. It should be a clue when the maker's of both these mics point out that they are for live use and not recording.

    Also, the positioning of these mics were just too close to the F-holes to get a true sound, in my experience. I like the mike 12-18" away from the f-holes.

    Monte
     
  8. anonymous0726

    anonymous0726 Guest

    Nov 4, 2001
    Monte,

    Perhaps the trouble that you were having with the other mics was because you were putting them in front of or too close to the f holes? The f holes are the worst place to get a good sound. They act like ports on a speaker cabinet, and so you get a really wierd tone right there. Really midrang-y and unclear. Even sounding distorted at times.

    There are two spots where I place the AMT. Right between the feet of the bridge, pretty close to the body, or directly beneathe the fingerboard and about an inch north of the bottom edge of the board. Facing straight at the body in both cases. Approach A gets better volume, and in some cases better tone, and the second method works great through my amp in combination with my pickup where not much bost is needed.

    I used to use the Crown that came with the Fishman setup, and with this I placed the mich just inside of the f hole, toward the foot of the G side of the bridge.
     
  9. Monte

    Monte

    Jan 9, 2001
    New Albany, MS
    Actually, on the Golden Trinity I did everything possible to get it as far away as possible. At one point, I had it sticking straight out just behind the bridge, but it wasn't sensitive enough and fed back when I tried to turn up the gain to compensate. Closer, and the sound wasn't all that microphone like. Listening to how it sounded on a live recording was the clincher for me.

    I should have been more clear that I have only owned the Golden Trinity. I played on the AMT in Austin, and just didn't think it was that much better than the K & K for the bread. That should be taken with a grain of salt, since I didn't have it long enough to form a complete opinion. Better players than me (Scott Colley, Pattitucci, etc) would probably disagree.

    I still liked the mic on a stand better.

    Monte
     
  10. Adrian Cho

    Adrian Cho Supporting Member

    Sep 17, 2001
    Ottawa, Canada
    I know this thread is old but I wanted to add one thing here and that is that sometimes you pay for the service and support. I've never owned a K&K product and I know Bob's service is number one but my experience with AMT has been amazing. I bought my AMT mic used and when I sent it in to get the tailpiece modification, for a little over $100 (US), they replaced the everything including the capsule (although they gave me the option to retain the capsule if I wanted to), the mount, the preamp box, cables, etc. The only thing that is still the same is the preamp electronics. So basically I got a completely new mic with a new warranty and updated with the latest mounting system. I've spoken with the mic designer Marty Paglione many times and every time he has been extremely helpful. Also, they will do custom work such as adding additional outputs on your preamp or changing the filters, etc. for very reasonable prices. So yes I do think that you pay a lot for the product initially but over the long-term I think it can sometimes work out to be a good thing.

    I should also mention WRT Monte's use of the mic on a stand that I did that for a while too. In fact I think I started doing it about the same time Monte did. With the AMT I can get pretty much the same natural reproduction with better isolation and it's a lot more convenient. With the stand-mounted mic I have to carry the mic and the stand and when I get there I have to set it all up and if for some reason I have to move my bass on the stage then I have to move my mic stand too. With the AMT with the tailpiece mount, I just get my bass out of the bag, plug in the mic to the preamp (which I can carry in the pocket of my bass bag) and into the amp and I'm ready to go.
     
  11. ctxbass

    ctxbass Supporting Member

    Nov 6, 2003
    Central Texas
  12. jazzbassnerd

    jazzbassnerd

    Aug 26, 2002
    I hope this hasn't already been discussed...
    What is the difference betweent the AMT mic and the AMT mic with super preamp or something of the sort. I have seen both and have seen no explaination as to why? Anybody know? thanks!


    --nerd
     
  13. Adrian Cho

    Adrian Cho Supporting Member

    Sep 17, 2001
    Ottawa, Canada
    There are a couple of options that AMT don't really advertise. One is the "super" version of the preamp. That's what they call it. I think the main difference is that it's a larger box and has two additional outputs in addition to the 1/4" with the volume control that (I think from memory) the normal preamp has. Both of the additional outputs are XLR and one has a ground lift. It also has an socket for a power pack which it comes with. AMT can add additional outputs. They told me about one guy that plays with a big band and wanted three XLRs on his preamp in addition to the 1/4" so he could send the outputs to various places. I believe the super preamp also has a high pass filter too that the normal preamp may not have.

    The other thing that they have is the "tailpiece" upgrade I mentioned. The reason they don't mention this is that the length of the gooseneck from the tailpiece mount to the capsule is customised to your spec depending on where you like to position the capsule. Also the isolation ring (shockmount) is bigger than the normal body mount which was originally designed for sound guys so they could quickly move it from one bass to another. The tailpiece mount stays on the bass all the time and there is a cable that connects to the preamp and plugs into the mic with a mini-XLR. I believe Patitucci has the tailpiece upgrade. When I got mine done about six months ago there were only about 13 at the time.