• 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.

REDDI DI "THRU"

#2
The "thru" is just a direct Y off the input. No coloration, nothing but a direct connection to your bass. The point of it is that the XLR out will go to the mixer, while the "thru" will go to your amp; and this is on the premise that your amp will provide all the coloration you'll need to hear onstage.
 
#3
bongomania said:
The "thru" is just a direct Y off the input. No coloration, nothing but a direct connection to your bass. The point of it is that the XLR out will go to the mixer, while the "thru" will go to your amp; and this is on the premise that your amp will provide all the coloration you'll need to hear onstage.
Click to expand...

That's the thing that I don't quite understand...

Why would someone need two signals on stage?

Why not just completely ignore the REDDI and just go bass into amp and then the DI (internal in the AMP) to record the "amps sound" into a mixer?
 
#4
Because most amps have a DI that doesn't sound nearly as good as the REDDI.

More precisely, though, the REDDI was not ever intended to be used onstage, it was intended for the recording studio only (Peter at A-Designs told me that himself). Because of that, it did not originally have a thru jack at all; they only added it after getting lots of requests from people who were in fact using it onstage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seth Shonefeld, danosix and BurningSkies
#5
eggfart1 said:
That's the thing that I don't quite understand...

Why would someone need two signals on stage?

Why not just completely ignore the REDDI and just go bass into amp and then the DI (internal in the AMP) to record the "amps sound" into a mixer?
Click to expand...

Many people do that exactly, myself included usually. But, some people (usually sound guys with a distrust of DI's built into amps, or people concerned with possible amp failure) prefer to take a DI signal before it gets to the amp. Also lots of tube amps don't have a built in DI or don't like the sound of their built-in DI (as Bongo mentions) so people want a DI to color their sound to approximate what they are hearing onstage without having to mic up the cab.

Different tools for different folks.

The REDDI is a great sounding DI for those like a lot of color to their sound, FWIW.
 
#6
bongomania said:
Because most amps have a DI that doesn't sound nearly as good as the REDDI.

More precisely, though, the REDDI was not ever intended to be used onstage, it was intended for the recording studio only (Peter at A-Designs told me that himself). Because of that, it did not originally have a thru jack at all; they only added it after getting lots of requests from people who were in fact using it onstage.
Click to expand...

The part that confuses me is:

If the REDDI is going into a mixer to record, you are getting the tone of the recording solely through the REDDI, not the amp as well. Correct?

That being said, if the THRU is connected to an amplifier and the REDDI doesn't color this sound at all, isn't it weird to record only the sound of the REDDI and hear something completely different on stage that's based only on the tone of your amp?
 
#7
eggfart1 said:
The part that confuses me is:

If the REDDI is going into a mixer to record, you are getting the tone of the recording solely through the REDDI, not the amp as well. Correct?

That being said, if the THRU is connected to an amplifier and the REDDI doesn't color this sound at all, isn't it weird to record only the sound of the REDDI and hear something completely different on stage that's based only on the tone of your amp?
Click to expand...

You may be talking about live sound vs. recording.

In a live situation, what you hear on stage would be your amp as a monitor, and what the audience hears FOH would be the REDDI. Most venues don't have adequate monitoring for bass, so you'd need a way to hear yourself...that's where the amp comes in to play.

For recording, you can do whatever you want...but most people would go: Bass-->REDDI-->Recording equipment
You would use the THRU if you wanted to mic your amp and record that as well. Otherwise there is no reason to use it in a recording environment.
 
#8
bassgod0dmw said:
What you hear on stage would be your amp as a monitor, and what the audience hears FOH would be the REDDI. Most venues don't have adequate monitoring for bass, so you'd need a way to hear yourself...that's where the amp comes in to play.
Click to expand...

But the amp wouldn't be becoming up any of the tube sound of the REDDI. The amp would just amplify the amps own internal sound, whereas the REDDI would be sending to the recorder only the sound of the REDDI...seems kinda odd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jwood
#10
eggfart1 said:
If the REDDI is going into a mixer to record, you are getting the tone of the recording solely through the REDDI, not the amp as well. Correct?
Click to expand...
If you're recording with a DI, like the REDDI, there's no amp in the picture at all anyway. Well, I mean you might also have an amp if that's how a given bassist likes to hear themselves while recording, but that's just an exception for some specific people.
eggfart1 said:
if the THRU is connected to an amplifier and the REDDI doesn't color this sound at all, isn't it weird to record only the sound of the REDDI and hear something completely different on stage that's based only on the tone of your amp?
Click to expand...
Recording studios and stages are two different places, with two different sets of expectations. You can record from onstage, but again that's an exception, not the norm.
 
#11
it's all about options. as many different sounds and textures to record as possible.
I'd use the REDDI to the house because that's what the soundguy wants to hear, but use my amp EQ'd so i can easily hear myself onstage.
or when recording i'd use the REDDI and the DI from my amp (and if possible, mic my cab) so that I've got 3 solid usable tones that can be shaped to fit the need of the song. If the REDDI works best for 1 song, but the cab mic works best for another, i don't have to rerecord anything. we've already got it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redwookie
#12
Interesting, thanks for the information. Would I theoretically be able to use the "THRU" as an effects loop when recording? Like have the REDDI as my main signal going into a mixer and DAW and then have the THRU going into an effects pedal input with the XLR out on the effects to go into the mixer/DAW? That way I could blend the two signals.

I'd ideally like to be able to get some studio monitors for tracking my home bass recordings (direct through REDDI, apogee duet 2 and Logic Pro) but I can't find any monitors that can really control a bass guitar...
 
#13
You can do what you suggest, but it's not an effects loop at all...so don't confuse that term. Just out of curiosity, why do you want to do that? Just add the effects in during mixing/post. What effect has an XLR output on it?

Studio monitors are usually designed to give a flat signal response, so I'm not really sure what you mean that you can't find any that can control bass guitar.

Methinks you should do some serious research before buying anything. The REDDI is a pretty hefty investment. It would be silly to buy it without understanding or or being able to use it to it's fullest potential.
 
#14
eggfart1 said:
Interesting, thanks for the information. Would I theoretically be able to use the "THRU" as an effects loop when recording? Like have the REDDI as my main signal going into a mixer and DAW and then have the THRU going into an effects pedal input with the XLR out on the effects to go into the mixer/DAW? That way I could blend the two signals.
Click to expand...

Absolutely this would work. Not actually an "effects loop" in this case, but a Y split for dry, REDDI --> board and effects --> board.

Many people take multiple sources for recording bass. One of the many joys and possible headaches of recording. ;-)

Edit: ^^Beat me to it!
 
#15
bassgod0dmw said:
You can do what you suggest, but it's not an effects loop at all...so don't confuse that term. Just out of curiosity, why do you want to do that? Just add the effects in during mixing/post. What effect has an XLR output on it?

Studio monitors are usually designed to give a flat signal response, so I'm not really sure what you mean that you can't find any that can control bass guitar.

Methinks you should do some serious research before buying anything. The REDDI is a pretty hefty investment. It would be silly to buy it without understanding or or being able to use it to it's fullest potential.
Click to expand...

I like to record wet sometimes with a tiny bit of external compression and some effects.

RE monitors: I've tried a bunch with a decent woofer size (8-10") and they can't handle notes below the third string A on a bass guitar...Even if I play softly, the speakers just rumble oor bottom out, or drop in volume.
 
#18
Here's the thing, a lot of bassists think it is a good idea to send "their sound" to the FOH desk by using a post out on the back of their head... while this can be better in some cases, in the majority of situations, that eqing you are doing to your signal to make it sound the way you want through your amp is making it sound completely different out of the PA, because the PA system's speaker setup sounds very different to the way your bass cab does (in most cases)

So ideally to give the sound engineer the best possible sound to work with, you should be sending him a line from a DI before your amp

Something like the REDDI or U5 is designed to send a slightly more colored signal than your straight bass, so it sounds better but doesn't mess with the FOH eq

Ps. of course I am generalizing though and "your" way is obviously better
 
#20
I would like the option to have the Reddi do it's thing into the amp input too, whether I decide to run it in to the power amp in via effects loop or directly into the input.

Kirk would this be a good thing into the SL900?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back