• 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.

Tell the difference: reddi vs no reddi

Which track was recorded with reddi in signal path?

  • 1

    Votes: 11 11.0%

  • 2

    Votes: 89 89.0%
  • Total voters
    100
#41
I'll join the minority (up to this point) who prefered track #1. Track one sounds very clear and lets the sound of an already good instrument through, whereas track two sounds a bit veiled and smoky to me, with bloated low mids and less apparent highs. I can't vote for which is the REDDI because I have no direct experience with the sound of it, and also because I won't assume the track I prefer is automatically the REDDI simply because many say it's supposed to sound "better."

One problem with this evaluation test is that "galore" does not state what device (D.I., or channel input - along with its input impedance) the bass was plugged into for the non-REDDI track. Just because there is no direct box used on the other track (if that is the case), it doesn't necessarily mean the sound of the bass was unaltered. While the intention was to have no change to the bass sound on the non-REDDI track, the fact is that whatever the bass was plugged into for the other track could have a significant impact on the sound of that track - possibly for the better, possibly for the worse. The sound of a passive bass (we weren't told it was not) is affected by the input impedance of what it is plugged into, especially if that impedance is not extremely high. If the loading on the jazz bass by the direct channel's input was excessive, the sound of that track could become degraded to the point where almost any direct box - from mediocre to boutique - would seem clearly superior by comparison. So, are we to assume that the non-REDDI track's input device (if there was one) had absolutely NO effect on the bass sound and was 100% pristine, or is it possible it did have a significant effect on the sound? In other words exactly what are we comparing the REDDI to?

Edited: Thanks to JimmyM for pointing out to me that galore DID tell us the input device for the non-REDDI track. Sorry about that, folks - I didn't realize that the Apogee is an input interface and has a high inpedance input.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: petrus61
#42
Bob, I just tried that, and it didn't come across to me that way in my AKG K141's. They sound pretty well gain matched to me...I just think the REDDI track is a little thicker to where it could push up the perceived volume. I think if you backed the REDDI track down in the mix, it would still sound better.

Figured, Galore said in the opening post that he plugged his bass directly into his Apogee interface with nothing else.
 
#45
JimmyM said:
Bob, I just tried that, and it didn't come across to me that way in my AKG K141's. They sound pretty well gain matched to me...I just think the REDDI track is a little thicker to where it could push up the perceived volume. I think if you backed the REDDI track down in the mix, it would still sound better.

Figured, Galore said in the opening post that he plugged his bass directly into his Apogee interface with nothing else.
Click to expand...
Ah, thanks Jimmy. I just checked the input impedance on this Duet model (I'm not familiar with these kinds of computer interfaces) and it's over 2 megohms - high enough to not have any negative affect on the signal and to keep it pristine.

So I'm now guessing #2 is the REDDI, though I still prefer the sound of #1!
 
#47
xed said:
Soooooo....... First off to the folks who say they're close, what did you listen to them on? Quality speakers/headphones? I'm thinking some of these "close" comments are due more to what was used to listen to them than the clips themselves.
Click to expand...

That's true, and listening at louder level makes it somewhat easier to spot it.

figuredbass said:
I'll join the minority (up to this point) who prefered track #1. Track one sounds very clear and lets the sound of an already good instrument through, whereas track two sounds a bit veiled and smoky to me, with bloated low mids and less apparent highs. I can't vote for which is the REDDI because I have no direct experience with the sound of it, and also because I won't assume the track I prefer is automatically the REDDI simply because many say it's supposed to sound "better."

One problem with this evaluation test is that "galore" does not state what device (D.I., or channel input - along with its input impedance) the bass was plugged into for the non-REDDI track. Just because there is no direct box used on the other track (if that is the case), it doesn't necessarily mean the sound of the bass was unaltered. While the intention was to have no change to the bass sound on the non-REDDI track, the fact is that whatever the bass was plugged into for the other track could have a significant impact on the sound of that track - possibly for the better, possibly for the worse. The sound of a passive bass (we weren't told it was not) is affected by the input impedance of what it is plugged into, especially if that impedance is not extremely high. If the loading on the jazz bass by the direct channel's input was excessive, the sound of that track could become degraded to the point where almost any direct box - from mediocre to boutique - would seem clearly superior by comparison. So, are we to assume that the non-REDDI track's input device (if there was one) had absolutely NO effect on the bass sound and was 100% pristine, or is it possible it did have a significant effect on the sound? In other words exactly what are we comparing the REDDI to?

Edited: Thanks to JimmyM for pointing out to me that galore DID tell us the input device for the non-REDDI track. Sorry about that, folks - I didn't realize that the Apogee is an input interface and has a high inpedance input.
Click to expand...

Good points here, I ran with reddi into mic level input and without reddi into instrument level input. Bass was passive fender jazz. I have no idea about inputs impedance loads but as I said this was a simple, quick home recording and I am more on the beginner side at this.

JimmyM said:
Bob, I just tried that, and it didn't come across to me that way in my AKG K141's. They sound pretty well gain matched to me...I just think the REDDI track is a little thicker to where it could push up the perceived volume. I think if you backed the REDDI track down in the mix, it would still sound better.

Figured, Galore said in the opening post that he plugged his bass directly into his Apogee interface with nothing else.
Click to expand...

I tried to match them gain-wise but it was done by ear or should I say by monitoring the level meter, so it might be slightly off. Well, "slightly" to me at least :)

thobbinghotrod said:
I chose #1. It sounds like less is in the signal path and sounds better to me.


Edit: I should have voted for #2. I voted for the one I liked instead of voting for which one I thought was the Reddi.
Click to expand...

I will add your vote to #2 at the end.
 
#48
bobcruz said:
I tried to match them gain-wise but it was done by ear or should I say by monitoring the level meter, so it might be slightly off. Well, "slightly" to me at least :)
Click to expand...

The average loudness difference (not peak level difference) measured at ~0.7dB with two different pieces of fairly reputable analysis software that I have on my utility PC. That's a really good job on your part IMHO. I can sometimes parse less than 1dB difference in other ABX tests, but after trying a gain-corrected pair I don't feel that that's what I'm hearing (or not) as a difference here. I might just have to fire up the DAW to see if that changes my perception. Thanks again for your efforts, and nice playin' !
 
#49
xed said:
Soooooo....... First off to the folks who say they're close, what did you listen to them on? Quality speakers/headphones? I'm thinking some of these "close" comments are due more to what was used to listen to them than the clips themselves.
Click to expand...


I agree, it was a pretty major difference between the two listening to each track through my studio monitors, where I doubt I would even hear a difference on my lap top.
 
#52
The difference is pretty big on my headphones. Voted 2# (and I swear I didnt peak'at the results), because it fits better with my mental picture of what a Reddi might sound like (not supported by any real life experience) I'm not sure if I'd absolutely prefer the #2 sound. EQ wise I prefer #1 but there's other stuff going on in #2 that sounds good too.
 
#54
Listening to both tracks on my laptop - subtle difference, no 2 sounds a little bit more organic, a bit fuller.
Listening with my Shure in-ear headphones - less subtle, the difference is a bit more obvious, still no 2 sounded more organic and fuller.
No 2 is the Reddi I think.
However, based on what I've heard in those two tracks, I'm not sure if the difference would be noticeable in a full band mix.
 
#55
I've just listened to the WAV versions from my Toshiba Satellite headphone out with Panasonic RP-HTX7 headphones (so not studio grade, but better than laptop speakers or cheap earbuds). I don't know if this is due to me hearing things better or confirmation bias from reading the thread, but the difference between the two seems a little more notable. I hear the difference between the two most on the slapped notes on the E string and on the higher notes at the end. I can picture clip two working better in a mix; the lows are tight but still solid and the high notes definitely seem a little sweeter.
I'd still say it's a subtle difference in a way that something like a Sansamp (for example) isn't. But then if the Reddi did something more pronounced than that, users would complain that it wasn't transparent enough. It might be interesting for somebody with the necessary software to look at what's going on with the Reddi - is it a small amount of harmonic distortion sweetening things, some kind of EQ curve or something else happening?
 
#58
I've never used a reddi but I do hear a difference - even listening on small desktop speakers. #2 sounds like it has more depth and color to it - if thats what a reddi is supposed to do then I'm going with 2
 
#59
caligula said:
Listening to both tracks on my laptop - subtle difference, no 2 sounds a little bit more organic, a bit fuller.
Listening with my Shure in-ear headphones - less subtle, the difference is a bit more obvious, still no 2 sounded more organic and fuller.
No 2 is the Reddi I think.
However, based on what I've heard in those two tracks, I'm not sure if the difference would be noticeable in a full band mix.
Click to expand...
A lot of people say that who never used it. I used to. Then I got one...totally noticeable.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back