• 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.

The best DI box for bass

#121
Always an interesting topic. I always see these posts about 'this amp has the best DI ever' or 'the sound man came up and complimented me on the DI and my tone':p

I don't think I've done a gig in 40 years where, if I end up talking to the guy running front of house, he didn't say 'bass sounded great' and if asked (if I'm using a new amp for the first time) that the DI was 'great'.

I am one who likes a clean tone, and have pretty good instruments. My backline doesn't sound that much different than what I consider a good 'direct' tone in either the studio or front of house (minus the awful, over hyped subs that many sound board guys insist on... not much control over that). So, a pre EQ send from a decent amp works wonderfully for me, the band, and the audience.

I also can't imagine EQing from stage using either the amp's tone controls (post EQ) or an external DI with tone controls, and expect that to help a soundperson get a good sound out of the bass in any way.

Regarding super expensive DI's, I guess if I was playing concert-level venues, and was the type of bass player that had a massively wide, clean, articulate tone that was key to the performance (ala Marcus Miller), I can see spending massive dollars on a U5. I can also see those who like a bit of 'vintage tube' tone in their tone spending some cash for a REDDI or similar thing.

For the rest of us, it is either 'clean and accurate' which virtually all but the cheapest amps provide with their pre EQ DI's, or totally grind/distortion, which has a lot to do with the cabinet and would typically require mic'ing.

For most 'mid level' players, the DI coming out of the back of their amp works wonderfully. IMO and IME.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bassomane
#123
JimmyM said:
They might. People certainly notice the difference between a $500 stereo and the sound in the control room at Abbey Road ;) Never been one for playing to the lowest common denominator at my gigs.
Click to expand...

True, but there's also a difference b/w playing to the lowest common denominator and a real-world trade-off.

It's one thing to gig a ratty, underpowered, badly maintained, and buzzy sounding SS Crate bass combo amp and shrug it off saying "nobody in the audience can tell the difference." That's apathy.

It's another thing though to have gear you like that isn't the world's sexiest. Compared to a REDDI, a JDI is not an unconscionable compromise *if what I'm after is a JDI tone.* (Personally, while I like the JDI and have at times kept one in the gear bag, it's not my DI ideal. But that doesn't make it always a cop-out choice, the ugly-sister for those who can't score a REDDI.)

Maybe more controversially, even if we're obsessive about gear, at some point most players reach a level of diminishing returns. Once I get to the point at which my gear lets me sound the way I want to on stage and in the house, any additional gear experiments are about my gear hobby, not about what my bass rig *needs.*

For example, I have a modded UA solo/610 that I actually like a lot, and it's a better solution for me than a REDDI on a number of fronts. Now, in a no-compromise world, I'd rack a modded UA 6176 instead for the gigs that the solo/610 covers. But honestly, that would be overkill. I'd like it, and some FOH engineers would like it (although I like the solo/610 now, and I can't say that most FOH guys are p1$$ing themselves with regret when they see what I'm sending them). But the difference b/w the little bit better that I might like the 6176 (on the best sounding stages) doesn't merit the extra purchase.
 
#124
if you can afford it, the Reddi. that's what I recorded through when band were in the studio. but they are like 700 bones, American.

recently read an article on a Firefly DI box that is supposedly great for bass. 600 American.

if you got the bread, that's they way to go. OR- sansamp tech 21 bass driver DI-got mine used for 120 bucks.

The MXR M80 is pretty bad ass, with a dirt channel and all, but I prefer the tone I get out of my sans.
 
#128
alembicguy said:
J48 -passive
JDI-active
Click to expand...

+1 To more specifically answer his question, any DI will work with any bass. The issue with the passive JDI with a passive bass is that you will lose some upper treble response to the board. This actually can be a good thing for some players, and not so much for others.

So, for both active and passive, to get the most 'accurate' signal to the board, it would be the J48 (or the Countryman).

GREAT DI's, and they will sound just as good as a pre EQ send from your amp:smug:
 
#129
I carry the active JDI DI because I have encountered sound guys who absolutely refuse to take a signal from the DI of my amp. I used to argue, but, now I just carry the JDI with me.
 
#130
jnewmark said:
I carry the active JDI DI because I have encountered sound guys who absolutely refuse to take a signal from the DI of my amp. I used to argue, but, now I just carry the JDI with me.
Click to expand...

Once I tell a sound person that I will send him a pre EQ out from my amp, I have never, ever had a sound person say no. Since most pre EQ DI's on all but the cheapest amps sound great, sound persons are much more worried about DI's that are impacted by stage EQ and master volume controls than the 'concept' of taking a DI off an amp.

All you need to do is talk to them for a second so they know you aren't clueless, and all is good. Of course, the JID (which is passive by the way) works great, and the only downside to that is carrying it, and having one more thing between your bass and amp (some DI's are not pure pass throughs and will change your tone a bit going into the amp.... although the JDI is pretty transparent.
 
#131
Canada’s Radial Engineering has announced the release of their new Firefly tube direct box, a fully discrete class-A unity gain amplifier designed for both studio and live performance applications. The Firefly begins with two inputs, each featuring separate level controls enabling optimal gain settings for each instrument. The inputs can be switched from either the front panel or via the optional JR2 footswitch and the instrument signal is immediately routed to a tuner output that is always on.


Radial-Firefly-Tube-DI-1-h.jpg
 
#132
I have three DI's: Countryman 85, Radial J48, and BSS AR-133. They are all good but the BSS gets the nod as the best!

They don't get as much love as the others do on here, but they just sound right, can't explain it. All the features too. Engineers have bought one after hearing mine.

I like all my DI's but if I could only keep one it would be the AR-133.
 
#133
That was over a year ago, right?
Pretty sure I've seen used one flip here anyway.
Reviews well, and is a little less than the reddi.


mjac28 said:
Canada’s Radial Engineering has announced the release of their new Firefly tube direct box, a fully discrete class-A unity gain amplifier designed for both studio and live performance applications. The Firefly begins with two inputs, each featuring separate level controls enabling optimal gain settings for each instrument. The inputs can be switched from either the front panel or via the optional JR2 footswitch and the instrument signal is immediately routed to a tuner output that is always on.


Radial-Firefly-Tube-DI-1-h.jpg
Click to expand...
 
#136
KJung said:
Once I tell a sound person that I will send him a pre EQ out from my amp, I have never, ever had a sound person say no. Since most pre EQ DI's on all but the cheapest amps sound great, sound persons are much more worried about DI's that are impacted by stage EQ and master volume controls than the 'concept' of taking a DI off an amp.

All you need to do is talk to them for a second so they know you aren't clueless, and all is good. Of course, the JID (which is passive by the way) works great, and the only downside to that is carrying it, and having one more thing between your bass and amp (some DI's are not pure pass throughs and will change your tone a bit going into the amp.... although the JDI is pretty transparent.
Click to expand...

Sorry, the one I have is the J48, not the JDI. The J48 is active. Usually when I have to use it is when we are opening up for a bigger name group,with their own PA, and don't want to listen to any requests from the opening act. It's usually a 40 minute set and I'm out of there, so I just go along to get along. The last time it happened, the sound company had the same DI as me for everybody.
 
#137
One of the things that can make a huge difference live with PA support
Is getting your stage rig generally in phase with the front of house.
You can rotate phase on a little labs phase tool/reamping DI tool.
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/nov03/articles/littlelabs.htm
Works great for mixing two sources without running into phase cancellation problems in studio or bigger gigs.:bassist:
 
#139
KJung said:
Always an interesting topic. I always see these posts about 'this amp has the best DI ever' or 'the sound man came up and complimented me on the DI and my tone':p

I don't think I've done a gig in 40 years where, if I end up talking to the guy running front of house, he didn't say 'bass sounded great' and if asked (if I'm using a new amp for the first time) that the DI was 'great'.

I am one who likes a clean tone, and have pretty good instruments. My backline doesn't sound that much different than what I consider a good 'direct' tone in either the studio or front of house (minus the awful, over hyped subs that many sound board guys insist on... not much control over that). So, a pre EQ send from a decent amp works wonderfully for me, the band, and the audience.

I also can't imagine EQing from stage using either the amp's tone controls (post EQ) or an external DI with tone controls, and expect that to help a soundperson get a good sound out of the bass in any way.

Regarding super expensive DI's, I guess if I was playing concert-level venues, and was the type of bass player that had a massively wide, clean, articulate tone that was key to the performance (ala Marcus Miller), I can see spending massive dollars on a U5. I can also see those who like a bit of 'vintage tube' tone in their tone spending some cash for a REDDI or similar thing.

For the rest of us, it is either 'clean and accurate' which virtually all but the cheapest amps provide with their pre EQ DI's, or totally grind/distortion, which has a lot to do with the cabinet and would typically require mic'ing.

For most 'mid level' players, the DI coming out of the back of their amp works wonderfully. IMO and IME.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything said here. I have a REDDI, and not because I am a high end player or get hired for big shows - but simply because I really really like the way it sounds. It is the only DI that I prefer over an amp on nearly all levels. And, (this is the main reason) I can afford it and I enjoy playing through it. A radial, or any other quality small box, would most certainly do the job for my level, but they are not nearly as fun to me.
 
#140
Gab124 said:
I agree with everything said here. I have a REDDI, and not because I am a high end player or get hired for big shows - but simply because I really really like the way it sounds. It is the only DI that I prefer over an amp on nearly all levels. And, (this is the main reason) I can afford it and I enjoy playing through it. A radial, or any other quality small box, would most certainly do the job for my level, but they are not nearly as fun to me.
Click to expand...
Me neither. They're so little fun that I used to hate using a DI and would mic a cab instead. And you don't even necessarily need a top notch PA to make the REDDI pop. Even in average PA's, it sounds great and is very noticeable.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back