From: dsohn72781@aol.com (DSohn72781)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic
Subject: Re: Best Undersaddle Piezo, IYO?
Date: 11 Sep 1997 03:01:25 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Thanks for all the informative responses!! I've finally come to a
decision after talking to well informed guitarists/builders/engineers like
Tom Loredo, Jason Nieh, Greg Gualatieri (sp?) of Pendulum Audion, Bo from
L.R. Baggs, Jim Kaufman of Sunrise, and many others, not to forget the
GREAT advice on this newsgroup, as well as my guitar builder himself, Del
Langejans.
If you're curious, this is what it's come down to for me: Sunrise and
internal mic hooked up to a L.R. Baggs Duet II (they're working on a new
one, btw) going to stereo endpin jack. Classic LB6 undersaddle going to
separate jack (I decided on the LB6 because it's just a good, standard
pickup, which I can switch with something else later on, if I need to).
For small gigs, with short set-up time, I'll just use the Duet system
straight into my effects; then into the house board. For medium gigs, I'll
do the same thing, except preamp the signals externally through my Rane
AP13 (for more EQ). For large-venue gigs, I'll go Sunrise/mic into one
channel of Pendulum's SPS-1, then LB6 into the other. I've been
researching my options for over a year now, and I believe--for my purposes,
anyway--that this is the best way to go.
I will keep you updated and posted of my set-up's performance, and I am
waiting in enormous anticipation for my Langejans R-6. If you have not
played one, pick one up--you'll never put it down!! And Del Langejans is
not only a wonderful builder, but one of the nicest, polite, and kind
individuals God ever put on the planet--seriously! This is not an ad, just
the truth from my experiences. Del is such a humble man, he would probably
not even like me plugging his intruments on the internet like this. But if
you're looking for a new guitar, get a Langejans--you won't be
disappointed. Jason Nieh runs a web page for him at:
http://www.guitarnotes.com/langejans, and if you want to order, call Del at
(616) 396-1776. Tell him Eddie sent you...:)
Thanks,
Ed
--------------------------------
From: Tom Loredo
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic
Subject: Re: Best Undersaddle Piezo, IYO?
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 16:51:46 -0400
Organization: Cornell University
Hi-
Boy, this must be pickup month on RMMGA. Or perhaps people have
finally gotten tired of the "best guitar" thread and think
a "best pickup" should replace it....
Though this thread has kind of exploded, getting back to the
original topic.... I don't think I believe there is one "best"
saddle-position pickup available. I have heard great sounds and
poor sounds in a variety of instruments using all four of the
most popular pickups (Baggs LB6 saddle pickup, Baggs Ribbon
under-saddle, Fishman Acoustic Matrix (2 types, actually!), and
Highlander). I do not have enough personal experience to know
to what extent issues such as guitar type, string gauges,
saddle material, etc., correlate with type of pickup (ie,
do small-body guitars sound better with the LB6, and dreadnaughts
with a Matrix, as a for-instance?). The experience I do have
does suggest strongly to me that the experience of your guitar
tech/luthier may have more to do with the success of your sound
than the type of pickup. That is, if Eric Aceto (luthier who
installed several Highlanders for Martin Simpson) installs
a Highlander for you, it may get you a better sound that if he
installed a Matrix. But *your* tech, lacking Eric's experience,
may get you a better sound with a Matrix than he could with a
Highlander (the Highlander has a reputation for being a bit
finicky about installation). If you already have someone who
you know will be installing the pickup, that person is the first
person you should be talking to in order to find out what they
have experience with.
There are also other issues that have to be weighed in, alluded
to in Larry's earlier post in another thread, and also discussed
in a couple of the articles archived at AG (www.museweb.com/ag/)
in the "Technology:Amplification" section. These issus include expense,
whether you want a battery in the guitar, how complicated you want
the setup to be, planning for the future
(the Highlander---a quality pickup for sure---requires an endpin
hole somewhat larger than other pickups, complicating somewhat
your future choices)...
I personally have a Baggs LB6. When I got it 5 years ago or so,
it was pretty much the best thing available---it sounded much better
than competing products by Fishman and Shadow, for example. But
the technology has come a long way since then, and as I said,
several manufacturers have quality pickups available. Personally,
I've grown less and less fond of the sound of *any* undersaddle
pickup, and am getting more and more interested in soundboard pickups
such as those made by McIntyre, True Tones, etc.. I'm in an experimenting
phase, and will certainly report here of my experiences if they seem
worthy of public consideration... 8-)
Changing topics to the Sunrise/piezo combination.... I have a Sunrise
as well. In my experience, combining the Sunrise with an internal
(or external mic), or combining a piezo with a mic, gives a more authentically
acoustic sound than combining a Sunrise with a piezo. However,
given that you are not talking about a solo acoustic situation, I
think Robert's advice is probably right on the money in terms of
getting you a reasonably acoustic sound, but keeping feedback problems
minimal. You'll probably want to be able to mix and EQ the two
signals, but if you run the signals into separate channels of a
mixer with a good EQ section (preferably at least 3 bands with
swept mids), you can probably get away without any further preamps/EQ,
at least at first. The Sunrise will definitely sound better thru
a hi-Z direct box (like a Countryman or the solid state Sunrise DI),
or thru a Baggs Para Acoustic DI (highly recommended!), but it is not
nearly as sensitive to loading as are bare piezos. The Highlander
(and the Matrix and the Ribbon System) has a built-in preamp, and
can go right to the mixer (thru a direct box if needed to convert
to balanced).
Good luck, y'all!
-Tom Loredo
--------------------------------
From: lpattis@xmission.com (Larry Pattis)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic
Subject: Dual channel pre-amps, pick-ups & more...
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 14:02:59 -0600
Organization: XMission Internet (801 539 0900)
This has been a topic asked about time and time again on rmmga. I don't
consider my opinion the final word on this topic, but I do have
experience with all of the gear currently on the market (and some still
being tested!). I will try to organize my thoughts on this topic, and
perhaps save the file for re-posting as these same questions are asked down
the road....do let me know hwether or not you find this lengthy post of
use.
Dual channel pre-amps:
The reason these are needed (vs. just using a Mackie board) are many.
Primarily, if your dual system requires external phantom power for a
condenser mic, the Mackie's 48v is too much. Also, the Mackie has no
phase shift buttons, and if there is a phase problem between your two
pick-ups, well, you're in deep trouble.
Pendulum SPS-1:
The most expensive (by far) of the group. Dual 3-band parametric EQ that
*requires* a knowledgeable user. Parametric EQ's are not great at finding
feedback under duress (on-stage with the system howling), but a competent
user will get pinpoint accuracy with the Pendulum product. To me, the
Pendulum is *so* accurate that the worst of the saddle transducers (quack)
and Sunrise (electric guitar sound) are much more apparent than with the
other systems. In other words, the SPS-1 is so good that I don't like it.
It does double as a two channel mic pre-amp for studio use, and is a very
flexible piece of gear. I seem to remember a separate tuner out jack
which is a good thing. I can't remember if the SPS-1 allows you to send a
combined signal to a mixing board (vs. two separate signals)...if you don't
want the sound man messing with the relational volume between the
pick-ups, this is a good thing to be able to do. The downside with sending
a single signal is that if you run a mic and it is feeding back, the EQ
adjustments for the sound guy are then not separate. It all depends on
whether or not you have a good sound guy, on the road this is a hard thing
to count on. Lots of people swear by the SPS-1, I don't.
Rane AP-13:
Seven bands of graphic EQ for each pick-up. Easier to notch out in an
emergency situation than the Pendulum, but only at their pre-set
frequencies. Lots of i/o's for convenience, including the tuner out
jack. Combined or separate outputs are available.
Fishman Blender:
Much less EQ capabilities than either the SPS-1 or the AP-13. The main
benefit of the Blender is it's portability and on stage use. It clamps to
a mic stand, rather than being a rack space unit. Also, the available EQ
(low & high for each channel) seems to be enough for a lot of performers.
Combined or separate outputs are available. No separate tuner out, but
you can use the transducer send jack for this.
Fishman Pocket Blender:
The difference between the Blender & Pocket Blender are the following: No
headphone out, no ability to send separate signals to a mixing board, and
it is much smaller. It does have an additional hi cut feature on the
mic/Sunrise side, which is useful. This is the unit that I use. It gives
me all the quick & dirty EQ that I need on-stage, and it is the most
portable unit available. It is also the least expensive unit, which was
not the deciding factor for me, but may be of interest to the group.
Pick-up/mic combinations:
Good rich lows: Saddle transducers (quacky high end), Sunrise pick-ups
(electric sounding highs).
Good highs/woody sound: Internal mini-mics, Soundboard transducers. Both
are a bit feedback prone in the low frequency ranges.
My opinion is that you want one from each category, so that you can blend
a balanced sound. Most people roll off the trebles on the saddle
transducer or Sunrise, while rolling off a bit of the bass on their mic or
SBT. This gives horrible separate sounds (when you're experimenting), but
works great when combined for the final sound...the whole purpose of the
dual systems. Or you can build your own pre-amp like Tom Loredo and
combine three signals...but I thought I would limit this discussion to
available equipment.
Saddle transducers:
To me, the differences between saddle transducer sounds are minimal. They
all need an additional mic or pick-up to fill in the high EQ range, where
they all have that transducer quack. Martin Simpson gets exceptional
sound out of his Highlander, but he always uses an external mic. Martin
has an extremely percussive style that does seem to work best for the
Highlander. The only thing I dislike about the Highlander vs. all other
transducers is that it requires a larger than standard endpin hole.
Switching back to any other endpin jack is then problematic. I use the
Fishman Matrix because it is consistent, and easy to run a mini-mic (or
other pick-up) through. The Baggs, to the best of my information, still
does not permit you to run a separate mini-mic through their Ribbon
w/pre-amp system and receive phantom power. Correct me if I am wrong,
please. EMG, Highlander, Matrix, etc.....all the same basic sound to me.
Best if run in conjunction with a mini-mic or SBT.
Soundboard transducers:
Two good choices here, the Fishman SBT, or the McIntyre (which is less
prone to feedback in the low frequency range). Nice and woody high
frequencies. Run these with either the Sunrise or any saddle transducer
for the best combined sound.
Sunrise pick-ups:
The best of all the magnetic type pick-ups. I don't like clamping anything
to my soundboard, so I no longer use it, but I have heard great sound with
them. Best used with a SBT or mic, a *lot* of folks use them with saddle
transducers. I disagree with this type of use, because the Sunrise sounds
more electric on the high frequency side (it has exquisite lows), so I want
to roll off the highs on both the Sunrise and the saddle transducers....
Internal mics:
A lot of different ones to choose from, AKG, Crown, Joe Mills, etc. I
prefer the Mills, it sounds good no matter where you place it, and tends to
feedback less on the low side of the EQ situation. Best if used with a
Sunrise or a saddle transducer.
Combined Internal Systems:
Anything that doesn't allow you to differentiate the EQ on, ummm, sucks,
IMHO. For all the reasons listed above. I am aiming at pro sound,
however, so these systems (the Baggs comes to mind first) really do work
pretty well. You can never achieve optimal sound when you only have a
relational volume control, and no separate EQ ability. Just my opinion.
The above comments are generalities; for instance I have heard pretty
damned good sound out of a combination that I do not recommend, i.e.,
Sunrise & saddle transducer. Also, the Pendulum is a damned good unit, and
may give you everything you want, especially for fine tuning EQ
issues...and therefore is worth every penny.
Since I am not publishing this in a guitar magazine, I don't have to worry
(too much) about pissing anyone off. However, I am friendly with Jim
Kaufman, Lloyd Baggs, Greg Gualtieri, Larry Fishman, Joe Mills, and the
people at Rane, so I hope they don't mind me posting my opinions here.
Hey, that's what rmmga is all about. Disclaimer: When properly combined,
you should be able to get great pro sound out of all of the gear discussed
above!!!!
Larry Pattis
--------------------------------
From: "Gerardo"
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic
Subject: RMC pick up
Date: 28 Aug 1997 16:57:35 GMT
Organization: CTS Network Services
I installed an RMC on a guitar and really like the sound. I think David
Wilcox uses some other effects that take some of the purity of the RMC away
(in my opinion). The RMC pick up has literally no feedback problems and
the sound is as acoustic as it gets. I understand that Phil Keaggy has
just installed and RMC on one of his Langejans guitars, James Taylor will
try the RMC pick ups system this coming week in Nashville, David Wilcox
has installed RMC pick ups on all of his guitars, Kirk Sand uses them
almost exclusively now (Doyle Dykes guitars) and also Tom Bresh is using
them. I have been very unhappy with almost all of the amplification
systems I have used (including the Baggs Duet). The ones that have worked
the best for me and my style of playing are: L6 Baggs through a Baggs
ParaAcoustic ID box, or a Sunrise through a Sunrise pre amp....and now the
RMC. I respect Tom Loredo's opinion, but I would recommend the RMC pick
up.
Gerardo
--------------------------------
Subject: True Tone M7 pickup review
From: brianm8888@aol.com (BrianM8888)
Date: 1997/05/05
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic
I just had this pickup installed on my Taylor 812C. I had been researching
pickups for some time, and had tried numerous systems including the
Fishman Blender and Baggs Duet. I had never tried the True Tone M7, but
had read about it on Tom Loredo's web page,
http://astrosun.tn.cornell.edu/staff/loredo/ag/technology.html. The brief
discussion there was enough to inspire me to call the manufacturer. He
gave a very convincing sales pitch. I had read the comments, pro and con,
on rmmga and decided to take the plunge and buy this pickup without having
heard it.
Different people want different things from a pickup. My desire was to
approximate, as closely as possible, the sound I get with a mic placed
just above the sound hole, with the convenience of a built in pickup.
I am *thrilled* with the M7. The sound is substantially better to my ear
(closer to an external mic sound) than either of the dual source systems
I'd been able to test. We played to a crowd of 2,000 last Friday night in
an amphitheater. I ran the guitar direct, and was surprised to get a
handful of comments regarding my tone and the pickup from guitarists in
the crowd. The other members of my band, including our producer/sound man,
were also very pleased.
I definitely believe the two narrow-band mics contribute to a better
overall sound than the single mic and bridge transducer systems (see the
WEB page mentioned above for details on the M7 transducers). The bridge
sensor also produces a good "foundation" sound by itself, although it
does, as some rmmga posts have suggested, pick up an inordinate but
tolerable amount of surface noise. I adjusted the tone and volume first on
the bridge sensor (you can adjust the tone only on the bridge sensor, not
on the mics), then add mic levels to taste. Because the mics are narrow
banded to high and low frequencies, you essentially have the means to add
high and low tones to the overall sound.
Our other guitarist also plays a Taylor with a Fishman under saddle
transducer (which I've always liked). There was no comparison between the
amplified sound of our two guitars. His guitar sounded good, but mine
sounded tremendously "acoustic".
Regarding feedback: An under saddle transducer like my friend's will be
undeniably less prone to feedback than the bridge sensor and two internal
mics of the M7. However, I found the feedback of this system quite
manageable. Also, I don't believe it is more prone to feedback than the
Blender or Duet systems that I had tried (although I haven't yet had the
chance to do a side by side to test this. If I do, I will post the
results), and certainly no more prone to feedback than an external mic
placed in front of the guitar. Friday night I split the signal with a
direct box, with a low impedance signal going to the house and a high
impedance signal running into my volume pedal and then into my amp. That
allows me to adjust my amp volume (used only as a monitor) without
affecting the house. I had to be aware of the feedback potential and
avoid exposing my guitar directly to my amp, but I never had a problem
with it. I keep my amp at ear level directly behind me. I could pump out
plenty of gain in this position without a problem. If you are relying on
your guitar being fully present in a single monitor mix you might have a
problem at high levels.
Also, the system only gives a single output. The manufacturer told me that
they did this to keep the cost of the unit down. Frankly, I don't think
the M7 would benefit in regards to feedback from multiple outputs anyway.
It seems to me that the bridge sensor is more prone to feedback than the
under saddle transducers of the Baggs and Fishman systems. Cutting the
mics to your stage source wouldn't eliminate feedback the way it would
with the Blender or Duet. The mics of the M7 don't seem any more prone to
feedback than the Blender or Duet mics.
The control device is great. It attaches with Velcro just inside the sound
hole. You have easy access to volume controls for each of the two mics and
a master volume. The tone and the volume controls for the bridge sensor
are located deeper into the sound hole. You have to push your fingers past
your strings to reach them. You can do that easily enough, but certainly
not while playing.
My guess is that some of the ideas that this system has introduces (a
three source system, noninvasive mounting of all hardware, and the
in-soundhole control box) will be imitated and improved on in future
iterations from True Tone as well as other manufacturers. However, to my
ear, this is the best system currently on the market for giving plug and
play convenience with a microphone quality sound. Two thumbs up!
Regards,
Brian
--------------------------------
Subject: Baggs Ribbon/Mic/Rane AP 13 - A Review
From: speierg@aol.com (SpeierG)
Date: 1995/07/21
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic
Hello RMMGA,
Some time ago I posted a few questions in an attempt to gleen some of this
newsgroup's vast wisdom concerning acoustic guitar amplification. Well,
at long last I've finally installed my new set-up in my beloved Martin J40
and I thought I'd post a review of this system for those of you who might
be interested.
Basically, I have an L.R. Baggs Ribbon under-the-saddle (UTS) transducer
and a Beyerdynamic MCE 5.9 mini-condenser microphone both running to a TRS
end-pin jack. From there I run a stereo cable into a Rane AP 13 acoustic
instrument preamplifier. Currently, I'm going from the Rane to my
electric guitar amplifier (much less than ideal), but when I perform I
will be going directly to the board from the Rane. Here's the cost
breakdown for those of you who are curious:
L.R. Baggs Ribbon - I paid about $70 for the Ribbon without the Baggs
preamp that is usually sold with it.
Beyerdynamic MCE 5.9 - I paid about $170 for the unterminated mic.
Rane AP 13 - around $400.
So, how does it sound? Well, I am yet to hear it through a nice PA
system, but even through my amp (a Rivera 30 12) it sounds great. I can't
wait to play it through a PA (no gigs lined up until August 18th). I'll
make another posting once I've checked this system out in a live
performance environment.
The Ribbon is VERY nice. I firmly believe that proper installation is the
most critical factor with UTS transducers. Mine was certainly done right.
A craftsman by the name of Steve Peck in Richmond, VA (e-mail me if you
want his phone number) did a very thorough job, making sure that the
string to string balance was nice and even and also making sure that the
element was seated deep enough in the bridge to get a nice woody sound.
This pickup sounds as good if not better than any other UTS pickup I've
heard. I'm quite impressed.
The Beyerdynamic mic however, really rounds out the sound beautifully.
The Rane allows you to mix the signals coming from the pickup and mic and
when you play with just the pickup and then have someone slowly turn up
the level on the microphone you can immediately hear the difference. The
sound becomes more crisp, natural and resonant. The only complaint I have
about the Beyerdynamic has nothing to do with the mic itself (which sounds
superb!). The mounting device provided with the mic leaves you with
basically no choice as to where the mic points when mounted to the cross
bracing inside the guitar. It is an omni-directional mic, so it still
picks up the sound, however, I can't help but think that if I could
experiment with the placement of the mic I might be able to coax an even
more pleasing sound out of this set up. I'm going to try to pick up a
good mic clip for this purpose and experiment with different mic
placements. For now, I can certainly live with the sound I'm getting.
The Rane is a great unit. I can't say much about how it compares to the
other rack-mount preamp units on the market since I really don't have any
experience with them (Pendulum, etc.). It came down to price for me.
From what I could tell, I would have had to pay quite a bit more for a
comparable Pendulum unit. However, I have no complaints about the Rane.
Like I said before, I haven't performed live with this thing yet, but from
just playing around with it, I really like it. You can adjust the levels
of the mic and pickup independently, you also have 7-band graphic EQ for
each signal (currently, I'm boosting the bass and mids a bit for the
pickup and cutting the highs while doing just the opposite for the mic).
I'm also running an Alesis Quadraverb into the effects loop of the Rane
for reverb. The Rane provides controls for mixing the wet and dry
signals. There is also a dedicated tuner output which feeds off the
pickup signal. This will be very nice during performances. The Rane is
very quiet and clean. I really couldn't be more pleased with the sound
reproduction.
Overall, I feel like it was all money well spent. I highly recommend this
set up. Thanks to everyone out there who advised me when I was agonizing
over what to purchase! Feel free to e-mail me with any questions. I'll
be out of town for about a week but I'll try to respond as soon as I
return.
Peace,
Greg Speier
About Guitar Notes | Add A Site | Advertising | Contact Us | Guestbook | Make Us Your Home
© 1995-2006 Guitar Notes. All rights reserved. Disclaimer and privacy statement. Site designed by Mainframe Media & Design.
