Christian LeBlanc wrote:Going from the sequencer into the guitar pedals, now, is a bit trickier. I've been doing research on different ways to drop from line-level to instrument-level, and most signs point to re-amps. Which is bittersweet, because spending $250 kinda blows.
I may not be following you on this. The output level of a DI would be related to it's input level as well as it's ability to pad or boost it's throughput. A DI with a strong signal on input, and with higher than unity gain can certainly overload the input of many mic pre's without a pad.Alain Benoit wrote:From the pedal to the mixer a DI is definitely the way to go as like the re-amp box it will match levels as well as impedance, now keep in mind that a DI active or otherwise will only output a mic level signal so it needs to be plugged in to a mic pre and NOT the line input on your mixer as you stated.
Christian LeBlanc wrote:I want to run my sequencer, into my guitar pedals, and into my mixer.
This means that I need to start from the sequencer at line-level, drop down into instrument level, go through my pedal chain at instrument-level, and into the mixer at line-level.
Christian LeBlanc wrote:Going into the mixer at line-level from the guitar pedals, I believe I need a DI, right? What factors determine if I should look for an active or passive DI?
Christian LeBlanc wrote:Going from the sequencer into the guitar pedals, now, is a bit trickier. I've been doing research on different ways to drop from line-level to instrument-level, and most signs point to re-amps. Which is bittersweet, because spending $250 kinda blows.
Drumwaiter wrote:Christian LeBlanc wrote:Going into the mixer at line-level from the guitar pedals, I believe I need a DI, right? What factors determine if I should look for an active or passive DI?
Yes and no. Does your mixer have line level inputs? If it does then you just do that. DIs are for impedance differences like the high impedance of a line level signal going into the low impedance of a mic level input, for example. As for the active/passive thing... it doesn't matter that much, active DIs require phantom because they have a preamplifier, so they tend to be a much hotter output than a passive DI.
Malcolm Boyce wrote:As Al said, the most often overlooked issue of proper impedance matching is as important as levels.I may not be following you on this. The output level of a DI would be related to it's input level as well as it's ability to pad or boost it's throughput. A DI with a strong signal on input, and with higher than unity gain can certainly overload the input of many mic pre's without a pad.Alain Benoit wrote:From the pedal to the mixer a DI is definitely the way to go as like the re-amp box it will match levels as well as impedance, now keep in mind that a DI active or otherwise will only output a mic level signal so it needs to be plugged in to a mic pre and NOT the line input on your mixer as you stated.
As well, many consoles/interfaces have inputs specifically for "instrument" inputs including some "line level" ins that have a switch to match impedance.Drumwaiter wrote:Christian LeBlanc wrote:Going into the mixer at line-level from the guitar pedals, I believe I need a DI, right? What factors determine if I should look for an active or passive DI?
Yes and no. Does your mixer have line level inputs? If it does then you just do that.
And, most importantly, the pedals are most likely looking to see an instrument's output impedance as opposed a console or other audio device. This is the more "tricky" part of the path and hence, the probable need for a specific device to match it.Drumwaiter wrote:Christian LeBlanc wrote:Going from the sequencer into the guitar pedals, now, is a bit trickier. I've been doing research on different ways to drop from line-level to instrument-level, and most signs point to re-amps. Which is bittersweet, because spending $250 kinda blows.
I can't think of any other way off the top of my head. Because your pedal is certainly not expecting +4dBu smashing into it, you'll overload the input.
Malcolm Boyce wrote:As Al said, the most often overlooked issue of proper impedance matching is as important as levels.I may not be following you on this. The output level of a DI would be related to it's input level as well as it's ability to pad or boost it's throughput. A DI with a strong signal on input, and with higher than unity gain can certainly overload the input of many mic pre's without a pad.Alain Benoit wrote:From the pedal to the mixer a DI is definitely the way to go as like the re-amp box it will match levels as well as impedance, now keep in mind that a DI active or otherwise will only output a mic level signal so it needs to be plugged in to a mic pre and NOT the line input on your mixer as you stated.
Malcolm Boyce wrote:And, most importantly, the pedals are most likely looking to see an instrument's output impedance as opposed a console or other audio device. This is the more "tricky" part of the path and hence, the probable need for a specific device to match it.
Can I get an Amen?Alain Benoit wrote:Generally too many people stick their collective heads in the sand when it comes to impedance matching, it is as crucial as level matching maybe even more important. Most of us know what happens when an amplifier sees too low of a load, but in the world of mic, instrument, balanced and unbalanced line level signals, improper impedance matching can lead to loading side effects which can cause severe bandpassing issues thus tonal shifts.
Drumwaiter wrote:That being said... if you bought a Redeye you'd have a killer DI and a re-amp box all in one.
Alain Benoit wrote:...now keep in mind that a DI active or otherwise will only output a mic level signal so it needs to be plugged in to a mic pre and NOT the line input on your mixer as you stated.
If it doesn't already exist, Al would probably make you a cheap device to go simply from console line out to "pedal" or "amp" in.Christian LeBlanc wrote:Thanks for the replies! Now who wants to sell Christian cheap re-amps ;)
Christian LeBlanc wrote:Drumwaiter wrote:That being said... if you bought a Redeye you'd have a killer DI and a re-amp box all in one.
It'd be one at a time, though, right? Not both at once? Both at once would be pretty sweet :)
Christian LeBlanc wrote:
I'm not sure about the sequencer, but the effects loop on my mixer, which I also want to play around with, is +4dBu. Up until recently, I didn't understand that the effects for the loop in question were assumed to be rack-mounted gear, not guitar pedals. I'm learnin', I'm learnin' ;)
Malcolm Boyce wrote:If it doesn't already exist, Al would probably make you a cheap device to go simply from console line out to "pedal" or "amp" in.Christian LeBlanc wrote:Thanks for the replies! Now who wants to sell Christian cheap re-amps ;)
Al... Doable, or prohibitively pricey?
Christian LeBlanc wrote:I was looking at Radial, actually, because they also make a Pro RMP re-amp, but it only accepts XLR for the input (which none of my line-level devices, or effects loop, have coming out).
I'm not sure if you mean $40 just for materials, or materials and labour included...either way, I'll PM you in a minute here :)
Alain Benoit wrote:Don't PM me as I am never here, instead email me.
macrae11 wrote:Everythings been well covered here, but just to play devils advocate: yes impedance mis-matching will change your tone and certainly won't be transparent, but that doesn't mean it will necessarily sound bad per se. I've had some fun patching some line level signals into guitar amps and really pushing them into their uncomfortable zone. Just know that I'm not responsible if you blow stuff up. And it's always good to have the proper way to do things for the 99% of the time when that's the right choice.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests