Outboard Gear Can a Radial J48 DI Box handle a guitar amplifier's output?

[Dejoux]

we're thinking about getting some DI boxes but obviously we want to make sure we have one that suits our needs. especially with the price that they are. does anyone have experience working with these DI boxes? Also Ive heard that some of the newer DI boxes capture the unique sound of the amp a guitar is plugged into. Does anyone know any DI boxes that can do this?

Any input is much appreciated,

thanks

 

[Footer]

Are you talking about unplugging the speaker from the amp and putting this in between the amp and the speaker? If so, your looking for something like the JDX. The Countryman Type 85 DI will also do this. Most decent active DI boxes will be able to take a powered input.

Personally, I still don't like the sound that you get in these configurations. Your money would better be spent on an e906 or a SM57 and micing the cabinet. The only time DI's are really used in most situations is for monitor and acoustic guitars. If you really want the electric guitar "wailing amp" sound, stay as far away anything DI related as possible.

My vote is to go with the Type 85. It is one of the more rider friendly pieces of gear out there... and it is extremely solid. If this is for a venue, not a specific band, I would also buy some whirlwind director passive DI's.

 

[neotrotsky]

Any decent DI box can take a line signal out of the amp and route it through the board, giving you the sound as affected by the amp. This is a great option when you want to keep the "live" sound and only want to reinforce the guitar on stage. Be careful that you're not taking a DIRECT line, bypassing the amp altogether and just getting a straight guitar signal. and you should be fine. Countryman DI boxes are the best since they still have Fisher components, but there are a few other high-end options for both active and passive boxes that can get you what you need. As long as your source isn't Guitar Center, you should find some quite affordable options for this.

 

[museav]

we're thinking about getting some DI boxes but obviously we want to make sure we have one that suits our needs. especially with the price that they are. does anyone have experience working with these DI boxes? Also Ive heard that some of the newer DI boxes capture the unique sound of the amp a guitar is plugged into. Does anyone know any DI boxes that can do this?

Are you sure you are not thinking of something like Line 6? That can replace/emulate the amp and cabinet and some models like Specifications | POD HD Pro | Line 6 have a mic level out so they also eliminate the need for a DI. But those are something the guitarist would usually provide.

 

[FMEng]

I agree with Kyle. DIs are easily accepted for electric basses and keyboards, but it's standard procedure to mic an electric guitar amp because the amp contributes so heavily to the instrument's sound character. An SM57 is the go-to mic for this. By micing the amp, the musician is using familiar equipment and he/she has creative control over the sound. The rare exception is jazz guitar, where the amp isn't always needed for coloration.

There are some decent DSP-based amplifier modelers. But, the musician needs to be familiar with it and happy with the result. That's why it is something they should provide if they choose to.

Upright or string basses are a gray area. Some bassists will prefer a DI for them, while others will insist on micing the instrument, or even a mix of the two. Acoustic guitars are are also a bit tricky. Some pickups are great, and some are awful. If the musician does not have a preference, I'll start with a DI for acoustic, but will have a mic at the ready.

Ditto, the Countryman 85 is tops. On a budget, the ProCo DB1 is solid and performs well. Stay far away from Rolls and Behringer.

 

[DuckJordan]

Actually, I don't like the sound of the SM57's on a guitar cab, I actually prefer the sound of a 58. But to each his own.

 

[chausman]

Actually, I don't like the sound of the SM57's on a guitar cab, I actually prefer the sound of a 58. But to each his own.

That's interesting, because they are the same capsule, just with a different windscreen.

 

[FMEng]

That's interesting, because they are the same capsule, just with a different windscreen.

That's old myth. Look at the frequency response plots of the two. There are significant differences.

 

[chausman]

That's old myth. Look at the frequency response plots of the two. There are significant differences.

SM57 vs SM58 - Gearslutz.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shure_SM57#Characteristics

 

[josh88]

Under characteristics on your Wikipedia link it says a capsule similar to the 58, with mechanical differences. So not the same.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

[FMEng]

Well, that's interesting but that's contradictory to Shure's own response plots. The capsules are indeed the same, but the windscreen and mounting affects the polar plot and the response. Not to mention that they sound different.

 

[chausman]

Under characteristics on your Wikipedia link it says a capsule similar to the 58, with mechanical differences. So not the same.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

From what I can tell, the difference is only in shape and size.

Shure Notes for Houses of Worship #28 - Inside the Classics: SM58® and SM57

That brings up another question that comes up all the time. What’s the real difference between an SM57 and an SM58? There are actually a fair number of myths and misconceptions about what the difference really is.
The basic difference is the grille. The other parts -- the diaphragm and voice coil combination, the magnet, the transformer that’s in the handle, the handle itself, the closing ring that surrounds the cartridge – are identical.

In the SM58, the ball grille with the foam lining provides an extra degree of pop protection and wind protection. The SM57 has a much more compact grille arrangement that doesn’t provide nearly as much protection against blast or wind. But the basic frequency response and polar patterns are almost identical – there is only a slight difference in high frequencies where the shape of the grille starts to affect the response. But that probably doesn’t kick in until 13, 14 or 15 kHz – something like that.

 

[Footer]

From what I can tell, the difference is only in shape and size.

Shure Notes for Houses of Worship #28 - Inside the Classics: SM58® and SM57

All moot anyway. The only reason people are still using 57's is everyone has them. Most people are asking for e609's on their riders. They have the added benefit of not needing z-bars.

They cost 10 dollars more... and sound a ton better. They can also handle extremely loud amps and have killer rejection.

 

[FMEng]

The e609 has a darker sound due to the lack of a presence rise. There was enough complaint about it that Sennheiser introduced the e906. The e906 has a three position presence boost switch. Most people buy the 57 because it is more versatile for things besides guitars and drums. If you have a big enough budget to buy a one trick pony, then the Sennheisers are great.

 

[howlingwolf487]

I wouldn't call them a one-trick-pony…I've used them on congas and various other drums, and they work quite nicely once positioned. I haven't tried them on human voice yet, but someday I look forward to it.

 

[bishopthomas]

Wow, lots of misinformation going on here. Before I address any of that, let me first answer the OP's question. The J48 is (IMO) the best sounding Radial DI. I am a dealer and purchased one of each DI with my opening order. In order of best to "not best" was the J48, JDI, Pro48, then ProDI. I ended up keeping the JDI and Pro48 and selling the J48, only because I had a customer looking to buy the best one. I plan on buying more JDI's within the next week or two.

The sm57 and sm58 capsule is the same. The only difference in sound is due to the windscreen. There are different part numbers in the two capsules only because of the way they mount (from what I remember). If you want to do an AB take the ball off the 58. People get too hung up on single source microphones. There's no reason you can't use a "guitar amp mic" for something besides a guitar amp. Tom Petty (and others) used to sing through an sm57. Stevie Nicks used a 441, which I typically use on brass, others like it on snare. I've used the e609 for other things besides guitar amps. I mean, the 906 is my go to for guitars (mainly because I can hang it) but I also tend to grab it for trumpet and I've used it on floor tom, percussion, bass amp, and other sources as well. There's no reason to call a microphone a "one trick pony" just because most people use it for a specific instrument. Another example is a "kick drum" mic. I've used ATM25's and a D6 on kick, upright bass, bass amp, floor tom, and baritone sax. Go with what your ears hear and not what stigma exists.

 

[TimmyP1955]

Use a passive DI for an active source (keyboard, bass with preamp). Use an active DI for use with a passive source. Use a cab-sim DI for the output of an amp. The Radial JDX is the ticket there.