Radial DIs-- JDI Duplex vs Pro D2

[Dave Ferris]

Well I used the API on the gig tonight and it's just ridiculous. I mean this is so overkill for these little gigs I'm doing but the sound is like a recording studio.

 

The Nord Piano didn't sound or feel like a Nord.... The chick who was singing through my speakers, her voice was so crystal clear, the whole place was just sitting around listening to the trio and her. The voice sounded like it was coming back on studio monitors.

 

It would be hard to justify laying out the dough for this but it could pull double duty recording the D with my DPAs. I'm gonna check it out tomorrow.

[timwat]

Well, Dave, we could try to organize a KC group buy - I gotta believe API would be willing to knock $50 or so off, right?

[Dave Ferris]

Thanks Tim. Through my connect I have a pretty decent price on a new one but still a ton of dough to lay out. Maybe my friend might decide to sell his.

 

In any case it was interesting to borrow it and hear how big a difference it made on the Nord and vocal live. I'd always thought high end preamps were more for the studio. The detail on the piano had never been that good. The voice, like I said, sounded like it was coming back at you through studio monitors.

[timwat]

Hmm. So sort of along these lines (but not a +3K list), I wonder what a couple of these might do for digital keyboards:

 

http://www.summitaudio.com/td100.html

 

 

[Dave Ferris]

I was looking at those. Maybe db knows something about them.

 

The thing that appeals to me about the API 3124 mb+ is that it's a DI and 4 channel of pres, a mixer with pan, effect send/return and channel inserts. It's pretty versatile for both live and studio.

 

The only thing I've found remotely close is the True. And even that doesn't offer all the "mixer" features of the API.

http://www.true-systems.com/precision8.html

 

[Mark Schmieder]

Did you see my earlier post on the Summit? I just sold mine last week, to help fund my return to "traditional" vs. "pro audio" approaches to bass guitar amplification (i.e. an amp head plus non-powered speaker vs. a pro audio active DI and line-level pre-amp plus powered speaker or power amp).

 

The TD100 is amazing, and a pair of those could accomplish some similar results to a vintage amp or Speakeasy setup when working with organ or electro-mechanical keyboards. But I do not recommend pumping a standard ROMpler with orchestral and other "natural" sounds through it -- use the passive DI's for that. And since you'll most often have all sounds from one source, best to keep it simple by sticking with the passive DI's.

 

If I had actual Rhodes hardware , a real B3 vs. a clone, etc., I would consider a single TD100 or pair of TD100's as my main input for recording in the studio. But I don't, so I sold mine as my bass will now go through a Mesa Walkabout head.

 

The TD100's impedance matching feature is a life-saver when you don't have other ways of doing that. Vintage gear in particular can vary wildly in the impedance compared to modern gear, and this dial can help get the right match so you don't go too dark or too bright as when the impedance is mismatched.

[Mark Schmieder]

The True Precision 8 has been my main multi-channel pre-amp for a few years now, and nothing in the 8-channel market comes close to its transparency. I will eventually add a two-channel DACS mic pre-amp for my most critical overdubs (such as vocals).

 

The TP8 also has mid/side encoding on channels 1 and 2, and an active DI on channels 7 and 8. I do not recommend the active DI as it is a bit dirty and noisy. The Summit TD100 is FAR better on that account (though it is of above-average quality on an absolute scale). The active DI on the TP8 is for convenience, primarily. I now bypass it completely.

[timwat]

I think db was the one who told me about the TD-100s originally

 

When you describe the API unit as "DI, 4 pres, mixer with pan, FX s/r and inserts" you're starting to make that entry price enticing. "Starting to" is the operative phrase.

 

Seriously though I find your experience fascinating. "Common knowledge" would say "you'll never hear the difference" running DP through very-high end studio preamps ("the bits aren't there in the first place...yadda yadda") and all. But obviously that's not the case.

 

You sure you don't secretly work for API?

 

 

[Dave Ferris]

I've gotta get this back to my friend later this afternoon but popped off a couple of quick recordings of the D with DPA 4011s. The first one is the API -the second I used my Jim Williams/Audio Upgrades modded Soundcraft Delta board. The recording level's hotter on the API one, man it's hard to match this stuff when you don't know wtf you're doing..

 

This is the Monk tune, Ask me now.

 

API

http://www.divshare.com/download/16825138-a32

 

Audio Upgrades Delta console pres

http://www.divshare.com/download/16825141-bc3

 

Personally the API sounds not as clear as the Soundcraft board

[JeffLearman]

I'm returning the Pro D2 to my friend tomorrow and he's gonna let me borrow one of these for grins..

 

http://www.apiaudio.com/3124mb.html

 

Like I said just borrowing for grins out of curiosity sake, ain't going there...

Oh man...I really, really shouldn't have borrowed this. The sound difference on the NP & CP5 compared to the $300 A&H mixer is pretty substantial..I guess it should be for the price. The whole sound on both are way more detailed and less digitally grating. High ends are more open and airy. The reverbs are a lot clearer on the Nord. Like I said I shouldn't have borrowed this--now I want one..

What happens if you eliminate the mixer entirely? Unless you're using the EQ, a mixer should be totally transparent: it shouldn't change the signal. (Ditto a DI box.)

 

If adding something between your instrument and the power amp (or powered speaker) improves the sound, then it's not being a good mixer or DI; it's not being transparent.

 

That's assuming you're not using any EQ and don't need an additional gain stage (e.g., all comparisons are at the same levels on all gear, and the resulting volume is the same).

 

If the 3124 makes your gear sound better than the AH, maybe the AH isn't very good -- but that's unlikely. If removing the AH makes it sound as good as the 3124, then something's wrong with your AH, or the AH just sucks to begin with. If removing the AH doesn't change things, but adding the 3124 makes it sound better, then either you're fooling yourself (it's hard NOT to do!) or the 3124 is altering the signal, which it shouldn't do.

 

Or, it's just louder; louder usually sounds better.

[Aidan]

Thanks for all the info, guys - a Radial Pro D2 has been duly added to the shopping list!

[Michelle ggurl]

 

Or, it's just louder; louder usually sounds better.

 

Sorry, I couldn't resist. But Jeff, seriously, excellent points you brought up. It would be reassuring to the rest of us who in no way are going to spend $3K that maybe, just maybe, a placebo effect is happening here. although the API has more bells n whistles than just being a straight DI, right? So maybe it is coloring the sound, and was meant to?

[BP3]

I was looking at those. Maybe db knows something about them.

 

The thing that appeals to me about the API 3124 mb+ is that it's a DI and 4 channel of pres, a mixer with pan, effect send/return and channel inserts. It's pretty versatile for both live and studio.

 

The only thing I've found remotely close is the True. And even that doesn't offer all the "mixer" features of the API.

http://www.true-systems.com/precision8.html

 

Have you tried the ATI 8MX2? 8 great mic pres with an 8x2 mixer. Multiple units can be linked together for more inputs. I had one im my rig a good while (I used them in my location recording flypack) and could send stereo to FOH as well as individual outs for large scale multitrack recording. Overkill, but it's less than the 3124mb+. This makes the JDI Duplex seem affordable in comparison.

 

http://www.apiaudio.com/ph1_8mx2_l.jpg

[Dave Ferris]

The True Precision 8 has been my main multi-channel pre-amp for a few years now, and nothing in the 8-channel market comes close to its transparency.

 

The TP8 also has mid/side encoding on channels 1 and 2, and an active DI on channels 7 and 8. I do not recommend the active DI as it is a bit dirty and noisy.

 

I was talking to a guy from True today about the P2 Analog.

http://www.true-systems.com/p2-analog.html

 

Mark, I wonder if the DI is the same on that as the TP8 ? The price of the P2 Analog is a lot more doable then the API 3124 I was looking at.

 

Also I'm borrowing a pair of these to demo next week. They're portable. He makes a bag that fits the pair AND they might take a trade on my Camco drums...

http://baeaudio.com/pages/products/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=204&Itemid=29

 

I wonder if their mod will make my CP5 sound like Bootsy ?

 

I was looking at those. Maybe db knows something about them.

 

The thing that appeals to me about the API 3124 mb+ is that it's a DI and 4 channel of pres, a mixer with pan, effect send/return and channel inserts. It's pretty versatile for both live and studio.

 

The only thing I've found remotely close is the True. And even that doesn't offer all the "mixer" features of the API.

http://www.true-systems.com/precision8.html

 

Have you tried the ATI 8MX2? 8 great mic pres with an 8x2 mixer. Multiple units can be linked together for more inputs. I had one im my rig a good while (I used them in my location recording flypack) and could send stereo to FOH as well as individual outs for large scale multitrack recording. Overkill, but it's less than the 3124mb+. This makes the JDI Duplex seem affordable in comparison.

 

http://www.apiaudio.com/ph1_8mx2_l.jpg

 

I have looked at that but it is overkill for me. It is less then the 3214 mb+ but the 3124 was perfect from a functional standpoint.

[PianoMan51]

Hello folks. As a former telecomms engineer and an infrequent contributor, let me see if I can add some value to the discussion.

 

I have nothing to say about different DIs or different pre's. But I do have a point to make about plugging keyboards (or any -10dBV devices) into a powered-speaker or power-amp (a +4dBu device).

 

Here's my own setup. MB into an Apogee Duet into a pair of Turbosound NUQ10DPs. The product literature on the Duet says that they can drive powered speakers, but this is misleading. There is a 12dB difference between the -10dV Duet output and the +4dBu input on the Turbosounds. (look it up) :-) This means the output amplifier from the Duet (or your -10dBV keyboard) is going to start distorting 12dB before your powered speakers. So you spent a lot of bucks to get that speaker that can put out 122dB sound pressure at 1 meter, but your system can only deliver 110dB as wired. And, while that 110dB may be loud enough on stage, the output amplifier on the Duet or keyboard is already maxed out, probably is coloring the sound, and has no headroom.

 

Here's what I did. Bought a Ebtech Line Level Shifter LLS-2 for $70 or so. It's just a pair of audio transformers that shift voltage up or down from -10dBV to +4dBu levels. Don't need it for the studio, but it's easy, cheap, unpowered, and lightweight for gigging.

 

If you found this article informative, please send a crisp dollar bill to: My GAS Fund, at ...

[Ashville.Guru]

Thanks, PianoMan51. Your post made me feel glad I chose an interface with +4dB balanced outs. Didn't exactly know why at the time, but went with my guts. Nice!

[Rocket Man 2]

Concerning Passive DIs and line-loss: "The Sound Reinforcement Handbook", (written by Gary Davis for Yamaha) Part II, Section 2.6 is highly informative as to the pros and cons of active vs. passive DIs (sorry, I haven't learned how to "clonk" you to the souce yet--please bear with me.) It is well worth reading.

 

Also, if my memory serves correctly (it's been a while), insertion of a passive DI (transformer) causes an insertion loss of -6 dB. (-10 dB is half as loud). That -6 dB has to be made up somewhere by a gain stage.

 

And, line-loss in a 100 to 150 ft. audio microphone snake is about -6 dB, which is often made up by increasing the gain of the PA's input of the active crossover. And a split-snake also causes an additional insertion loss of -6 dB.

 

Would someone knowledgeable out there kindly fact-check me? I can't locate a source at the moment to back this up.

[Mark Schmieder]

I'm pretty sure the Active DI on the newer True Precision gear has been pipped a bit from what I have. In many cases, a DI on a Mic Pre-Amp simply bypasses the transformer stage, but the True Precision mic amps are transformerless, so I doubt any cheapo shortcuts were taken. The bigger question is whether a cheap transformer was inserted somewhere in the signal path to achieve the DI feature -- this might be documented but those notes are at the studio so I can't access them right now.

 

I plan to order a Radial J48 this week, as soon as I get to the bottom of the difference between Mk I and Mk II and why most vendors show photos of Mk II but only have Mk I whilst the Radial site doesn't even mention or show Mk II. The J48 feeds off of phantom power so doesn't require a wall wart. I think it bumps the impedance to 2 Mega-ohms or thereabouts, which should be sufficient to avoid colouration on most sources (except piezos).

 

I have for now decided against a Phoenix DSR Mic Pre-amp but may end up just getting the Nice DI version without the pre-amp, depending on how the J48 turns out and whether I end up wanting to occasionally use active vs. passive DI on keyboards and/or analog synths.

 

Note that there is no clear consensus on whether and when an Active DI is preferred over a Passive DI, and that Radial's designs are unique and break some of the "givens" about the pluses/minuses of each type of DI. That is, their passive JDI box tends to produce more usable output than many passive DI's, whilst their J48 active DI avoids the usual colouration that comes with a transformer based design as it only uses the transformer at the output stage.

 

Any of these are good choices, and the differences between them are probably minimal compared to the differences vs. any of the cheapo solutions. I have personally found the money spent on my Radial gear to have been some of the best bang-for-buck in my studio in terms of improved audio quality, even though these are not sexy devices whose effect is nakedly obvious.

[Mark Schmieder]

I found out today that there is no Mk II of the Radial J48; they simply at one point produced stock photos that had that overlay on a bunch of units, thinking apparently that they were going to name any DI unit that is based on a similar board design that was then at Mk II as an identifier of sorts.

 

As a result, I went ahead and confidently ordered one today. It should arrive next week. From a keyboard point of view, I will need to use it on a mono source or combine L/R on the DI itself. I'll see which sounds best; on the passive JDI unit, it sounds WAY better to use the keyboard's mono-summing feature instead.

[Dave Ferris]

I thought I'd give an update on an A/B test I ran today with the API 3124 mb+ and the BAE DLB API 312.

http://baeaudio.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=145&Itemid=197

 

I used this BAE DLB on a gig last week and immediately was impressed with the thick, in your face sound. The Nord Piano was super out front in the mix with the acoustic bass & drums. However I did notice a harshness that wasn't there with the 3124.

 

So the same friend who has been letting me borrow his 3124 mb+ lent me his Radial Pro D2 DI again today. It made all the difference in smoothing out the sound going into the BAE.

 

I A/B'd the 3124 (which he was kind enough to lend me again) and BAE and I can honestly say the BAE smoked it-even with the non-Jensen based Radial DI. Fuller, more sparkle on the top end, clearer and just an overall more hi-fi sound with the NP.

 

From what I've been told by BAE, this is due to different op-amps used in the DLB designed by Avedis Audio. Avedis is not far from me and I've had the pleasure of meeting him once, he really knows his stuff. His preamps garner rave reviews from everyone who has used them.

http://www.avedisaudio.com/about.html

 

This would be a lower cost alternative for just one keyboard in stereo then the 3124. Street on the BAE is $1600 plus a Radial Duplex can be had for around $300. So for under 2K you would have world class sound. You could even go the Radial Pro D2 route and save a few more bucks. Of course you wouldn't have the 4 channels plus mixer flexibility and option to have one/ two vocal mics or extra keyboard.

 

But just talking straight sound and not functionality, the BAE is noticeably superior.

[Dave Ferris]

A friend lent me his Pro D2 last night and I used it on the CP5. I ran into the Di > the A&H ZED10 mixer. Didn't notice much difference if any in the sound. I also tried the Nord Piano through it at my studio and ditto.

 

Back OT. Purchased the Duplex locally here at W. LA Music on Sat. and used it that night on the NP.

 

Wow -big noticeable difference over the Pro D2. I was getting spoiled using all these high end preamps but just inserting the Duplex in the chain:

 

NP> Radial > A&H ZED 10 > RCF TT08As- the sound was much smoother, less harsh then going instrument > A&H > active speakers.

 

Nord Bosendorfer XL sounded way clearer and less boxy. XL Bright Grand was less bright and grating while still retaining that very forward, present sound. The Sparkle top rhodes, which can sometimes cut your head off with certain notes in the high register, was all round more even and punchy sounding. The stereo field was noticeably wider and more hi-fi. When I went to mono mode on the Nord, the sound wasn't as compressed.

 

The Duplex really tames the sometimes jumpy sounding high notes of the CP5.

 

This thing's wonderful !

 

The weird thing is-with the Duplex, both DPs sound better running into the inferior $375 A&H (somewhat colored) ZED mixer then my 2K Audio Upgrades/Jim Williams hot rodded , pristine quality Soundcraft Delta console-live through speakers that is, not recorded of course..

[allan_evett]

I used to rely on sound co. supplied DI's, which definitely is a crapshoot. But they were usually better than the pair of old, Peavey units I've had since the 80's. Also have a Whirlwind Director that an engineer friend gave me about 10 years ago; that worked ok for mono, single keyboard gigs.

 

Finally decided to get a high quality DI last fall, and picked up a Radial D2. Compared to the other DI's the D2 does a better job with my rig. It tightens up and focuses the sound of both my Kronos and Motif XF. The D2 helps even out the high end of the Motif; plus it gives the Kronos' Japanese Grand a more 'centered' sound - smoothing out those high frequencies as well. Also takes some of the boxiness out of a couple of the RD-300NX pianos.

 

While not creating dramatic improvements, the D2 still provides a noticeable difference in my sound. I'd probably like the JDI Duplex ever more. What would provide a startling improvement would be an API 3124mb+, or something of that level. Just listening to the 'Ask Me Now' demo got the GAS going. But... got to remember that my DI is for live playing, the 3124 is a studio piece; unless of course I win the lottery

[Mogut]

Concerning Passive DIs and line-loss: "The Sound Reinforcement Handbook", (written by Gary Davis for Yamaha) Part II, Section 2.6 is highly informative as to the pros and cons of active vs. passive DIs (sorry, I haven't learned how to "clonk" you to the souce yet--please bear with me.) It is well worth reading.

 

Also, if my memory serves correctly (it's been a while), insertion of a passive DI (transformer) causes an insertion loss of -6 dB. (-10 dB is half as loud). That -6 dB has to be made up somewhere by a gain stage.

 

And, line-loss in a 100 to 150 ft. audio microphone snake is about -6 dB, which is often made up by increasing the gain of the PA's input of the active crossover. And a split-snake also causes an additional insertion loss of -6 dB.

 

Would someone knowledgeable out there kindly fact-check me? I can't locate a source at the moment to back this up.

 

Really? -6db that much?... doesnt seem to be that much quieter.

 

fyi CLONK

[Mogut]

No one uses this one? Its not the duplex but still has the jenson transformer... and dual input

 

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/JDI/

[Mark Schmieder]

I bought the Duplex instead, because it's more flexible.

 

I found that mono-summing in the JDI is not as effective as using the keyboards' own mono-summing capabilities.

 

I wrote about this in detail at the time, but I'd rather not duplicate that from memory. Maybe the earlier thread can be found.

 

At any rate, even if using the mono-summing of the JDI itself, the Duplex unit then gives you twice as many inputs. This may or may not matter to you at a gig; probably depending on whether you are using a line mixer.

[Mogut]

I bought the Duplex instead, because it's more flexible.

 

I found that mono-summing in the JDI is not as effective as using the keyboards' own mono-summing capabilities.

 

I wrote about this in detail at the time, but I'd rather not duplicate that from memory. Maybe the earlier thread can be found.

 

At any rate, even if using the mono-summing of the JDI itself, the Duplex unit then gives you twice as many inputs. This may or may not matter to you at a gig; probably depending on whether you are using a line mixer.

 

Can it be used for two different mono input signals? For example two keyboards?

[Michelle ggurl]

I'm confused about something here. If you have a mixer, do you guys still feel you NEED a DI? I was thinking the options typically used were:

 

1. Keybd to powered speaker

2. Key to DI to pwered spkr

3. Keys to mixer to powered spkr

 

But that you wouldn't use a mixer AND and DI. or are we just now talking about using extra gear for sound altering, as opposed to just gain-level control?

[KingstonCrim]

In my case, the mixer (little 12-ch Behringer Eurorack) doesn't have it's own balanced outputs to feed the powered speakers. So even when I'm set up just at home, I take the unbalanced outputs from the mixer into the stereo DI which then feeds the speakers.

 

 

[mate stubb]

I'm confused about something here. If you have a mixer, do you guys still feel you NEED a DI? I was thinking the options typically used were:

 

1. Keybd to powered speaker

2. Key to DI to pwered spkr

3. Keys to mixer to powered spkr

 

But that you wouldn't use a mixer AND and DI. or are we just now talking about using extra gear for sound altering, as opposed to just gain-level control?

 

DIs often have a ground lift, which is usually necessary for feeding the FOH system.

[Mogut]

Cool video here from radial

 

[video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYVk3TJfKOQ&feature=player_embedded