|
|
Post by svart on Jan 7, 2019 8:53:36 GMT -6
So my new workflow has me using a ton of DI boxes.
I'm using one between the guitar/bass and the pedals, and another between the pedals and the amp.
Right now I'm using Countryman 85's which sound just fine, but each one needs batteries or phantom, and a preamp channel which means I'm eating up preamps doing little more than supplying phantom for guitars and bass.
I'm thinking of whipping up a quick board that has two DI channels, as well as multiple outputs for buffered pass-throughs, and/or A/B switching, etc.
So here's my thought for each channel:
1x instrument level input
2x buffered instrument outputs controlled by A/B switch (switching between amps?)
1x mic level out (optional?)
1x line level out with level adjustments (so no preamps needed)
powered by external wall wart so no phantom needed
Thoughts?
I don't want to make this complicated. Most of it will probably be opamp based for simplicity.
|
|
|
|
Post by stratboy on Jan 7, 2019 13:25:59 GMT -6
Why not just whip up a little phantom supply that delivers 48v via a modified XLR adapter?
Even simpler, saves your preamps, and no chance of mucking up the sound (not that your design would do that Chris).
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 7, 2019 14:23:48 GMT -6
Why not just whip up a little phantom supply that delivers 48v via a modified XLR adapter? Even simpler, saves your preamps, and no chance of mucking up the sound (not that your design would do that Chris). I'm also trying to consolidate all these DI boxes, all the cables, etc. I don't think most DI boxes do line level outputs either, so I'd still need a preamp of sorts to get the level up from instrument to line levels, which my box would take care of so it frees up both phantom and preamp channel. |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 7, 2019 15:14:51 GMT -6
Sounds like a nice, handy, tidy project to me, <thumbsup>
I'd definitely do both mic - and line level outputs, and flavor (or not) them to your needs.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 7, 2019 16:21:27 GMT -6
I'm also not sure how to power it, meaning I don't want to use the normal 9V pedal adapters, but they're pretty ubiquitous. I'm thinking 12, 15 or 18V now.
18V would allow tons of headroom that's probably completely un-needed, but I know some guitar pedals that use 18V which would make the supplies more available I suppose.
Or I could use 18-24V and regulate internally..
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 9, 2019 14:15:41 GMT -6
I also plan on using the larger sized guitar pedal housing, 1590BBM for this. Someone mentioned wanting two switches for the A/B function rather than one switch, so it could really be a A/B/A+B/OFF situation.
Should the buffered outputs also be controllable by the gain pot, or should they just be unity buffers?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Jan 9, 2019 14:24:12 GMT -6
Unity
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 9, 2019 14:37:30 GMT -6
Thanks. I've had a few people suggest unity and only one suggest gain. |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Jan 9, 2019 14:45:27 GMT -6
2 switches and unity. Agreed on all fronts.
Any chance of getting dual line or mic outputs? I guess I could just use the two supplied though. Usually when I DI the bass, I'll run one channel to a cleaner chain and one getting eq'd, compressed, and grindy.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 9, 2019 15:19:11 GMT -6
2 switches and unity. Agreed on all fronts. Any chance of getting dual line or mic outputs? I guess I could just use the two supplied though. Usually when I DI the bass, I'll run one channel to a cleaner chain and one getting eq'd, compressed, and grindy. So you'd want two line level outputs to go directly to things like rack compressors or effects boxes? I could do two TRS line outputs no sweat, it's really just about the physical tightness of the connections. I could certainly fit 2x TRS(Line out), 2x TS(out) 1x TS(in) and 1x XLR(mic out) on the back but they'd be pretty close to each other.. I had intended this to be multiple channels in a half-width rack chassis, but folks keep telling me I should make it a stompbox, which is why I suggested a 1590BBM chassis. |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Jan 9, 2019 15:54:47 GMT -6
 How about having an FX loop so you can kill 2 birds with one stone. Since you're looking to have DI before and after the effects. See attached. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 9, 2019 16:41:44 GMT -6
How about having an FX loop so you can kill 2 birds with one stone. Since you're looking to have DI before and after the effects. See attached. That was kinda the point of having two units. i think separate channels would be more flexible though, but I could be wrong.. |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Jan 9, 2019 17:06:48 GMT -6
How about having an FX loop so you can kill 2 birds with one stone. Since you're looking to have DI before and after the effects. See attached. That was kinda the point of having two units. i think separate channels would be more flexible though, but I could be wrong.. I prefer the idea of the all in one. If you incorporate reamp functionality, then it's a true guitar swiss army knife. |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Jan 9, 2019 17:11:52 GMT -6
That was kinda the point of having two units. i think separate channels would be more flexible though, but I could be wrong.. I prefer the idea of the all in one. If you incorporate reamp functionality, then it's a true guitar swiss army knife. Let's make those gain stages 312 preamps while we're at it. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 9, 2019 17:29:53 GMT -6
That was kinda the point of having two units. i think separate channels would be more flexible though, but I could be wrong.. I prefer the idea of the all in one. If you incorporate reamp functionality, then it's a true guitar swiss army knife. I have a little labs red-eye that's both di and reamp, but there's one thing I dislike about it.. That it's either one, but not both at the same time. I'd rather have a bank of di and a bank of reamps separate in this case. |
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on Jan 11, 2019 12:43:20 GMT -6
This is very cool, looking forward to seeing how it comes together.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 11, 2019 14:59:43 GMT -6
This is very cool, looking forward to seeing how it comes together. Currently overthinking the output drivers. A common approach is to have a non-inverting buffer followed by an inverting buffer. The NI buffer supplies the +(hot) signal to the tip of a TRS or pin 2 of an XLR, while the INV buffer supplies the ring/pin3. The problem is that there is a slight offset in timing between the two. A second common approach is to use a cross-coupled output section that ensures that each section is aligned in time (and by default, phase) but has issues with instability and headroom. I don't think I'll go to a true differential amplifier or driver as they are kind of expensive for what functionality you get. |
|
