idiots guide to re-amping?

[recall]

Hi Guys,

Once again I ask for your generous advice.

I've never tried re-amping before. I want to send sounds from my 002r to an amp and record the results. I am mostly going to be using this as some kind of spatial/room effect to get some idiosyncratic ambience to live takes. I don't really intend re-amping di'd bass etc...but y'never know right?

So am I right in thinking I need a DI box to make the impedence of the 002 out "amp friendly".

I haven't got a Dedicated DI as when I need to DI I just go through one of my TFpro's inputs. I've seen the littlelabs stuff and fully intend to get one in a couple of years but as for now I'd like a decent, reasonable (£35?) box.

Am I on the right track with this?

Any general purpose DI recommendations?

Thanks

[warhead]

A dedicated re-amp device (Re-amp, Radial X-Amp etc) is going to sound better than a passive DI used in reverse.

War

[recall]

i understand that but I can't afford them at the moment.

[Kiwiburger]

If it's just ambiance you want (as opposed to amp distortion and color) then maybe try mic'ing up your monitors. That will give a cleaner, flatter, fullrange sound - which you can carve up with eq later on. Maybe try a mono'd monitor, pointing into a corner, with a stereo pair of room mics.

Reamping with high gain guitar amps is a recipe for noise, but it can be worth it if done right. I bought a Reamp box from www.reamp.com.

To me, the essential components are the transformer and passive attenuator. This simple concept is patented, so there are plenty of variants that get close but not quite the same.

A passive DI matches impedance from high to low, but also attenuates the level from instrument down to microphone level. If you use them backwards for reamping, the impedance is fine - but you now get a boost in level. This is exactly what you don't need - because your line level output from your DAC is already waaay hotter than you need for the front end of a guitar amp.

It's hard to beat a purpose designed transformer with a variable attenuator. Or a purpose designed active reamp. I prefer passive - no power supply, no noise. No gain is required - it's basically an exercise in dumping unwanted level, so passive is great. Breaks up ground loops too.

[recall]

Yes that is a thought. I have done that in the past, but i was specifically after something the amp my guitarist produces. I want to be able to hear this "in place" without using series of plugs later on to get "near" the sound in my head.

I suppose I could try using low quality speakers that distort easily, which would take a normal line level.

[Barish]

Idiots shouldn't reamp.

In fact, they shouldn't engineer at all, if possible.

B.

[recall]

Originally Posted by Barish

Idiots shouldn't reamp.

In fact, they shouldn't engineer at all, if possible.

B.

Thats really great advice mate, thanks for being so helpful.

[octatonic]

Find a Focusrite Tone Factory.
They have a -20 output on the back- I've been using mine for reamping for the last 5 years.

[Blindside]

Originally Posted by Barish

Idiots shouldn't reamp.

In fact, they shouldn't engineer at all, if possible.

B.

I really hope that is a joke. There's no place for that here in GS. I may be a newbie, but I think I speak for everyone.

[Kiwiburger]

For fekks sake - the original poster entitled this thread "An idiots guide to reamping". Sort of asked for this humorous remark I think ...

Lighten the fukk up!

[Sonicvalley]

... anyways...

I did a shootout one time. I took a ReAmp box and a Whirlwind Director DI and tried reamping with a recorded DI electric guitar (Les Paul). VERY slight difference in sound. I would not pay an extra hundred or so dollars for that small of an improvement (unless i just had spare $$$ lying around). But Kiwi is right, you will need some way to attenuate the signal and the ReAmp has that great attenuation knob on it, or you could just pull your send fader down enough. As far as overall sound quality goes, very little difference. But i was using high quality devices to begin with.

[Barish]

Originally Posted by Kiwiburger

For fekks sake - the original poster entitled this thread "An idiots guide to reamping". Sort of asked for this humorous remark I think ...

Lighten the fukk up!

If you can't get the humour then you have no other choice but to judge it.


You "lighten the fukk up".


The way this thread was started is a joke itself, why are you expecting me to be so serious about it?


If the dude said "could you please explain the fundamentals of reamping?" I could do that too. In fact I could even get him build his own DIY reamp box step by step if he liked. It's not a rocket science.


But whenever I read a line that begins with "An Idiot's Guide To..." I just can't help thinking of "A Guide To Keep An Idiot Clear Of..."


It's a counter-humour that is instantly triggered...


...if you are really serious about something...


...which one should be about engineering.


So you want me to get serious about a joke, for you don't like my counter humour.


Ok-kay...


No decent reamp box costs 35 quid.


Only an "idiot" would ask that...



...hence the title of the thread.


And a passive DI in reverse won't work either, due to the unsuitable impedance and winding ratios between either side of a standard instrument-to-mic level DI box.


So, in simple language, a machine that was designed to give you pastrami from one side when you fed an animal in from the other will not give you an animal back when you feed the pastrami back in.


Or not in this case anyway.


A DI is designed to convert an "instrument" level signal to "mic" level.

A reamp box aims to convert a "line" level to an "instrument" level, not a "mic" level to an "instrument" level.


I hope you realize the level difference between those three levels by now. It can be up to 1000 times in terms of Voltage.



Hence the winding calculations for either side of the transformers for each purpose.


Trying to use one for another will compromise somethings somewhere. Whether your ears like the outcome, or even notices it is another argument. But from engineering point of view, they are not suitable for each other's ideal applications.


A DI box in normal operation causes a gain reduction on the signal, while matching the circuit impedance. Step-down. Using it reverse with plain logic causes a gain signal amplitude. Step-up.

Whereas a reamp box should work with step-down principle too. So how are you going to step down a signal that is 1000 times larger than the optimum, by reversing another step-down device to work as a step-up device?


You see, it's all idiotic. And I haven't got into impedance issues yet. Just talking about signal levels here.


A DI box wouldn't ideally work. You need to use a proper reamp box for that. The one with a transformer that can handle line level signals.


So if you want to build one to fit it in the budget, then buy a cheapo 10k:10k 1:1 OEP line transformer, a metal box to house it, a TRS and a TS socket -chassis mount type, a 10k logarithmic pot and a 20k linear pot, and a mini toggle switch, all available at your local Maplin store, and wire them all up according to the document as092 in Jensen Transformer web site.

It may be good, it may be bad.

If you use Jensen tranny, it's guaranteed it will be one of the best. Same goes for Lundahl and Sowter. But they all cost pretty much the same. Because quality comes at a price (Argos is telling a lie.)

You can't get Jensen in the UK, for some strange reason they do not have a representation here, but you can get Sowter (British) or Lundahl (Swedish), all from Canford Audio. The transformer cost will be around £45 inclusive of VAT and shipping alone. An OEP equivalent should be around £15-16.

And then the rest of the hardware, and some drilling-filing-soldering-assembly job.

Come on, show us that you're not an idiot to pay £150 for a proper unit, so spend a day or two to make one that has £35 material cost.

Once you calculate the time you spent on it, you'll realize that the saving you thought you've made comes to the hourly rate of what idiots charge anyway.


And using it? Don't worry, the unit is idiot-proof.


Output to input, and input to output. And then twist the knob until it sounds good.


There you go, an "Idiot's Guide" to reamping for you.


How do you like it?


Enjoy.


B.


One last edit: An Idiot's Guide won't unidiot an idiot. If one is an idiot then one will always be an idiot no matter what. Monkey see, monkey do. And to avoid calling an idiot an idiot in order not to offend him won't change the fact that he will always be an idiot.

...which is all part of a bigger joke only idiots fail to get.

Sad, innit? They are missing the best part of the fun.


...and yes, Blindside, if you like to speak for every idiot on the board, please do so. That saves me from replying to each and every one of them.

[recall]

Ha Ha,

What a can of worms!

I didn't take particular offence from Barish, in fact it doesn't bother me at all - I'm quite secure in what I'm doing and working on.

And BTW thanks Barish for the info on reamping, very useful indeed.

[Vogon]

Talking of idiots...
If I'm not mistaken, kiwiburger was defending your post, and pointing out that it *was* an attempt at humour in light of the topic title.

[Kiwiburger]

Exactly.

[Barish]

Yes, I must have barked up the wrong tree there. It should have been Blindside who's getting it.

Sorry Kiwi. When my mind is busy, I do that kind of mix-ups.

B.

[Il Giallo Uomo]

3 years later and this thread is still hilarious!

[drcaron]

5 years later and it's still hilarious!

[Zyzygis]

Originally Posted by Barish

Yes, I must have barked up the wrong tree there. It should have been Blindside who's getting it.

Sorry Kiwi. When my mind is busy, I do that kind of mix-ups.

B.

when idiots quide.....

[Colonel Blues]

So… as this thread have been re-opened, why not publish some kind of DIY schematics ? If someone can help, I'll be pleased to get some info about that !
Thanks !