• From: Thailand
  • Registered: 2011-05-05
  • Posts: 16

Topic: Babyface Hi-Z instrument matched for passives or actives?

Hi, any of you know whether it sounds better with passive or active pickups.
I'm curious because I have the usual passive pu combination of Seymour Duncan JB and 59' on my guitar
and would like to keep the utmost detail of recording a clean track with it. I'm planning to use amp sims (podfarm, amplitube, vst free stuff, etc.)
on the computer by the way, so is it better to use (or in another phrase, is it enough?) BF's 640kOhms instrument input or something like a
Countryman DI Box rated 10 MegaOhms through the mic XLR.

2 Reply by MC

  • MC
  • MC
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Germany/Thailand
  • Registered: 2007-04-06
  • Posts: 24,877

Re: Babyface Hi-Z instrument matched for passives or actives?

Active pickups don't need any matching. The BF's input is working perfectly for passive pickups.

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

MC's Website

  • Registered: 2011-04-29
  • Posts: 76

Re: Babyface Hi-Z instrument matched for passives or actives?

Hellface - if you really want to get the best out of software based amp simulators I would look/listen to the option of a high-end DI box vs. the Babyface instrument input.

The Babyface is certainly very reasonable & I'm happy using it when travelling so I have the minimum amount of gear to carry - whenever possible & when tracking however I'll use a Radial Engineering JDI for any guitars/basses (with any audio interface btw) - I have a couple of Les Pauls with JB's, Stingray basses, & a Reissue Strat with a mini JB here, all sound decent plugged directly into the Babyface - superb via a proper DI, then into the Babyface (XLR input).
Amp sim' is NI Guitar Rig.

For me the Radial is the best of the lot DI-wise - tried them all inc' the Waves PRS interface, JDI just has a clarity & punch that none of the others can match imho.

Again - nothing wrong with the Babyface instrument input......but you have Duncan's already so I'm going to assume you know/want the difference sonically.
I certainly wouldn't expect a stock Gibson pickup to sound anything like a Duncan in as much as I'd expect the BF instrument input to match a good DI or in fact the pre's on the BF to sound as good as an Avalon....

I'm positive the RME guys could make a BF like that but would anyone be prepared to pay £4000 for it?

  • From: Thailand
  • Registered: 2011-05-05
  • Posts: 16

Re: Babyface Hi-Z instrument matched for passives or actives?

@ Drainaudio, Thanks for your input! Thats exactly what I wanted to know.

I live in an apartment with 'sad' neighbors so by all means I can not do any quality mic-ed up guitar recordings (high-gain death metal). So the instrument input thing is a pretty big issue for me and unfortunately, I have no access to try any high quality DI box, be it Radial's or Countryman's. All I can do is ask alot of questions and research about it as much as I can before I make the order. I do want the difference sonically. I will be buying a babyface within the next. The babyface is probably the most perfect audio interface feature-wise for me, I'm not recording a whole band or recording live drums anytime soon so thats all I need in regards to the number of mic pre-amps, inputs or output. But still I want them to be high quality without needlessly getting a UFX. So it all comes down to only 2 questionable things for the babyface, one being the instrument input and the phone out. I went reading through this forum about the impedence delivery of it and most definitely I think I would have to get a headphone amp to use with my 250 ohm Beyerdynamic DT770.

@ MC, I notice under your display picture.. are you in Thailand? I'm Thai and I live in Thailand by the way, so its good to know if an RME representative is also stationing here.

5 Reply by drainaudio (edited by drainaudio 2011-05-06 12:26:01)

  • Registered: 2011-04-29
  • Posts: 76

Re: Babyface Hi-Z instrument matched for passives or actives?

Get some Sennheiser HD-25's - not only are they the industry standard in pro sound reinforcement but the BF has plenty of juice to drive them.....I've not come anywhere near running the BF headphone vol above "0" with a pair of these.

Re BF instrument input if you can only afford an audio interface then go with the BF but don't expect the results of superior equipment - the BF is great no doubt about it, but expecting it to achieve results above the design spec & price-point is totally unrealistic.

All too often now in this product over-saturated "electronic/computer/recording" industry consumers (& clients, many of whom should know better) spend £500 & expect the results of gear that cost 10 times as much, plus the £500 piece of gear should also make good coffee..........you get what you pay for!!

The BF is an excellent 2 channel portable audio interface - it's stereo channels sound great & the feature package is better than anything else of similar design, you would however get better results using a dedicated high-end DI to input your instruments - just as you would on a FF800 or UFX or any other audio interface.

If all you can afford is the BF then do get it but please be realistic about results vs. your budget.

6 Reply by Hellface (edited by Hellface 2011-05-06 13:13:50)

  • From: Thailand
  • Registered: 2011-05-05
  • Posts: 16

Re: Babyface Hi-Z instrument matched for passives or actives?

No, I'm not expecting the BF to have pres like API, Chandler, Vintech, Neve, etc or anything else in that matter vs. the budget I'm willing to spend.
I already have some idea about what I will be getting for what its worth but thank you anyway for further clarification about the DI box. As a whole, I do expect it to be better than any similar audio interfaces on the market (especially the drivers, performance, sound quality, built quality) - so I've read, or else I wouldn't be here. I'm more of a musician than a technician-gear hound so sometimes when it comes this sort of thing, half-knowingly, I expect to some degree for what's best for my music considering the price tag ex. BF - being the most expensive out of the bunch of similar audio interfaces around.