Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Any experience w/ Boss AD-5 Acoustic Instrument processor ?

394 views
Skip to first unread message

levi

unread,
Mar 23, 2010, 9:47:34 AM3/23/10
to
I bought one, virtually new, for $60. I'll likely pair it with
the K&K Pure Western Mini pickup in my Martin HD-28
with the objective of getting the most realistic sound
possible going out to the sound board.
http://www.bossus.com/gear/productdetails.php?ProductId=158

The second option would be to pair it with a K&K Twin
pickup I have installed in my mandolin. I am already
fairly pleased with the (ahem, improved) sound I've
achieved with effects in my Zoom A2.
http://allmusicjunkies.com/magazine/zoom-A2-acoustic-pedal-review.html

Generally specific (!) questions:

1) Ideas re EQ settings, etc?

2) I like to use a small EQ box (e.g. Danelectro
"Fish&Chips" or the Boss GE-7) as a "stomp
pedal" to boost my volume for playing leads.
I normally put the "stomp pedal" *after* the
signal shaping processor, but with the AD-5 you
can't do that and use it as a DI box as well. Any
issues with placing the volume boost prior to the
AD-5?

hank alrich

unread,
Mar 23, 2010, 11:44:03 AM3/23/10
to
levi <le...@visi.com> wrote:

If I were you I'd replace whatever is now between the K&K passive
pickup(s) and the processor with a Red-Eye instrument preamp, and use
the R-E's built-in stomp button for gain boosting at solo time. Don
Hindenach is a good source for Red-Eyes.

At a jam down in Austin I had a guy who owns many tens of thousands of
dollars worth of instruments and electronic goodies come out of the
audience to ask me if I had "a compressor" on the mando when I stomped
the R-E. He couldn't believe how it jumped out over the rest of the
instruments (2 acoustic guitars, an electric guitar, snare drum, bass,
keyboard) when I soloed. It was nothing more than the Red-Eye and the
fact that the sound was completely uncompressed. It just sounded like
Gawd's own mando, so clean like that.

Any time you put a volume boost ahead of outboard processors you have to
consider the headroom of the processor. There's a reason Darn Apelt
designed the insert loop on the Red-Eye the way he did. I might put a
processor in the R-E's insert path instead of just following the gain
boost.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar
http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/hsadharma

levi

unread,
Mar 23, 2010, 5:35:23 PM3/23/10
to
On Mar 23, 10:44 am, walki...@nv.net (hank alrich) wrote:

Yep. That wuz my thinking.

Instrument ==> Processor ==> "Stomp box" ==> DI ==> PA

I'll experiment w/the AD-5. It does have jacks for "effects"
boxes that enter the chain just before the output jacks
(choice of 1/4" or XLR).

levi

unread,
Apr 1, 2010, 10:23:40 AM4/1/10
to

Can anyone explain this??? I was tweaking the
various controls on the AD-5 and got about as good
a sound as I figured I'd get out of my mandolin with
the K&K pickup. Then, just because it was convenient,
I ran the signal through my Boss equalizer *before* the
AD-5.

When I "stomped" on the EQ just to increase the
volume 5% or so (eq settings all set to flat, output
slider raised a smidgen), BAM, there was the tone
I'd been looking for.

hank alrich

unread,
Apr 1, 2010, 1:23:22 PM4/1/10
to
levi <le...@visi.com> wrote:

> > Yep. That wuz my thinking.


> >
> > Instrument ==> Processor ==> "Stomp box" ==> DI ==> PA
> >
> > I'll experiment w/the AD-5. It does have jacks for "effects"
> > boxes that enter the chain just before the output jacks
> > (choice of 1/4" or XLR).
>
> Can anyone explain this??? I was tweaking the
> various controls on the AD-5 and got about as good
> a sound as I figured I'd get out of my mandolin with
> the K&K pickup. Then, just because it was convenient,
> I ran the signal through my Boss equalizer *before* the
> AD-5.
>
> When I "stomped" on the EQ just to increase the
> volume 5% or so (eq settings all set to flat, output
> slider raised a smidgen), BAM, there was the tone
> I'd been looking for.

1. A lot of research has been done demonstrating that in almost all
cases short of earsplitting SPL's humans will prefer the louder signal.
This is why absolute gain matching is critical in blind tests. A tiny
increase in level is perceived as better.

2. You might be looking for a certain kind of distortion, and increasing
the level into the AD-5 might have given you that.

--
ha

Misifus

unread,
Apr 1, 2010, 2:23:12 PM4/1/10
to


Another explanation is that, although the K&K gives a strong enough
signal that a pre-amp is required, using a pre-amp gives the signal a
little boost. I'm not talking about "LOUD", I'm just saying the amp or
PA is getting something closer to a line level signal.

I know I prefer my K&K with a pre-amp.

-Raf

--
Misifus-
Rafael Seibert
Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rafiii
home: http://www.rafandsioux.com

levi

unread,
Apr 1, 2010, 2:40:50 PM4/1/10
to

I know what you're saying about the louder sound
seeming better, but I had been working with both
the input gain and the output. This was about
clarity / cleanness.

One piece of info that I left out was that the AD-5
has two input jack, one for piezo pickups, one for
mags. I began with the piezo input, wasn't happy
with that, real dull even after diddling the EQ's on
the box. I liked the basic sound thru the mag
pickup input better, so I worked from there. Now
I'm thinking that the little extra signal boost from
the stomp box EQ provided a bit more signal that
the mag interface really needed.

And in other news, I found that my Zoom A2
box has a control that lets you select for a
"bright" piezo input or a "dull" one. Invoking
the "bright" mode gave me sound very nearly
as good as what I got from the AD-5 and I
haven't even begun to use its EQ programs.

SO I'm thinking that the AD-5's piezo input
must be tuned for old quacky piezo's

hank alrich

unread,
Apr 1, 2010, 3:33:46 PM4/1/10
to
Misifus <rafse...@att.net> wrote:

From the AD-5's info:

"Specially voiced acoustic instrument preamp with 4-band EQ"

levi

unread,
Apr 1, 2010, 4:27:15 PM4/1/10
to
On Apr 1, 2:33 pm, walki...@nv.net (hank alrich) wrote:

Right. The reason I bought the thing in the
first place was because it's a pre-amp. I'm
guessing that "special" voicing is what got
me.

Steve Daniels

unread,
Apr 1, 2010, 6:48:18 PM4/1/10
to
On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 13:23:12 -0500, against all advice, something
compelled Misifus <rafse...@att.net>, to say:

> Another explanation is that, although the K&K gives a strong enough
> signal that a pre-amp is required, using a pre-amp gives the signal a
> little boost.


Did you mistype not required?


--

Howdya like that... we started playing guitar to impress the chicks and wind
up talkin' fingernails with old men.

Ray Boyce - 9.27.09

hank alrich

unread,
Apr 1, 2010, 7:10:24 PM4/1/10
to
Steve Daniels <sdan...@gorge.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 13:23:12 -0500, against all advice, something
> compelled Misifus <rafse...@att.net>, to say:
>
> > Another explanation is that, although the K&K gives a strong enough
> > signal that a pre-amp is required, using a pre-amp gives the signal a
> > little boost.
>
>
> Did you mistype not required?

I think Raf did mistype.

Here's the K&K PWM deal: of course it needs a preamp, but the type of
preamp it can use is much the same as regular electromagnetic pickups
get on with, which is to say that the preamp in most any instrument amp
will work decently with it. Many other piezos don't work well without
something specfic between the pickup and whatever else one wants to use.

So my K&K needs no batteries or anything besdies the elements and wiring
inside my guitar, and I like that.

Steve Daniels

unread,
Apr 1, 2010, 7:58:12 PM4/1/10
to
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 16:10:24 -0700, against all advice, something
compelled walk...@nv.net (hank alrich), to say:


I've been thinking of putting a pickup into my HD-28. That's an
endorsement, and probably the way I'll go.

Thank you.


Misifus

unread,
Apr 1, 2010, 11:49:09 PM4/1/10
to
Steve Daniels wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 13:23:12 -0500, against all advice, something
> compelled Misifus <rafse...@att.net>, to say:
>
>> Another explanation is that, although the K&K gives a strong enough
>> signal that a pre-amp is required, using a pre-amp gives the signal a
>> little boost.
>
>
> Did you mistype not required?
>
>


Yes, I meant not required.

levi

unread,
Apr 2, 2010, 6:13:13 AM4/2/10
to
On Apr 1, 10:49 pm, Misifus <rafseib...@att.net> wrote:
> Steve Daniels wrote:
> > On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 13:23:12 -0500, against all advice, something
> > compelled Misifus <rafseib...@att.net>, to say:

>
> >>     Another explanation is that, although the K&K gives a strong enough
> >>     signal that a pre-amp is required, using a pre-amp gives the signal a
> >>     little boost.
>
> > Did you mistype not required?
>
> Yes, I meant not required.
>
>         -Raf
>
> --
> Misifus-
> Rafael Seibert
> Photos:http://www.flickr.com/photos/rafiii
> home:http://www.rafandsioux.com

It's instructive (I guess) cuz that's what I "read".

I'm struck with the irony of (apparently) needing
a pre-amp to feed into my pre-amp.

Misifus

unread,
Apr 2, 2010, 10:40:16 AM4/2/10
to


You may not. I have two guitars I often alternate between, one has an
onboard preamp, the other the K&K. By using my PADI, I don't have to
change any settings on the Ultrasound to keep the same level. Whereas,
without it, I have to boost the gain for the K&K.

Also, I prefer the sound of the K&K through the PADI. (also I have a
little impedance matching box that helps the K&K a little)

0 new messages