Di box or Reamp box?

[maddnotez]

In my info search on DI boxes I stumbles across an old thread that included this link.

http://en.audiofanzine.com/getting-started/editorial/articles/what-is-reamping.html

My question is to the studio guys. On average do you prefer people to send you tracks for reamp through a DI box or a Reamp box?

I don't know much about either but I would like to buy one or the other for sending off recordings for mixing and possible reamping.

 

[MountAnDewMe]

I use both. Use the DI to get a good quality, stable signal for the initial recording. I use a PARA DI from tech 21 and monitor my sound through my rig while keeping the track I'm recording muted. I'll later run that track out of output 3 on my interface through a Radial passive reamp into an amp for the final recording. 1st take I only care about getting the notes right because I can deal with the tone aspect later without having it distract my playing. I would say you always should use both but you absolutely need a dedicated reamping solution to change the impedance level or you will bust you amp up. Some interfaces like the eleven rack have a compensated output just for reamping but the majority of them do not. Both the DI and the reamp devices serve up necessary but different services to recording.

If you plan on only sending DI tracks of to be reamped and never plan to do it yourself then get a DI, it will help you achieve the best possible signal for that purpose. If you ever plan on doing it yourself you need the reamping device. I suggest both to home studio owners because of the flexibility offered but be warned reamping leads to higher GAS levels fast.

 

[Ventura]

Easy arena to spend gobs of money in.

Starts with a loadbox/DI unit.
Then an auxiliary reamp box.
Then rack mount effects.
Monitors.
Computer horsepower.
MIDI keyboards.
Triggered drum kits to the tune of $4500

It never stops...