RMMGA postings on B-band pickups (1998)

79 Messages in 41 Threads:

B-Band pickups VS Baggs, etc. [5]
Review: Sans AMP Acoustic DI- [1]
EMF b-band review [1]
Piezo Owners...Highlander or LR Baggs? [1]
Recording acoustic gtr direct? [1]
B-Band pickup [1]
Pickup vs. quality of guitar* SUGGESTIONS? [1]
Any Word on B_BAND? [1]
B-band [2]
Baggs vs Fishman [4]
b-band with baggs para acoustic DI? [1]
B-Band retrofit (was: Baggs vs. Fishman) [1]
condenser mic placement [1]
B-Band dual source review [3]
B-band/mic review [2]
B-Band pickup for classical guitar [1]
Transducers, mics, & pre-amps [2]
What is a Piezo electric pick up? [1]
Lowdens with Piezos or B-Bands? [1]
Sunrise pick-ups? Any users? [2]
Source for b-band pickup [2]
B Band? [7]
B-Band Review [4]
Awesome B-Band! [7]
Mics (was "Awesome B-Band!") [1]
b-band problem [3]
B-Band Installation Findings [1]
B-band Pickups [1]
Installing the B-band pickup [1]
Another B-Band rave [1]
Q: B-Band vs. Highlander [1]
B-Band mic mounting problem [3]
noisy b-band problems [1]
My experiences with the B-Band pickup [2]
Another B-band rave [1]
B-Band Balance on a 12? (was: pocket blender phantom power) [2]
pocket blender phantom power [1]
Review: EMF B-Band Piezo Replacement System [1]
Saddle Pickups: LR Baggs versus Fishman? [1]
B-band and Fishman Cleartone Saddle [4]
Taylor Electronics [1]

From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: B-Band pickups VS Baggs, etc.
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 1998 18:09:41 -0500
Organization: Cornell University

George-

The current B-band is just an undersaddle pickup, not a dual source
system. In my opinion, the pickup sounds better than any other
undersaddle pickup. But a dual source system will probably sound
better than just the B-band, if it's set up right.

By the way, I've yet to hear a Baggs dual source system based on
their Ribbon pickup that I liked, but the ones using the older LB6
saddle pickup can sound good, in my opinion. In the past these
have been available custom (used by Phil Keaggy and others), but
I think Baggs now makes a public version compatible with the LB6.
I may be confusing the Dual Source and the Duet here, though---I
always screw those two up! 8-)

The current B-band cannot easily be used in a dual source setup
because they use the "ring" connection on the stereo endpin jack
to turn the internal preamp on an off---that is, you can't connect
a mic or second pickup to it. So to use it in a dual source system,
you'd have to install a second jack. The EMF folks recognize players
want dual source setups, and are working on such setups right now.
They will not require holes in the side of the guitar.
I don't know when they will be available. Probably worth waiting
for if you aren't in a rush.

I myself am developing some preamp kits that will work both with
B-band and other pickups and mics. But this is a spare-time activity,
so they won't be available for a few months. And since they will be
kits, they probably won't interest that many of you. Ideas/feedback
appreciated, though, if you wouldn't mind soldering together your
own preamp.

Peace,
Tom Loredo

From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-Band pickups VS Baggs, etc.
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 1998 16:10:34 -0700
Organization: XMission Internet (801 539 0900)

In article <<34B53BC0.3219@ccm...>>,
<george_reiswig@ccm...> wrote:

> Hi, all.
> I know that Larry Pattis and Tom Loredo had mentioned the B-Band,
but I
> don't know anyone else who seems to know anything about them. Tom,
> Larry, how do these compare to, say, the Baggs Dual Source system? I'm
> interested in putting something in my old 12 string, and those two
> systems are the same price with all the electronics. One advantage the
> Baggs system seems to have is that, if the guitar owner doesn't want a
> hole cut in the side, the Baggs system let's them keep it whole.
> Opinions? Has anyone else heard these things?
>
> --
> George S. Reiswig
>

The B-band, as a stand alone, is the best under saddle element that I have
ever heard. I have never cared for the all-in-one dual internal systems,
as they do not allow for seperate eq of the pick-ups/mics, plus the
individual components (the mic, along with the internal pre-amp gear) are
not nearly the same quality as the seperate stand alone gear that is
available. For $120 or so, the B-band is the best thing going. Doesn't
the Baggs Dual Source go for more than $200? If you have need for higher
quality than this, the only real next step (IMHO) is to go the full 9 yards
with a Mills mic, Fishman Blender (or Rane or Pendulum), etc. I am just
now trying to test the B-band in a dual set-up with an external pre-amp
system. I'll report back in a few weeks on this. Tom may already hgave
some results on this, I don't know.

Larry Pattis

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in
practice.

The top header is to reduce spam. You can really find me at
<lpattis"at"xmission"dot"com>.

From: jeff liaw <jeffliaw@mail...>
Subject: Re: B-Band pickups VS Baggs, etc.
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 1998 18:06:40 -0600
Organization: Flashnet Communications, http://www.flash.net

I haven't done any thorough scientific research on the matter, but I'd
give the Baggs system another look before dismissing it as lesser
quality stuff.

The saddle transducer is the ribbon transducer that baggs markets
individually. As far as I know, this transducer has an excellent
reputation. Taylor uses them in some of their guitars, and I know
Langejans does as well.

Larry is right about the fact that the internal unit limits your eq
flexibility. My experience with the unit is this: I don't know enough
to improve the sound dramatically with an eq anyway, so i trust the
default settings and the sound man enough that I don't need the unit.
if you're one of those people who likes to fiddle with the knobs until
everything is perfect, yeah, don't get the Baggs. But if you see your
amplification system more as a burden to mess with, I think the Baggs is
the best thing around. Besides, you have a nice compromise with the
onboard volume and mic/transducer controls.

If you check the Langejans home page (from guitarnotes.com), you'll see
that Del put the unit on his display guitar. I think that says a lot
about the system. Three of my guitar-playing buddies went out and
bought the unit as soon as they'd heard mine. You can get the unit for
something like $155 or so. A decent tech man will put the system in for
$50 or so. It's well worth the investment.

jeff

Larry Pattis wrote:
>
> In article <<34B53BC0.3219@ccm...>>,
> <george_reiswig@ccm...> wrote:
>
> > Hi, all.
> > I know that Larry Pattis and Tom Loredo had mentioned the B-Band,
> but I
> > don't know anyone else who seems to know anything about them. Tom,
> > Larry, how do these compare to, say, the Baggs Dual Source system? I'm
> > interested in putting something in my old 12 string, and those two
> > systems are the same price with all the electronics. One advantage the
> > Baggs system seems to have is that, if the guitar owner doesn't want a
> > hole cut in the side, the Baggs system let's them keep it whole.
> > Opinions? Has anyone else heard these things?
> >
> > --
> > George S. Reiswig
> >
>
> The B-band, as a stand alone, is the best under saddle element that I have
> ever heard. I have never cared for the all-in-one dual internal systems,
> as they do not allow for seperate eq of the pick-ups/mics, plus the
> individual components (the mic, along with the internal pre-amp gear) are
> not nearly the same quality as the seperate stand alone gear that is
> available. For $120 or so, the B-band is the best thing going. Doesn't
> the Baggs Dual Source go for more than $200? If you have need for higher
> quality than this, the only real next step (IMHO) is to go the full 9 yards
> with a Mills mic, Fishman Blender (or Rane or Pendulum), etc. I am just
> now trying to test the B-band in a dual set-up with an external pre-amp
> system. I'll report back in a few weeks on this. Tom may already hgave
> some results on this, I don't know.
>
> Larry Pattis
>
> In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in
> practice.
>
> The top header is to reduce spam. You can really find me at
> <lpattis"at"xmission"dot"com>.

From: Paul Guy <paul@guyguitars...>
Subject: Re: B-Band pickups VS Baggs, etc.
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 05:24:14 +0100
Organization: Paul Guy Guitars

Larry Pattis <<abuse@127...>> wrote:

> <george_reiswig@ccm...> wrote:
>
> I know that Larry Pattis and Tom Loredo had mentioned
> the B-Band, but I don't know anyone else who seems to know anything
> about them. Tom, Larry, how do these compare to, say, the Baggs Dual
> Source system? I'm interested in putting something in my old 12 string,
> and those two systems are the same price with all the electronics. One
> advantage the Baggs system seems to have is that, if the guitar owner
> doesn't want a hole cut in the side, the Baggs system let's them keep it
> whole. Opinions? Has anyone else heard these things?
> >
>
> The B-band, as a stand alone, is the best under saddle element that I have
> ever heard. I have never cared for the all-in-one dual internal systems,
> as they do not allow for seperate eq of the pick-ups/mics, plus the
> individual components (the mic, along with the internal pre-amp gear) are
> not nearly the same quality as the seperate stand alone gear that is
> available. For $120 or so, the B-band is the best thing going. Doesn't
> the Baggs Dual Source go for more than $200? If you have need for higher
> quality than this, the only real next step (IMHO) is to go the full 9
> yards with a Mills mic, Fishman Blender (or Rane or Pendulum), etc. I am
> just now trying to test the B-band in a dual set-up with an external
> pre-amp system. I'll report back in a few weeks on this. Tom may already
> have some results on this, I don't know.
>
I have to agree with Larry here. The only other undersaddle pickup I've
heard which comes close is the English Ashworth "Microstrip" (from
Ashworth Electronics). I tested the B-Band for the Swedish guitar
magazine FUZZ recently and was very impressed. If you're interested you
can read my review of it (translated into English!) on their website:

http://www.b-band.com/paulguy.htm

The B-Band model I tested had the "CORE" preamp, which is mounted on the
endpinjack, and thus needs no holes cut in the side of the guitar. They
also have a new preamp/equalizer called the "New Frontier" with volume
and EQ controls (which does mount in the side) which they sent me for
test, I haven't finished evaluating it yet but so far I'm very positive.

I'm also very excited about their B-Band for electric guitars which is
in the works (see their website), they promised to send me one for test
when they get production up and running, I'll post a report when I've
tried it.

Larry, I will be very interested to hear how your test goes, I'm going
to try something similar myself, but with a contact p/u as the second
transducer, as I don't like internal mikes (too much feedback...).

Paul

--
Paul Guy Guitars (Handmade - Custom Shop - Repairs)
 Katarina Bangata 65, 116 42 Stockholm, Sweden
 My homepage: http://home3.swipnet.se/~w-37192

From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: B-Band pickups VS Baggs, etc.
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 19:07:21 -0500
Organization: Cornell University

Hi again, folks-

Larry Pattis wrote:
>
> If you have need for higher
> quality than this, the only real next step (IMHO) is to go the full 9 yards
> with a Mills mic, Fishman Blender (or Rane or Pendulum), etc. I am just
> now trying to test the B-band in a dual set-up with an external pre-amp
> system. I'll report back in a few weeks on this. Tom may already hgave
> some results on this, I don't know.

The EMF folks sent me a modified version of their New Frontier preamp/EQ
that works outside of the guitar. I further modified the setup to
allow addition of another pickup or mic signal. I've been using the
B-band as the core sound of a 3-transducer setup this way (with an
AT831 mic and a Sunrise pickup) since early November. It's great, and
combines well with other transducers. However, I haven't wanted to say
much about this because it's not publicly available yet, and the EMF folks
haven't even settled on the basic details of their upcoming dual source
systems. I've used it in two configurations: In one, I combined the
mic and Sunrise with a Rane AP13 loaned to me for a conference; the
AP13 provides access to the mix bus on the back, so I plugged the
B-band signal in there. In the second, I have a Fishman Blender that
I modified to take a third input. I use the standard controls to blend
the mic and Sunrise, and take the 3rd input from the B-band.

Regarding holes in the side of the guitar... I presumed the original
question referred to the New Frontier setup---a B-band pickup with an
onboard preamp that provides volume and bass and treble boosting. This
also brings the cost up around the dual source prices quoted in this thread.
The New Frontier box requires holes in the side of the guitar for the
three controls to pass through. If you use the B-band with only the
Core preamp (no controls), you need no holes. Any EQ you have to provide
yourself externally.

Regarding the tone, when used flat, I prefer the B-band tone to other
piezo tones, flat. The difference in the basic tone is not incredibly
dramatic. The B-band does not sound completely natural, and has a
bit of harshness, but in my opinion this is inherent to the undersaddle
location. Put your ear very close to your guitar at the bridge---it just
doesn't sound as nice as what you hear far away, when you hear sound
produced across the whole instrument. I don't believe there is any way
to get around this limitation with an undersaddle pickup. Thus I believe
you need to add a second source to get the most natural sound out of a
B-band setup. But I think the B-band is probably about as good as an
undersaddle sound can get.

Where it really shines in comparison with my current pickup (Baggs LB6)
is when you add EQ. With the B-band you can add highs without the added
harshness you get when you try this piezos. The lowest bass notes also
sound less "boingy" to my ears. The New Frontier preamp works quite well for
this. With most piezos, the 1st thing I like to adjust as far as EQ is to cut
mids in the 1-2kHz region. You cannot do this with the New Frontier, but
you can get the effect of a broad midrange cut by boosting lows and highs
a bit. This would be a disaster with my LB6, but sounds quite nice with
the B-band. I thus suspect the B-band with the Core preamp would work very
nicely with a Blender, since the Blender provides similar tone shaping
capabilities.

Also, when I play hard, I find the B-band to be noticably less harsh sounding
than piezo pickups, which to my ears tend to sound harsher the louder you
play.

Paul's review puts it well; read it. [He doesn't have the physics quite
right, though! 8-) ] The one thing he didn't mention that
all the other testers I've spoken to have noticed is that it takes a bit
of work to get good string-to-string balance. Perhaps Paul was lucky in
this regard!

I think Jeff really summed up the issues about dual source systems well.
In my presentation at the Folk Alliance conference I handed out a list
of the questions you need to consider when shopping for an amplification
setup, and one of these was in regard to the level of complexity you are willing
to deal with. If you really don't want to carry around a Blender or fiddle
with EQ of the separate signals, you will probably do better with an
onboard dual source setup than with any single pickup setup. But if sound
quality is your primary consideration, get two separate transducers and
leave the preamp/EQ/mixing tasks to higher quality equipment out of the
guitar.

As for the Ribbon transducer... I have only heard it live in a few setups
(with a Duet or Dual Source), and never liked it. The luthiers I've spoken
to about Baggs pickups (Jim Olson, Peter Granata, Eric Aceto) all feel it
was a step backwards from the older LB6; Jim and Peter regularly recommend
the LB6 to their customers. Phil Keaggy, Cliff Eberhardt, and a few other
players whose names escape me at the moment agree with this assessment.
A few years after the introduction of the Ribbon, Baggs is not only still
selling the LB6, but has just come out with a version of their dual source
system compatible with it (it requires less gain than the Ribbon, so the
preamp has to be adjusted). What can I say? This is a subjective game,
and I can believe the Ribbon does sound good in some guitars when installed
properly. But I think it's pretty indisputable that the LB6 sounds better
a fair fraction of the time.

Peace,
Tom Loredo

Review: Sans AMP Acoustic DI-

From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@xxxomega...>
Subject: Re: Review: Sans AMP Acoustic DI-
Date: 29 Jan 1998 16:59:13 +0200
Organization: TUT

Robert McArthur wrote (in avery good article):

> ...When the Sans Amp meets the highlander you have what to my ears is
> the holy grail of amplification found. Highlander IP-1's run bout
> $125...

I agree, the Highlander is a very good mic. Best of the piezo saddle
transducers I've heard. But I'd like to remind that technology goes
on. Some time ago I did an A-B test with two handmade guitars, one
equipped with a perfectly installed Highlander, the other with the new
B-Band. (At the time, not so perfectly installed.) We recorded both
guitars digitally to a DAT, through just the transducers to remove the
acoustic sound completely.

Result: The Highlander was by no means completely butchered in the
comparison, but there was little doubt as to which one sounded closer
to the original. Especially the attack brought the difference
out. B-Band just lacks the piezo quackiness. You can try to compensate
with something like the Sans Amp, but with the B-Band you don't have
to. As either Tom or Larry previously pointed out, to get a
significant improvement in the sound you need to add a zero to the
price. (A multi-source micing system with a dedicated preamp; no
one-point vibration-sensing device will ever sound natural by
definition.)

http://www.b-band.com, about 130 $ by mail order. No affiliation.
Just an impressed beta-tester.
	Ville
# Ville.Nummela"at"cc.tut.fi http://www.tut.fi/~vnummela
# Acoustic Trio CaveOss: http://www.hut.fi/~tilmonen/CaveOss.html
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
# Promote Responsible Net Commerce: http://spam.abuse.net/spam/
# Stomp the Spammers: Support CAUSE: http://www.cause.org

EMF b-band review

From: Tom Chow <thomchow.NOSPAM@geocities...>
Subject: EMF b-band review
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 15:05:59 -0800
Organization: UC Berkeley. No spamming please.
   i finally got the guitar and played it plugged in..  and i was
surprised how good it sounded for a measely 130 dollar pickup. the
pickup lacked the brittle high ends that the Fishman demonstrates. it
was really sharp and clear- not quite as good as an internal mic, but
pretty darn good. the mids and lows were very strong, but not overly
loud. they sounded just like the guitar. with a bit of EQing, the
pickup is very impressive. while it's not completely acoustic, it was
really close- all it needs is the brilliant highs of an internal mic.
b-band is like getting the richer highs of the Highlander and a more
natural mid and low ends like the Fishman. all in all, definitely worth
the 130 dollars for the b-band with Core. :)
   i still can't believe that this pickup sounded as good as any dual
source system. thumbs up!

--thom

Piezo Owners...Highlander or LR Baggs?

From: Tom Chow <thomchow.NOSPAM@geocities...>
Subject: Re: Piezo Owners...Highlander or LR Baggs?
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 17:55:17 -0800
Organization: UC Berkeley. No spamming please.

> The B-band US dealer page is "under construction" (nice picture... -
> wanna sell that guitar... ?). Who does installs in US ?
>
> John
   it's under construction, but the "The Music People" are carrying the
B-band pickups. it's currently the only US Distributor, but i'm sure
that they're working out details with other distributors. (like Tom
Loredo reported.. and i know some people who would like to get in touch
with EMF also). i actually recommend just ordering a b-band from them
directly if you can't contact The Music People. (sorry, i don't have
their number or anything) that's what i did a few months back- and i
have absolutely no regrets since it burns any undersaddle pickups i've
ever heard.
   in terms of installs, you can get any competent luthier/tech to do
it. if the person has done various under-the-saddle pickup
installations, they will have no trouble doing the installation for the
b-band. it's really easy to install- took my guitar tech no time to
install though it was his first time doing it. it's a rather simple
procedure. the only tough part is trying to get proper string to string
balance from the pickup, but any good luthier/tech should know how to
deal with it.

--thom

Recording acoustic gtr direct?

From: dave <dave@ced...>
Subject: Re: Recording acoustic gtr direct?
Date: 24 Feb 1998 16:45:52 GMT
Organization: University of Utah Computer Center

Tom Loredo wrote:

: None of these will make a lousy pickup sound good, though they may
: make a lousy one sound better. The guitar transducers with the best reputation
: are the under-saddles by LR Baggs, Highlander, and Fishman, the
: soundboard pickups by McIntyre, soundhole pickups by Sunrise and Seymour
: Duncan, and internal mics by Joe Mills and Donnell Enterprises.
: I've been beta-testing a new under-saddle pickup by EMF called the B-band
: that I believe is a step above existing under-saddle technology. It is
: the only such pickup that does not use piezo technology; it is a
: 12+ mil strip of electret material, essentially putting an electret
: condensor mic element under your saddle. More info at www.b-band.com.

I got one of the b-band units to look at and although it is an electret
rather than piezo based element it still is closer to a piezo than a
mic. It still works by translating the saddles vibrations to an
electrical signal rather than translating the heard sound to an electrical
signal signal like a mic would. That said I fell that it is an improvement
over existing piezo based units in that it does sound better and it is
thinner and requires no or certainlt less modification to the guitar.

dave

B-Band pickup

From: Dan Smith <des24@cornell...>
Subject: Re: B-Band pickup
Date: Unknown

Tom,
	Thanks a bunch for your suggestions.  I have decided to go with the B-Band
pickup. I e-mailed EMF acoustics with my question (shown below) and their
response went like this. They also indicated that the first shipment was
due in the US on April 1st. Incredible price, too :) Thanks again for
your help!
					Dan
<<My message to them>>
>> I have a question regarding your B-Band acoustic guitar pickup. I am
>> interested in combining an under-saddle pickup with an internal=
 microphone
>> in my Martin D-1. Is EMF considering developing this sort of product in
>> the future? Thanks for your time!
<<>>

>Hello Dan.
>
>Thanks for your mail. I gues our Larry did answer to you but in case he
>didn=B4t see your mail (it came to my laptop) I answer to you just for=
 sure.=20
>
>This product is being manufactured right now. Our first shipment to our US
>distributor will be new Core preamps which will feature as standard a Mic
>input/output. We will naturally be offering the Core with our choice Mic.
>This will retail at 179 US with B-band pickup but you can very easily
>modify the Core to plug in for example a Joe Mills Mic. The retail price
>for Core with B-Band pickup will be 139 US.
>
>All the best for you.
>
>Best regards,
>EMF Acoustics
>Heikki Raisanen

Pickup vs. quality of guitar* SUGGESTIONS?

From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@xxxomega...>
Subject: Re: Pickup vs. quality of guitar* SUGGESTIONS?
Date: 03 Mar 1998 11:57:13 +0200
Organization: TUT

<hojo2x@aol...> (Hojo2X) writes:

> As to the pickups, what I have found over the years is that one
> company will make a breakthrough and have the best pickup available
> for a couple of years, while the other outfits scramble to catch up.
> The best firms seem to be EMG, Baggs and Highlander. Right now the
> Baggs RT system (which makes up the under-the-saddle component of
> the Dual Source mentioned in another post) is currently the best
> acoustic pickup available, at least to my ears. Previously I had an
> EMG, which was also quite good.

These three companies are, to my ears as well, the best makers of
piezoelectric pickups. A new breaktrough has, however, been recently
made, by a small new company. EMF Acoustics Ltd has come up with a new
under-saddle design. It looks and installs just like a conventional
piezo slip. But inside, nothing is the same anyy more. It is a
condenser microphone, with a long thin and flexible `capsule'.

This design neatly avoids many of the piezoelectric crystals' inherent
non-linearities. Which most notably result in the upper-range
quackiness, regardless of the manufacturer. The EMF's B-Band uses
minute air bubbles inside the pickup. Comparing to the piezo crystals,
the bubbles compress and decompress much more readily with the
vibrating string than any crystal can. The result is a clearly audible
improvement in sound.

Of course, it is still an under-saddle pickup, so it can't capture the
full effect of the entire vibrating soundboard. So, for the ultimate
sound you still need a microphone to go with it. The starting point
is, however, already much closer to the goal with the b-band. The mic
only has to add a little air and warmth. You don't have to desperately
try to EQ the piezo shortcomings away & compensate with the mic.

The www site is http://www.b-band.com/
	Ville
# Ville.Nummela"at"cc.tut.fi http://www.tut.fi/~vnummela
# Acoustic Trio CaveOss: http://www.hut.fi/~tilmonen/CaveOss.html
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
# Promote Responsible Net Commerce: http://spam.abuse.net/spam/
# Stomp the Spammers: Support CAUCE: http://www.cauce.org

Any Word on B_BAND?

From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@xxxomega...>
Subject: Re: Any Word on B_BAND?
Date: 03 Apr 1998 17:51:18 +0300
Organization: TUT

"jae il \"Joker\" Ko" <<jik3343@is...>> writes:

> Dear all,
> how's that Bband thing going? Have they made a dual source system, yet?
> My Martin's screaming for a PA voice and my Sunrise's getting kinda lonely.
> Thanks
	Dear Jae,
I called EMF to ask about this. Harri (the electronics guru) assured
me, that a dual source system has been designed. Even better, they've
made a contract with an electronics manufacturing plant to assemble
the electronics for them. The first big shipment is expected to arrive
from the factory in about a week or so, including both single & dual
source models. Add a week (or two - they're going to check every
unit themselves before shipping) and The Music People Inc has it &
then whatever time it takes to make it to the stores. Guitar Centre
will probably be the first chain to start carrying B-Band. It probably
won't slow the guys down to have your local store to call & ask for
it. Of course, you can still order it directly from EMF Acoustics.

As for first reviews, I'm hoping to have one installed some time
around easter. The only problem is that Lottonen the luthier is on
vacation, as he has just become a father. I rather doubt he'll be too
interested in installing pickups right now.
	Ville
# Ville.Nummela"at"cc.tut.fi ("at"=@) http://www.tut.fi/~vnummela
# Note: To reduce spam, my return address has been modified.
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
# MAKE MONEY FAST (Hall of Humiliation): http://ga.to/mmf/

B-band [2]

From: David Wolfe <dwolfman01@sprynet...>
Subject: Re: B-band
Date: Unknown

-->Hi David-
>
>I just got a note from Heikki at EMF. It seemed that he was
>going to contact you directly, but I couldn't tell for sure
>from what he wrote so I thought I'd better double-check. They
>are a few weeks behind on production, but are about to get
>their first deliveries. They've been away and so haven't
>responded to recent email.

Evening Tom,
    Thanks for the help. I have gotten e-mails from both Heikki and Larry in
the sales department. I have ordered the B-Band/mic combo. It should take
about a week to get here according to Larry.
    The people at EMF are great to work with. I wish I could get half the
customer service from them from other businesses I deal with. If the pick-up
is half as good as I've heard they have picked up a loyal and vocal
customer.
    My Langejans should be done in about 3 to 4 weeks so that should be just
enough time. I'm starting to save my pennies up now for a second custom
guitar. I'm torn between an Olson or getting a Grand Concert from Del. It's
gonna be 2 years or so before I can get another one...so I have plenty of
time to make up my mind.
    Again, thanks for your help.
Dave Wolfe

"I've been lining up my heros. like big paper dolls,
  And I find they need a wall behind them to lean on.."
    Karen Perris

From: <glenjan@zeta...>
Subject: B-band
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 13:36:36 GMT
Organization: Zeta Internet, http://www.zeta.org.au/

Just had my B-band installed and am having a party to celebrate. Long
wait and really worty it. Review to follow after the week-ends gigs.]
Glen
PS. Get one, no get TWO!! If we have to plug our beautiful
acoustic's into a PA they should at least sound the same, only LOUDER!
Back to the party.

Baggs vs Fishman [4]

From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: Baggs vs Fishman
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 17:56:25 -0400
Organization: Cornell University

Hi again folks-

Lance McCollum wrote:
> [Lots of great info snipped...]
>
> I have yet to see a B-band pickup. I have some on order and will give my
> opinion as soon as I have had a chance to check them out. They sound very
> interesting. But from what I'm hearing from my "tech-head" friends, they
> claim not to use piezo technology, but anything that thin would have to be
> a film that was excited by string energy which is "technically" a piezo,
> but they just might be using a different crystalline structure (I guess
> we'll have to wait and see when we actually have one in front of us).

No, the B-band is not in any sense ("tecnically" or otherwise) a piezo.
It uses no crystals of any kind. "Piezo" = "piezoelectric", relying on
a material that produces a voltage or charge on reaction to a stress or
strain. The B-band is technically an electret condenser mic element.
It has a proprietary electret material that permanently holds an electric
charge, and uses this to create a capacitor that produces a varying output
voltage as its cross-section changes in size (microscopically) in response
to vibrations. Completely different physics from a piezo, and thus a
different set of strengths/weaknesses. It is this use of a totally different
technology that allows them to make a transducer drastically thinner than
previous ones.

If you've read some of Ville's posts on the B-band, you might have noticed
that he often speaks of "putting the mic under the saddle" rather than
"putting the pickup under the saddle." The difference in technology is
why he uses this lingo. I personally haven't adopted it because the
B-band will not usefully pick up sound from the air. Unlike a normal
condenser mic which has air between the charged plates (and thus can
respond readily to changes in air pressure, ie, sound), the B-band's
insulating material is stiff (designed to have the same acoustic impedance
as wood, in fact), so it doesn't act like a condenser mic in its response
to air vibrations, only in response to direct contact with a rigid surface.

Lance, when you get one, do post your impressions. I for one value your
opinion and would love to know what you think of it.

In response to Daniel, I've never heard or seen a Bourgeois system myself.
But in the ASIA pickup shootout that Jody mentioned, as I recall Bourgeois
was rated very highly, as good as the more popular contenders. I'll try to
remember to dig up the article; I and others have potentially misquoted it
too many times already in this thread! 8-)

Peace,
Tom Loredo

From: George Reiswig <reiswig@europa...>
Subject: Re: Baggs vs Fishman
Date: 10 Apr 1998 22:47:47 GMT
Organization: All USENET -- http://www.Supernews.com

To all who are thinking about it: try a B-Band. I put one in my Lowden
recently, and I'm truly impressed that a single-source setup can get this
close to a desirable sound. I think it could benefit from some microphone
high-end, but that's soon to come, too.

GR

Tom Loredo <<loredo@spacenet...>> wrote in article
<<352E9589.22475DC8@spacenet...>>...
> Hi again folks-
(SNIP)
> Lance, when you get one, do post your impressions. I for one value your
> opinion and would love to know what you think of it.
>
> In response to Daniel, I've never heard or seen a Bourgeois system
myself.
> But in the ASIA pickup shootout that Jody mentioned, as I recall
Bourgeois
> was rated very highly, as good as the more popular contenders. I'll try
to
> remember to dig up the article; I and others have potentially misquoted
it
> too many times already in this thread! 8-)
>
> Peace,
> Tom Loredo
>

From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@xxxomega...>
Subject: Re: Baggs vs Fishman
Date: 14 Apr 1998 20:12:07 +0300
Organization: TUT

Tom Loredo <<loredo@spacenet...>> writes:

> Hi again folks-
>
> Lance McCollum wrote:
> > [Lots of great info snipped...]
> >
> > I have yet to see a B-band pickup. I have some on order and will give my
> > opinion as soon as I have had a chance to check them out. They sound very
> > interesting. But from what I'm hearing from my "tech-head" friends, they
> > claim not to use piezo technology, but anything that thin would have to be
> > a film that was excited by string energy which is "technically" a piezo,
> > but they just might be using a different crystalline structure (I guess
> > we'll have to wait and see when we actually have one in front of us).
>
> No, the B-band is not in any sense ("tecnically" or otherwise) a piezo.
> It uses no crystals of any kind. "Piezo" = "piezoelectric", relying on
> a material that produces a voltage or charge on reaction to a stress or
> strain. The B-band is technically an electret condenser mic element.
> It has a proprietary electret material that permanently holds an electric
> charge, and uses this to create a capacitor that produces a varying output
> voltage as its cross-section changes in size (microscopically) in response
> to vibrations. Completely different physics from a piezo, and thus a
> different set of strengths/weaknesses. It is this use of a totally different
> technology that allows them to make a transducer drastically thinner than
> previous ones.

Both piezoelectric crystals and the EMF electret condenser produce a
minute charge (rather than voltage - although there's not much
difference) when squeezed. Thus, both require a charge amplifier for
the signal. The impedances are way different, though, so you cannot
use a piezo preamp to drive the B-Band.

The tonal difference comes from the fact, that the B-Band's EMF film
behaves much more linearly in response to the vibrations. Basically,
the charge produced should be directly proportional to the amount the
material gives in. And the material should give in in proportion to
the applied force. EMF film's cushioning material is air, and the
charge is produced by a condenser element. While nothing is ever
perfect, it's pretty hard to get much closer to ideal than this.

In contrast, a piezo crystal is a crystal. Not exactly the most
perfectly elastic material around. Squeeze it, and yes, it'll give in
- by some amount. Squeeze it twice as hard, and it'll give in more,
but not necessarily twice as much, as it should. And even if it did
that, the resulting output charge wouldn't necessarily be twice the
original.

This kind of behavior results in distortion. In other words,
additional frequency components get added to the original signal,
often overlapping with it. Which means you can't EQ it out...

B-Band is by no means completely free of problems either, but IMHO,
it's a long step forward.

> If you've read some of Ville's posts on the B-band, you might have noticed
> that he often speaks of "putting the mic under the saddle" rather than
> "putting the pickup under the saddle." The difference in technology is
> why he uses this lingo. I personally haven't adopted it because the
> B-band will not usefully pick up sound from the air. Unlike a normal
> condenser mic which has air between the charged plates (and thus can
> respond readily to changes in air pressure, ie, sound), the B-band's
> insulating material is stiff (designed to have the same acoustic impedance
> as wood, in fact), so it doesn't act like a condenser mic in its response
> to air vibrations, only in response to direct contact with a rigid surface.

Actually, B-band has air inside too, but that's not the reason. After
all, English is not my native tongue, and sometimes I confuse these
little nuances. In Finnish, theres no good word for a
pickup. Microphone, yes, and transducer and sensor, but no pickup.

In this case, the correct term would be pickup. Microphone should
be reserved for devices that require some carrier medium (air, water
etc) to transfer the signal to the element.

BTW, the entire band just got new B-Bands installed. Two guitars and a
cello, that is. Dual source versions, all of them. I still need to
solve a few practical problems before I can post a full review, but
it's coming soon. Initial impressions were pretty good, though. No
match to a good studio microphone (we used an AT 4033 & a pair of
Genelecs for a quick check), but with a little EQ and careful
mixing, one should be able to get a pretty good live sound.
	Ville
# Ville.Nummela"at"cc.tut.fi ("at"=@) http://www.tut.fi/~vnummela
# Note: To reduce spam, my return address has been modified.
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
# MAKE MONEY FAST (Hall of Humiliation): http://ga.to/mmf/

b-band with baggs para acoustic DI?

From: Jiyang Kang <jiyang@hdtv...>
Subject: b-band with baggs para acoustic DI?
Date: Unknown
Organization: School of Electrical Engineering, Seoul National University

Hi,

> The Fishman Matrix preamp uses a FET-input op amp as its input stage,
> and has a nontrivial EQ network in the feedback loop. It uses surface
> mount components, and thus is not easy to modify. The EQ network
> will modify the timbre of the B-band even if you put it thru the Core
> preamp. The input impedance of the Matrix preamp is not suitable for
> direct connection to the B-band. Also, the B-band element has a
> 0.1" 2-pin (female) header attached directly at the end; this plugs
> into the Core. Most other preamps require that you solder a wire.
> If you add a wire to the B-band, be careful---it is a capacitive
> transducer, and 8 inches of good quality small-diameter cable has enough
> capacitance of its own to cut the signal substantially (EMF told me this,
> but I also found it out by experiment!).
> ........

A question on b-band and outer preamp.

I have a Baggs Para acoustic DI, and have a plan to use it with my nylon
string guitar which I'll put the b-band with Core preamp on. In above
article, it seems that b-band do not match well with external preamp &
EQ such as baggs PADI. Is that true?

Sincerely,
	Jiyang Kang

B-Band retrofit (was: Baggs vs. Fishman)

From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: B-Band retrofit (was: Baggs vs. Fishman)
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 15:08:35 -0400
Organization: Cornell University

Howdy-

A few clarifications....

The B-band insulator is not air; it is a proprietary material that
has air bubbles in it, but that is more like wood in its density.
That's why it does not respond to normal sound the way an air-insulated
condenser mic element does. It does not squeeze linearly, but presumably
it squeezes more linearly than does a piezo because it's more like a
sponge than like a crystal.

Like other electret elements, the b-band element is a capacitor with
a fixed charge. When compressed, what changes is the capacitance,
not the charge. This results in a fluctuating voltage from the element.
The Core preamp is a standard Class A FET voltage gain stage, as are
the preamps in most condenser mic modules.

The Fishman Matrix preamp uses a FET-input op amp as its input stage,
and has a nontrivial EQ network in the feedback loop. It uses surface
mount components, and thus is not easy to modify. The EQ network
will modify the timbre of the B-band even if you put it thru the Core
preamp. The input impedance of the Matrix preamp is not suitable for
direct connection to the B-band. Also, the B-band element has a
0.1" 2-pin (female) header attached directly at the end; this plugs
into the Core. Most other preamps require that you solder a wire.
If you add a wire to the B-band, be careful---it is a capacitive
transducer, and 8 inches of good quality small-diameter cable has enough
capacitance of its own to cut the signal substantially (EMF told me this,
but I also found it out by experiment!).

I don't know if the Prefix has the same built in "pre EQ" as the Matrix
(I would suspect it does), or whether it, too, uses surface mount
technology. If it uses standard thru-hole components, it may be
easier to modify. But if it uses a FET op-amp input stage rather than
a discrete FET, the results may not be great. These op amp chips have
a nonlinear capacitance between the FET inputs and the substrate that
causes distortion when used with high impedance sources. The B-band
impedance is so high that this distortion could be troublesome, but the
only way to tell is to try.

Bottom line: This modification is not trivial.

By the way, the Core preamp is about the simplest thing you can imagine,
with absolutely no pre-EQ. I think this says something about the the
basic sound from the transducer---with the Matrix, you have to start
"fixing" things right away.

Peace,
Tom Loredo

condenser mic placement

From: Thomas Chow <tomchow@uclink4...>
Subject: condenser mic placement
Date: Unknown

Larry, Tom, & Ville:
   I got the package from EMF the other day with the Core preamp with 
b-band and condenser mic. Because the instructions don't really
specify where to place the mic, I was wondering if you guys had any
advice to give on mic placement. What are the best positions for
different tones (clear highs / strong mids / boomy) and what are your
favorite mic positions, especially as you 3 all have EMF b-band
pickups? (Ville in particular because he has the dual source)
Thanks a lot!

--thom

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ Thomas Chow! _/ <tomchow@uclink4...> _/ <manowar@technologist...> _/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ <>< Lord and Savior, true and kind, be the master of my mind; Bless and _/
_/ guide and strengthen still all my powers of thought and will. While I _/
_/ ply the scholar's task, Jesus Christ be near, I ask; Help the memory, _/
_/ clear the brain, knowledge still to seek and gain. --Bishop H.G.C. Moule _/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

--------

Hi Thom-

Well, I see Ville gave you quite a lengthy report. I don't have
much to add except to say that optimal placement seems to vary
a lot from instrument to instrument and mic to mic. This mic
element is extremely similar to the Panasonic element used in
the highly regarded Radio Shack 33-1052 lapel mic. Paul Stamler
has written about this mic in Recording magazine, noting
that Martin Carthy uses it for his live sound. I've written to
Paul about it and it turns out that Carthy puts it on the neck
block. But in Paul's guitar that turned out to be a horrible
place, and he had to experiment a lot to find a good one.

For what it's worth, my guitar has a Sunrise soundhole pickup,
and a good location turned out to be under the pickup, pointing
toward the back of the guitar. But as near as I can tell the
mic element is an omni, so it shouldn't matter which way you
point it. Ville's experience does not seem to verify this,
however.

Let us know what ends up working for you.

Peace,
Tom Loredo

PS: Who was Bishop Moule? I like the prayer in your signature!

B-Band dual source review [3]

From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-Band dual source review
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 15:32:21 -0600
Organization: XMission Internet (801 539 0852)

In article <<mike-2404981220040001@mueckler...>>,
<mike@cellbio...> wrote:

> In article <<tmfwwcfb435.fsf@cc...>>, Ville Nummela
> <<vnummela@xxxomega...>> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Thanks for the review. You seem to imply that the mic doesn't add that
> much to the tonal quality of the under saddle B-band pickup. Is that the
> case, and if so, is the B-band by itself acceptable? I don't care for all
> of the feedback problems that result from the use of a mic, and it always
> limits volume to some degree.
>
> Thanks.

I have found that the B-band (by itself) is absolutely the best sounding
saddle element available. It is not quite as good as the high end dual
systems out there, but it is certainly head and shoulders above anything
else in it's "class." I firmly believe that every other saddle element is
now obsolete. Completely obsolete.

When adding a mic, every other saddle element requires up to 50% of the
sound be the microphone....because the transducers sound so bad! With the
B-band, less mic is needed simply because the high end transducer quack
that is ever present on the treble strings from "old technology"
transducers is literally gone. I find that the small amount of mic I am
using (see below) with my new Core/B-band/mic combination is to enhance the
bass a bit more than even the treble needs....what a great change, and a
great sound.

I have just installed my new Core (internal pre-amp) in my Traugott...the
Core that allows the additional condenser mic....and I would like to add my
email to EMF as part of this discussion...believe me, it is just
sensational....I am plugged into a Fishman Pocket Blender, then directly
into my Mackie board/PA system and I am just astonished....

Dear Heikki,

Guess what...? I have just installed the new Core & Mills mic in my
favorite guitar and it is FANTASTIC. I mean, really better than fantastic.
I will post to the newsgroup as soon as I am finished writing you.
 EMF Acoustics Oy Ltd wrote:
>>>Yes, our standard Core preamp is built so that the Mic gets it power
from it. So in a standard version the Mic cannot be powered from external
unit like Fishman blender. However, the one we sent to you was modified by
Harri so that it does not power the Mic at all. You told earlier about
using it with Fishman blender and that is why we modified it. Other way
would have been naturally to modify the Blender. We will make the
instructions how to do this modification...there might be some other too
that would like it that way.>>>>

This is also fabulous...I forgot this was being done this way, and it is
really perfect!!!!

Can you please send to me two more internal Core pre-amps set-up the same
way. Send your mics along with these two for me to try in my other
guitars. Then, if I like your mics I will take out the Mills from my first
guitar!!!

Again, so many thanks....this is great...I play out tonight and I will be
able to talk about your system from the stage for the first time....I am
very excited.

Larry Pattis

From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@xxxomega...>
Subject: Re: B-Band dual source review
Date: 27 Apr 1998 21:14:04 +0300
Organization: TUT

<abuse@127...> (Larry Pattis) writes:

> In article <<mike-2404981220040001@mueckler...>>,
> <mike@cellbio...> wrote:
>
> > In article <<tmfwwcfb435.fsf@cc...>>, Ville Nummela
> > <<vnummela@xxxomega...>> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > Thanks for the review. You seem to imply that the mic doesn't add that
> > much to the tonal quality of the under saddle B-band pickup. Is that the
> > case, and if so, is the B-band by itself acceptable? I don't care for all
> > of the feedback problems that result from the use of a mic, and it always
> > limits volume to some degree.
>
> I have found that the B-band (by itself) is absolutely the best sounding
> saddle element available. It is not quite as good as the high end dual
> systems out there, but it is certainly head and shoulders above anything
> else in it's "class." I firmly believe that every other saddle element is
> now obsolete. Completely obsolete.
>
> When adding a mic, every other saddle element requires up to 50% of the
> sound be the microphone....because the transducers sound so bad! With the
> B-band, less mic is needed simply because the high end transducer quack
> that is ever present on the treble strings from "old technology"
> transducers is literally gone. I find that the small amount of mic I am
> using (see below) with my new Core/B-band/mic combination is to enhance the
> bass a bit more than even the treble needs....what a great change, and a
> great sound.

Exactly. For a virtuoso fingerstylist like Larry, the mic is just the
finishing touch. For recular flatpicking this applies as well.

More mic is only needed if you do some heavy percussive stuff -
especially if you drum the soundboard, rather than just hit the muted
strings. In the former case, the body resonances come into play, and
you really have to set the mic EQ curve carefully. Also, an adjustable
frequency low cut circuit is a good thing for eliminating excessive
low end, especially from the B-Band. (The element's bass response
virtually reaches zero, unless you artificially limit it. I believe
there is some kind of bass rolloff thing in the Core, but if so, it's
been set really low.)

Anyway, this hardly applies for most players.

[from Larry's e-mail to EMF:]
> Can you please send to me two more internal Core pre-amps set-up the same
> way. Send your mics along with these two for me to try in my other
> guitars. Then, if I like your mics I will take out the Mills from my first
> guitar!!!

Tommi played a little with the digital recordings we made from our
first dual source test session. After a quick Matlab session on a
Silicon Graphics workstation (Calculate transfer function from the
impulse response we recorded & invert it for the frequency response
curve. We used an AT 4033 studio microphone as a reference), he
concluded that the mic's frequency response is almost similar to the
B-Band's. Which, I guess, is why the two blend in rather nicely.

The other parameters might not be as good; I wish the mic had had a
bit more accurate upper range. So, there's still room for improvement.
Don't mistake this though - the mic is by no means of low quality. I
was quite impressed myself. Those who already have a Mills mic,
however, may choose to stick with it. (The Core preamp can be made
compatible with a small modification.) As long as the Mills alone
costs around the same as the entire B-Band dual source system, I'm
happy with what I've got.
	Ville
# Ville.Nummela"at"cc.tut.fi ("at"=@) http://www.tut.fi/~vnummela
# Note: To reduce spam, my return address has been modified.
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
# MAKE MONEY FAST (Hall of Humiliation): http://ga.to/mmf/

From: Tommi Ilmonen <nouser@kill...>
Subject: Re: B-Band dual source review
Date: 30 Apr 1998 11:18:45 +0300
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland

Ville Nummela <<vnummela@xxxomega...>> writes:

> Tommi played a little with the digital recordings we made from our
> first dual source test session. After a quick Matlab session on a
> Silicon Graphics workstation (Calculate transfer function from the
> impulse response we recorded & invert it for the frequency response
> curve. We used an AT 4033 studio microphone as a reference), he
> concluded that the mic's frequency response is almost similar to the
> B-Band's. Which, I guess, is why the two blend in rather nicely.

I might add something myself about this. We wanted to compare the
b-band with quality studio mic. Both were set up very quickly. As
expected the external mic sounded better. The b-band sound lacks
something (is shimmer the word) that we couldn't repair with an EQ.

We recorded both sound sources to ADAT for later
comparison. One thing we recorded was "bidge impulses" - sound you get
by tapping the bridge bone with light hard object (pencil).
Eventually I transferred the sound to my work computer
(Silicon Graphics workstation) for closer analysis.

I selected with sound-editing program individual impulses to use with
Matlab (software for scientific computation). These impulses can be
visualized and further parameters can be calculated. I was specially
interested in the spectrum of mic and pick-up. (spectrum - or
frequency response - describes the general timbre of an instrument:
bassy, lots of highs... it is not a perfect method to analyze sound,
but it gives decent results).

Results I got from analyzing multiple impulses:

1. Visually, the impulse signal from mic and pick-up are very
different. In pick-up there is one strong peak and little low-freq
"reverb". The impulse response of the mic looks very complex (like a
mountain range) and takes more that 0.2 seconds to vanish. One reason
signals sound different.

2. In spectral analysis of the signals look very similar "in
average". Finer detail revels a major difference. The mic spectrum has
large number (probably hundreds) of sharp peaks and valleys in the
spectrum. Looks like a saw-edge when you look at the details.
Another reason why mic and pick-up sound different (in fact the
complex spectrum and complex impulse response are are connected to
each other).

What does this amount to ? Well, it tells pretty much the same thing
as we found out by listening. I did it mainly out of interest to see
if computational analysis could do anything about this.

I should do comparison with my older guitar that has Highlander bridge
pick-up to verify these preliminary results. Besides I could run the
tests on Villes guitar.... Also spectrogram (spectral waterfall plots)
analysis could be fun to do. The recording levels should have been set
better, now the noise tended to be a problem at times. I guess I'll
redo the recording some day.

I suppose I could put some pictures to web if there are people who
want see them...

PS. The guitar used for the tests was my new Goodall KGC. By using the
b-band with the internal mic we got very good sound as we had been
expecting.

Tommi.Ilmonen"located-at"hut.fi ("located-at"=@)
http://www.hut.fi/u/tilmonen/

B-band/mic review [2]

From: Tom Chow <thomchowNOSPAM@geocities...>
Subject: B-band/mic review
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 16:03:11 -0700
Organization: No spamming please.
     Alrighty..  I know I just recently posted (last night I posted but
somehow it came today), but I have officially installed the new pickup
(with the help of a friend since my tech was booked like crazy). The
new dual source is quite a pickup.. It has the standard b-band, which
is really good- but I won't get into that since there have been full
reviews posted here before (just check dejanews).
     My big complaint with the b-band was that it's highs weren't as
crystal clear as my guitar's highs. I was able to EQ the b-band to get
fairly close highs, but because of my pinless bridge (where the string
angle isn't really high), it got somewhat harsh. (but that's not a
problem for people with standard pin bridges) With the new mic, I was
able to EQ out some of the highs off the b-band and use the highs from
the mic instead.
     B-band: turned up bass, left midrange, lowered the highs.  Mic:
turned down bass (almost to zero), turned midrange up a tad, turned up
highs. Mind you, I used an SWR California Blond amp to do it. When I
plugged it into my cheesy amp (not in stereo), the signals were
automatically blended- and they actually blended pretty nicely.
     I admit, this mic is what I needed- it added a kick to the highs
that I was searching for. Though I wish there was a way for me to bang
my strings harder and not have such a loud thump (the undersaddle is
condenser mic material.. aka "electret"), I cannot really complain about
this pickup. I have a feeling that this will be the best and most
affordable pickup system out there... until EMF decides to release that
external blender! :) <grin> All in all.. this definitely gets my 2
thumbs up.

--thom

From: Tom Chow <thomchowNOSPAM@geocities...>
Subject: Re: B-band/mic review
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 11:01:58 -0700
Organization: No spamming please.

> > So, tell me if I'm on the right track here--hard strumming with the
> > B-band is harsh, but has been improved with a better pre-amp, even
> > without a mic. But in either case, the B-band harshness is much
> > less of an issue than peizro harshness. True?
    It's MUCH less of an issue here..  and if you have the standard pin
bridge, then I am willing to bet that you will have NO problems with
harshness. (remember that I have a pinless bridge, which means there
isn't that string angle to put enough pressure on the pickup to prevent
harshness). And with the improved pre-amp (yes, it has been improved),
harshness isn't really an issue for me either. :) String banging often
comes into play when I pick up my guitar so I know how you feel.

> Umm, I haven't been informed of any modifications to the basic Core
> preamp. Something may have been changed, but this seems unlikely; the
> Core is a very simple device. Essentially two high quality field
> effect transistors and very little else. Not much there to modify. Due
>
> to the high quality of the B-Band element, nothing else is needed.
    Actually, I was informed by Heikki at EMF that the Core preamp was
modified to handle more output (I have it in my email), so yeah, it was
modified to be better. ;) The Core is still a simple device.. hard to
improve on, but somehow the folks at EMF improved on it!

> From Tom's posts it seems that the harshness comes from his unusual
> bridge design. The B-Band can be a bit picky about these
    Exactly.
> Anyway, I've never had any problems with harshness. (That is, since I
> dumped my old piezo.) Single or dual source. And I too sometimes
> really bash the living daylights out of my guitar.
    Exactly what I was thinking with standard pin bridge guitars.
> Of course no saddle element will ever sound completely like the real
> thing. The element only hears the strings and a small portion of the
> top around the bridge; the player hears the entire vibrating body but
> virtually no strings (directly). Adding the mic in the equation helps,
>
> as you can make the sound a little more natural, for example by adding
>
> some highs for extra shimmer.
    But that's what I really love about this pickup..  The b-band
doesn't have those shimmering highs without the mic. (When I talk about
shimmering highs, I mean SHIMMERING highs.. the b-band itself is
capable of very nice, bright, clear highs.. I'm just a picky bastard
when it comes to the highs since my guitar has them in abundance) :)

--thom

B-Band pickup for classical guitar

From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@xxxomega...>
Subject: B-Band pickup for classical guitar
Date: 28 Apr 1998 20:19:10 +0300
Organization: TUT

I got the following question by e-mail. Since it's relevant to others
too, I thought I'd post my answer to the guitar & builders newsgroups.

If you don't know what B-Band is, or would like to read other
reviews of it, just go to http://www.dejanews.com/ and type
B-Band in the search box.

Currently B-Bands are available for folk & classical guitars, upright
bass, acoustic bass guitar and electric guitars with
stratocaster-style bridge.

> Hi,
>
> I'm a fingerstyle player in Seoul, Korea.
> I have a great hand-made classical guitar by local luthier,
> which I'm considering to put the b-band pickup on.
>
> Would tell me or post an article for me on your experience with
> classical guitars with b-band pickup?

I'm afraid I don't own a classical, so I only have second hand
information. The EMF people have tried it on several classical
guitars, including high-end hand made ones. They claim, that usually
the b-band is even easier to install in a a classical than a steel
string. And gets even better results. I know the luthiers who's
guitars they have been using, and they agree with this.

In conventional piezoelectric transducers the signal level increases
as the string tension increases. Compared to steel strings, nylon is
left far behind, and thus few people use piezos at all in
classicals. They just won't work properly. Not that they sound
terribly realistic in folk guitars either; there's always the
high-range harshness, an inherent property of all piezoelectric
crystals.

With the B-Band the situation is reversed: Smaller string tension
actually allows b-band's thin condenser film to vibrate more freely
with the strings. You'll have ample gain, without having to worry
about loss of fidelity.

As for the B-Band itself, IMHO it truly is head and shoulders above
any other bridge transducer, folk guitar or classical. Still not
the same as a good external microphone, but better than anything
else. No harshness, incredible bass reproduction, enough fidelity to
deliver all the delicate nuances of a good fingerstyle player.

Last time I asked, the international price (before customs) was around
130 USD. If you have the money and a suitable preamplifier (or mixer),
I would recommend the dual source system, B-Band + Core 2, which adds
a condenser capsule inside the body. The price is 175 USD for
both. This is what I'm using myself. The b-band alone is already very
good, but the other mic will give it a nice final touch.

As Larry Pattis said, you don't really need to add very much mic
signal. (Unlike in piezos, where one needs to do something to fix the
piezo shortcomings!) Nevertheless, adding some 25 % or so (for
fingerstyle) would give you a little extra warmth and a more realistic
sound. A bridge element, no matter how good, essentially only hears
the strings and the bridge area, but the mic hears the rest of the
body too.

EMF Acoustics can be reached at
        sales@b-band.com
or http://www.b-band.com/

They've always been very helpful, don't hesitate to contact them.
        Ville Nummela
# Ville.Nummela"at"cc.tut.fi ("at"=@) http://www.tut.fi/~vnummela
# Note: To reduce spam, my return address has been modified.
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
# MAKE MONEY FAST (Hall of Humiliation): http://ga.to/mmf/

Transducers, mics, & pre-amps [2]

From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: Transducers, mics, & pre-amps
Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 15:19:59 -0600
Organization: XMission Internet (801 539 0852)

In article <<354A3A71.8A943DB5@spacenet...>>, Tom Loredo
<<loredo@spacenet...>> wrote:

> Larry Pattis wrote:
> >
>
> > Or you can build your own pre-amp like Tom Loredo and
> > combine three signals...but I thought I would limit this discussion to
> > available equipment.
>
> Though I have a pretty complicated custom unit for 3 transducers,
> lately, for reasons of convenience, I've been using a modified

<<snip>>

>
> The quality of the B-band reduces the need for it, however.
>
> Peace,
> Tom

When I get up in the morning now, I bow three times in the direction of
Finland to thank them for the B-Band pick-up. And I also whisper my thanks
to Ville for "introducing" us.

Larry Pattis

From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@xxxomega...>
Subject: Re: Transducers, mics, & pre-amps
Date: 05 May 1998 19:50:13 +0300
Organization: TUT

<abuse@127...> (Larry Pattis) writes:

> When I get up in the morning now, I bow three times in the direction of
> Finland to thank them for the B-Band pick-up. And I also whisper my thanks
> to Ville for "introducing" us.

Whoa, you almost made me blush bright red...

I guess this is a perfect opportunity to share this little story I
just heard on the EMF film.

Guitar pickups are just one application that this revolutionary new
material can be used for. The inventor of the material (but not of
b-band), one Kari Kirjavainen, recently visited our physics
department. I missed the show, unfortunately, but here's a couple of
stories someone passed on to me.

To demonstrate the incredible sensitivity of the film, they put a big
piece of it underneath a carpet. Then someone walked on the carpet and
stood still. The meters promptly picked up his heartbeat!

The film is sensitive the other way around too. There's another
company who makes hi-fi speakers out of it. The film can't move very
much, so the bass range is a bit of a problem, but the highs can be
reproduced quite accurately, and with very little power. The exact
number escapes me, but one could produce more than 110 dB of sound
energy with just 0.6 Watts of input power!! (Sorry, don't know if the
signal was just sine wave, pink noise or something else.)

For comparison, the sound pressure is something of the order of the
classic 100 Watt Marshall guitar cabinet at full blast. Too loud to
stay in the same room (for me, at least). Imagine a battery-powered PA
system that folds into a briefcase? In theory it's now possible...
	Ville
# Ville.Nummela"at"cc.tut.fi ("at"=@) http://www.tut.fi/~vnummela
# Note: To reduce spam, my return address has been modified.
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
# MAKE MONEY FAST (Hall of Humiliation): http://ga.to/mmf/

What is a Piezo electric pick up?

From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: What is a Piezo electric pick up?
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 15:18:34 -0400
Organization: Cornell University

Howdy-

Just to complicate matters further... There is a new type
of under-saddle pickup out that I've had the privelege to
beta test. All the testers I know consider it a significant
improvement over the piezo under-saddles, and the product is
now on the market. It's the B-band pickup, made by a small
(3-man!) Finnish company called EMF. The pickup is based
on a proprietary electret material (EMF) that they use to
create what is essentially a thin, long electret condenser
mic element that sits under the saddle. Unlike a normal
condenser mic, whose insulator is air, for the B-band the
insulator is a compressible solid filled with air bubbles;
it has roughly the same acoustical properties as wood.
For whatever reason (we can speculate to death about this),
the pickup produces a more natural sound than any piezos
I know of, and in particular seems to distort less when you
strum hard (a well-known limitation of piezo undersaddles).
Like most condenser mic elements, it has a very high,
capacitive impedance (ie, an impedance nearly equivalent to
that of a small capacitor, perhaps 10 pF or so). It thus
cannot be used "bare" into any standard acoustic guitar preamp.
But nowadays even most piezo pickups come with small onboard
preamps, and the B-band comes with the EMF "Core" preamp---
a simple Class-A FET preamp with an input impedance of ~ 1G Ohm.
The pickup + preamp costs just over $100, and is thus competitive
with active piezo setups. They have also just started offering
a dual-source version, combining the piezo with a small electret
cartridge (let's not start that thread again!) for about $170.

The B-band pickup is thinner than any piezo; only about 12.5 mils
thick! You can thus install it without having to trim the saddle,
since the action will be raised only very slightly (~6 mils at
the 12th fret).

More info about the B-band at http://www.b-band.com/. They
are now being distributed in the US by Guitar Center.

More info about acoustic guitar amplification at my AG web site:
  http://www.museweb.com/ag/
Look under "Technology:Amplification".

Peace,
Tom Loredo

Lowdens with Piezos or B-Bands?

From: George Reiswig <george_reiswig@ccm...>
Subject: Re: Lowdens with Piezos or B-Bands?
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:19:20 -0700
Organization: Intel Corp.

Dave,
    Are you buying that F-32C that's been around Portland for awhile?  Nice
instrument.
    Anyway, I have an O-32C that has a B-band dual source in it.  B-Band is
making a split saddle unit, and I have one of the prototypes. The first one
had some problems, but this one seems to have the bugs ironed out. I'm not
sure if or when they're available to the public, but it's worth it. Very nice
pickups.
    Good luck!
Red River wrote:

> I'm getting ready to buy a Lowden, and I understand the top is split into
> two pieces, as is the bridge. I want to use a mic in conjuncton with a
> piezo or b-band pickup. Do I need two piezos (one for each half of the
> top -- e.g. two Macyntires)? Alternately, will a single bridge transducer
> work okay all the way across the split bridge?
>
> Many thanks to any knowledgeable souls who respond to this.
>
> Dave Carter
> Portland, OR

--
George S. Reiswig

Obviously, my opinions should not be construed as being anything like
those of my gracious employer, Intel. Their opinions are probably
better.

Advertisers!
It is illegal to use this e-mail address for unsolicited commercial
e-mail per United States Code Title 47 Sec. 227. I reserve the right
to assess a US $500 charge for reviewing & deleting each unsolicited
commercial e-mail.

Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to my email address denotes
acceptance of these terms. Postings from me to UseNet neither grants
my consent to receive commercial emailings nor is intended to solicit
commercial email.

Sunrise pick-ups? Any users? [2]

From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: Sunrise pick-ups? Any users?
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:39:28 -0600
Organization: XMission Internet (801 539 0852)

In article <<3585B7A5.572134CF@ghg...>>, Andy Schreckenghost
<<alschrec@ghg...>> wrote:

> > <snip> Info about pickups and mics....
>
> Could someone post information (or email me) about cost and availability
on the
> B-band? Also the phone number for Joe Mills mic's? Seem to have misplaced
> information I once collected and there's a new guitar coming up..
>
> Andy Schreckenghost
> Houston TX

Andy,

The B-Band/Core retails at $139.99. Believe it or not, to add their
internal Mic only bumps up the price to $199.99. I find their mic to be a
tad less quality than the Mills, but the Mills retails anywhere between
$175 and $200. Plus, the quality of the B-band is so high that I find
myself needing less Mic to bring in an acoustic sound. Win-win situation.

I am mostly recommending the entire EMF system to folks, especially if they
don't already own a Mills. Joe Mills can be reached at 615-227-3542, I
can't find his email address.

I have all the B-Band & Mills gear available.

Larry Pattis

Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com

From: Bruce Stryd <bstryd@home...>
Subject: Re: Sunrise pick-ups? Any users?
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 05:21:52 GMT
Organization: @Home Network Member

STILLLLLLL waiting for the Thompson to arrive (late this week, I believe) but
Ted installed the B-Band dual source for me as he was building the guitar. Ted
was VERY impressed with the sound after he put it in and said he thinks its
the best thing going.

Bruce

Larry Pattis wrote:
>
> In article <<3585B7A5.572134CF@ghg...>>, Andy Schreckenghost
> <<alschrec@ghg...>> wrote:
>
> > > <snip> Info about pickups and mics....
> >
> > Could someone post information (or email me) about cost and availability
> on the
> > B-band? Also the phone number for Joe Mills mic's? Seem to have misplaced
> > information I once collected and there's a new guitar coming up..
> >
> > Andy Schreckenghost
> > Houston TX
>
> Andy,
>
> The B-Band/Core retails at $139.99. Believe it or not, to add their
> internal Mic only bumps up the price to $199.99. I find their mic to be a
> tad less quality than the Mills, but the Mills retails anywhere between
> $175 and $200. Plus, the quality of the B-band is so high that I find
> myself needing less Mic to bring in an acoustic sound. Win-win situation.
>
> I am mostly recommending the entire EMF system to folks, especially if they
> don't already own a Mills. Joe Mills can be reached at 615-227-3542, I
> can't find his email address.
>
> I have all the B-Band & Mills gear available.
>
> Larry Pattis
>
> Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com

Source for b-band pickup [2]

From: Anthony W. Rairden <TRairden@XXstrategicplan...>
Subject: Re: Source for b-band pickup
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:07:10 -0400
Organization: Rairden Associates

First Quality Musical Supplies (www.fqms.com) has added the B-Band pickups
to their lines, and should have them in stock in a week to ten days. As soon
as they've been shipped from the distributor, they'll be up on the Web site,
probably at www.fqms.com/b-band.htm. The straight pickup/Core preamp
combination will be on sale (10% Off) at $80.96, and the pickup/mic
combination with the Core preamp (which is built to handle two inputs) will
be $144.95. (Prices might always change modestly between now and when we get
them in, so YMMV, but we have no reason at this time to think that these
won't be the final prices.)

Tony Rairden
(SPAM Control on-- delete Xs in return address to reply directly.)

John Z wrote in message <<35896a87.4616154@news...>>...
>I've been reading all of the positive reviews on rmmga about the EMF
>B-Band pickup (thanks Thom) and I've pretty much decided to purchase
>one. Does anyone know of a good source to buy from (mail order?)
>(local music stores here don't carry them). I'd like to find a
>discount source (nobody really pays retail, do they? <g>) What is the
>street price for these gems?
>
>Thanks for any help!
>
>John

From: Brad Lussier <brad@c4...>
Subject: Re: Source for b-band pickup
Date: Unknown

Tom,

I paid under $75 for an EMF CR1AG B-Band pickup core preamp system . Got it
from The Music People, 2074 Park Street, Hartford, CT 06106. Call them at
800 289 8889.

Sounds great in my Gurian.

Best,

Brad

B Band? [7]

From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@xxxomega...>
Subject: Re: B Band?
Date: 25 Jun 1998 22:52:32 +0300
Organization: TUT

"Chuck Boyer" <<caboyer@monumental...>> writes:

> I saw something the other day that led me to believe
> that the B-Band is a condenser type transducer
> (vice piezo). Can anyone validate /elaborate?

Correct. It is an electret condenser, which simply means a condenser
microphone (actually, pickup in this case) with permanently charged
condenser plates.

Physically it looks & installs just like ordinary piezos, except that
it's a lot more thin, easier to install & sounds better (as it lacks
the high end 'quack' inherent to all piezos). You may have to
experiment a bit to get the string-to-string balance right though.

For more info, go to http://www.dejanews.com and do a power search for
B-Band. Or check the manufacturers pages at http://www.b-band.com

The thing is so new, that it's a bit difficult to find one as
yet. Worth the trouble though. The US importer is
                   The Music People! Inc.
                   P.O. Box 270648 West Hartford,
                   CT 06127-0648
                   tel 860/236-7134
                   fax 860/233-6888 or 860/523-4023
The easiest way is probably to just buy one from Larry.
	Ville
# Ville.Nummela"at"cc.tut.fi ("at"=@) http://www.tut.fi/~vnummela
# Note: To reduce spam, my return address has been modified.
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
# MAKE MONEY FAST (Hall of Humiliation): http://ga.to/mmf/

From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@xxxomega...>
Subject: Re: B Band?
Date: 26 Jun 1998 16:03:02 +0300
Organization: TUT

<abuse@127...> (Larry Pattis) writes:

> > Could you elaborate on "You may have to experiment a bit" please, Ville.
> > What sort of tweaking is done to get the balance right?
> >
> > Tony Rairden
>
> I have had to shim under the B-band. With balance problems on the
> Matrix, one of the fixes was to wrap the quiet area once or twice with
> aluminum foil (sort of like the beer can fix in Zen and the Art of
> Motorcycle Maint.). This did not prove to be enough with the B-Band. I
> have used a very hard plastic less than half the thickness of a credit card
> for shim material. Hasn't affected the acoustic response of any of my
> guitars.
>
> Ville will tell you more about this....

Okay, here goes.

Part of the reason for B-Bands great sound lies in the fact, that it
responds directly to pressure variations.

[In contrast, a good deal of the piezo signal comes from the minute
twisting motion it does when the bridge moves. A condenser pickup,
like B-Band, responds to a change in the condencer's capacitance.
Which is induced, for example, when the motion of the bone
pushes the condenser's charged plates closer together.]

The drawback in a design like this, is that the output of the pickup
becomes sensitive to the static pressure on the bridge, as well as the
vibrations.

If one or more of the strings aren't as loud as the others, there can
be two reasons.
 1 - Too little pressure. The contact of the bone (or bridge) with
the B-Band is less than perfect beneath the offending string, and the
vibrations of the string won't get transferred to the pickup properly.
 2 - Too much pressure. There's a slight bump against the pickup, or
the string exerts much greater pressure than the others for some other
reason. In this case, the plates of the condenser get squeezed
together, and won't have room to move --> no signal.

To get the balance right, one has to try to recognize which is the
case, and try to even out the pressure by some means. The first thing
is to make sure, that your bone & bridge slot are perfectly clean
and smooth. In addition, Larry, Tom and I all have put some sort shims
under the saddle to even things out. Either under or sometimes even
above the B-Band. Materials vary from hard plastic and metal to wood
and even paper. Whatever that works.

Note that we are dealing with relatively high levels of static force
compared to the minute motion induced in the capacitor. B-Band is
actually roughly as compressible as the wood beneath it, and only a
little softer than the piece of bone above it. In other words, don't
consider the bone rigid. As far as the pickup is concerned, it's
not. It's more like an elastic rubber bar that twists whichever way
the strings happen to be pulling, allowing for each string separately.
Remember, the pickup and the saddle mostly move together with the
top; The relative motion of the two is several orders of magnitude
less than the vibration of the top.
	Ville
# Ville.Nummela"at"cc.tut.fi ("at"=@) http://www.tut.fi/~vnummela
# Note: To reduce spam, my return address has been modified.
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
# MAKE MONEY FAST (Hall of Humiliation): http://ga.to/mmf/

From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: B Band?
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:01:12 -0400
Organization: Cornell University

Hi folks-

Ville gave the best summary yet of how to balance the B-band. I just
want to emphasize---you may (as I did) have to shim under the strings
that are loudest. Back in the beta-test days, EMF recommended
that you shim soft strings or sand/shave the saddle or saddle slot
for loud strings. Since I had one loud string, I tried lightly sanding
the bottom of the saddle slot, figuring there must have been a bump
there. Just made the problem worse! I eventually had to shim there,
an extra amount to make up for the mil or so that I had sanded out.
Live and learn! Just take this as a warning to try all the least
"destructive" approaches first.

Ville Nummela wrote:
>
> Mind you, B-Band's Core preamp introduces some nonlinearity
> intentionally - they add a touch of 3rd and 5th harmonic distortion (I
> think) to make a little thicker sound.

Yikes! No! They add a little *2nd* harmonic distortion. This happens
naturally with FET-based preamps (for Chuck---the Core preamp is just
a simple JFET common-source stage); depending on how you bias them, you
can control how much distortion there is. Back in the beta-test
days, I commented to them that my simulations of their preamp showed
a bit of 2nd harmonic distortion, and they replied that in their
extensive user tests, users actually preferred this. By the way,
even-harmonic distortion is what many believe is the pleasing characteristic
of the "tube sound," hence the use of FETs to simulate tube sound in
many circuits (FETs and tubes have similar nonlinearities). For
some reason, our sense of hearing finds even harmonics more pleasing
than odd ones (hint---even harmonics are exactly at higher octaves
from the original tone), and also we can audibly detect much smaller amounts
of odd-harmonic distortion than even-harmonic distortion. So circuit
designers go to great lengths to reduce odd-harmonic distortion.

By the way, the distortion is added by the Core preamp; the distortion
we're talking about here is not produced by the B-band itself. And we're
talking small amounts; probably only easily measurable with hard strumming.

Chuck wrote:
> Me too; my favorite TV show was "Mister Wizard"?! I'll bet our own
> virtual Don Herbert (Tom Loredo) understands it! :-)

Mr. Wizard?! ;-)

Well, I pretty much understand it. But Ville is our resident materials
scientist, and understands the physics of the B-band itself better. In fact,
during the beta-testing he was the one who actually figured out the
occassionally
anti-intuitive strategy one must adopt to shim the B-band mentioned above
and in earlier posts.

And speaking of shims... I use thin sheet brass shim material, which
you can buy in plastic packs at a modeling store (including various
thicknesses, 1-5 mil). You can cut the stuff with ordinary scissors.
However, Jim Olson told me of a neat trick he uses to shim LB6
transducers---he uses the "sticky" part of post-it notes. Since
they are sticky, you don't have to worry about them moving about
as you put the pickup and saddle back in, or later if you happen
to remove all the strings. But they aren't so sticky that it becomes
tough to move or remove them.

Peace,
Tom Loredo

From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: B Band?
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:06:45 -0400
Organization: Cornell University

Howdy again-

Just to elaborate on the "is it a mic" issue....

It's an electret-based capacitive transducer. So is a conderser mic.
But the b-band is not a condenser mic, in the sense of being able to
pick up normal sound waves. In a condenser mic, there are charged
plates separated by a layer of air. When sound (a pressure wave in
air) hits it, the plates change their spacing, producing a small
fluctuating voltage. The B-band works similarly, but the space
between the plates is not filled with air, but instead with a
proprietary flexible material (a bit like wood---a solid with air
bubbles). Thus if you plug in a B-band outside of your guitar and
talk to it (!), you won't get any significant signal---the stiff
insulator prevents it from responding the way an air-filled
condenser mic element does.

So... is it a condenser mic element? Yes and no! Yes---it uses
the same basic technology. No---it can't pick up ordinary sound,
which is what a microphone does.

Peace,
Tom Loredo

From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@xxxomega...>
Subject: Re: B Band?
Date: 29 Jun 1998 23:39:52 +0300
Organization: TUT

Tom Loredo <<loredo@spacenet...>> writes:

> Ville Nummela wrote:
> >
> > Mind you, B-Band's Core preamp introduces some nonlinearity
> > intentionally - they add a touch of 3rd and 5th harmonic distortion (I
> > think) to make a little thicker sound.
>
> Yikes! No! They add a little *2nd* harmonic distortion. This happens

Thanks Tom. Not the first time you pull me out when I make some stupid
mistake like this. I was thinking of even harmonics, but got lost
somewhere.

> Well, I pretty much understand it. But Ville is our resident
> materials scientist, and understands the physics of the B-band
> itself better. In fact,

"Resident materials scientist"??? Gimme a break... a "smartass
college kid" is more like it. Never did any "materials" stuff and
still miles away from the "scientist" too.

> during the beta-testing he was the one who actually figured out the
> occassionally anti-intuitive strategy one must adopt to shim the
> B-band mentioned above and in earlier posts.

Boy did I have a hard time convincing the EMF people. Had to type a
few pages of equations before they bought it. (I guess the formulas
went mostly over their heads, but it looked very convincing and then
they no longer dared argue with me :-)

Not that they were the only "boneheads" around - it took them a while
to convince me, that it could be the other way too. Too little string
pressure and the contact isn't good enough. Shouldn't have been too
hard to get it. Oh well, I guess students are supposed to discover new
things...

> However, Jim Olson told me of a neat trick he uses to shim LB6
> transducers---he uses the "sticky" part of post-it notes. Since
> they are sticky, you don't have to worry about them moving about
> as you put the pickup and saddle back in, or later if you happen
> to remove all the strings. But they aren't so sticky that it becomes
> tough to move or remove them.

A great tip. And yes, paper is actually a pretty good material. I've
tried it too. While flexible, it doesn't give in a lot when
squeezed. (There's quite a bit of clay in it.) It is also quite
smooth, and thin enough, should you wish to put it under one or two
strings only.
	Ville
# Ville.Nummela"at"cc.tut.fi ("at"=@) http://www.tut.fi/~vnummela
# Note: To reduce spam, my return address has been modified.
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
# MAKE MONEY FAST (Hall of Humiliation): http://ga.to/mmf/

From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: B Band?
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:32:29 -0400
Organization: Cornell University

Howdy again folks!

McCollum wrote:
>
> First off, I would like to explain to everybody that the B-Band is still a
> piezo element...because piezo means "to press, squeezes, or pressure". The
> difference between the Baggs and B-Bands are the materials used and how
> much they are actually electrically charged. But they basically function
> the same.

As George said... BZZZT! "Piezo" is not an English word; in this
context it is slang for "piezoelectric" which is an English word
that means using "electricity or electric polarity produced by
meachanical stress on a nonconducting crystal." No crystals inside
a B-band, so sorry, it's not a piezo. All the other under-saddle
transducers use piezo crystals (sometimes long solid crystals,
sometimes several small ones spaced according to the strings,
sometimes lots of them embedded in a flexible medium). The B-band
is a completely different technology, and thus has different
inherent strengths and limitations.

> I did some serious A/B-ing between the Baggs Ribbon Transducer and the
> B-Band system. I will post a review in the next day or two of what
> conclusions I came to. But I do have one concern about the B-Band and that
> is about its end jack. It's wimpy, cheap, and I would like to see it
> improved. It is very easy to mess the threads up because of the low
> quality of the metal.

Can't comment on the current jack, since I have an old one that used
a custom-made jack. It was very solid, but a tad longer than most
such jacks. They told me they switched to an off-the-shelf variety
recently. Interestingly, they told me they learned at the NAMM show
that Baggs and others are starting to use the same jack. It's a newish
type that includes a separate switch for the battery (not the one
marketed by EMG, though).

> Back to Alan's question. In my guitars (and I flat pick in a fingerstyle
> kinda way -- if that makes any sense at all - kinda of Michael Hedges-ish
> -- being a guitar builder its kind of hard to have real nails :) ) I have
> found that I actually prefer the Baggs over the B-Band.

Can't directly compare the Baggs Ribbon to the B-band. Baggs sent
me one to show at an amplification workshop a year and a half ago.
They said I could install it if I wanted. I had heard other guitars
with the Ribbon in them and not been impressed at all, so I didn't
bother. I can say that my own playing mixes lots of fingerstyle
with single string runs played with a pick and heavy strumming with
a pick and fingers (especially at church). The B-band is fine for
all of it.

> Especially in
> altered tunings. The B-Band will not keep up with the upper lows (and no I
> don't mean the mids) of my guitars.

My guitar is seldom in standard tuning. Yesterday it was in
B F# C# D A D (pretty low stuff!). The B-band has always behaved
fine for me.

George asked:
> That's got me wondering... If the B-Band is so thin, can one assume that it's
> effects on the mechanical system of the guitar are small enough that one could
> A/B it with an under-the-saddle transducer mounted on the same instrument?

As I've mentioned before, my comparisons of the B-band with the
LB6 in my Olson are with the B-band under the LB6---that is, both
pickups in the same guitar at the same time.

All this said, I'm looking forward to more about Lance's test. There
are lots of variables in this game, and what's best in one situation
is not always best in another.

Peace,
Tom Loredo

From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@xxxomega...>
Subject: Re: B Band?
Date: 29 Jun 1998 23:58:30 +0300
Organization: TUT

Alan J Rabideau <<rabideau@acsu...>> writes:

> I'm curious - do any of you b-band advocates
> flatpick, or are you mostly finger style players?
>
> Alan Rabideau
> (flatpicker who is almost ready to purchase
> a dual source b-band)

I flatpick and fingerpick around half the time each. Maby leaning a
bit on flatpicking lately. On top of that I do quite a bit of special
effects. Mostly percussive stuff - soundboard drumming, harmonics
tapping and left hand hammering.

Quite a combination of things - and really, not even my B-Band + mic
combination is quite up to it all. You know, one can optimize the
setup for something, but not all of it at the same time. Especially
the drumming is a pain to amplify. So, we're still a long way from
good studio microphones, but IMHO it's the next best thing.
	Ville
# Ville.Nummela"at"cc.tut.fi ("at"=@) http://www.tut.fi/~vnummela
# Note: To reduce spam, my return address has been modified.
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
# MAKE MONEY FAST (Hall of Humiliation): http://ga.to/mmf/

B-Band Review [4]

From: McCollum <mccollum@netshel...>
Subject: B-Band Review
Date: 30 Jun 1998 23:08:13 GMT
Organization: McCollum Guitars

First things first :) Everybody has gotten a little rabid waiting to
pounce on anything or anyone's opinions that might be different than their
own. Remember, people, this is a discussion group, so let's have a nice
discussion, not a pissing match.

Now having said that, I never said I didn't like the B-Band. I actually
like it a lot. But there are some things that it won't do that the Baggs
will. The same for the Highlander, and Sunrise. I use all of these
systems in my guitars depending on the customer's needs and the environment
in which he/she plays.

Here's what I came up with:

The B-Band is an easy installation with the minor exception that the metal
used for the end jack is easily damaged and extra care must be taken to
hold the pre-amp on the inside of the guitar when tightening the nut,
instead of using the little hole on the outside of the jack. This is how I
damaged one of mine, and have not been able to get the threads back to
normal since.

As far as the sound goes...The B-Band sounds very natural, but when the
tuning is dropped, the low E and A (now down to D and G) will not produce
the upper low frequencies that I desire in amplification of my guitars.
We're talking the 80-130 cycle range. This is why a lot of people use a
Sunrise. Because this is where that pickup excels. The tones I'm looking
for are those typical of Michael Hedges and Richard Thompson to name a
couple.

I have a very extensive rack system with about $10,000 worth of equipment,
so it's not your typical "home stereo" setup. I also tested these two
systems (the Baggs and the B-Band), albeit not in the same guitar, when I
did the sound for the Doug Smith concert that I put on this month. We were
running through a typical PA system with Bagend speakers. Both Doug and I
agreed that for his playing style and mine, that the Baggs sounded better.
Much cleaner.

Back to comparing one system to the other...After testing the B-Band, and
swapping out back to the Baggs RT system, I noticed how much more accurate
the Baggs was and the funny thing was when I went back to the B-Band, it
(the B-Band) didn't sound as clear and accurate anymore. Then I added some
enhancement processing with a BBE Sonic Maximizer and it sounded exactly
like the Baggs does without enhancement. And being as most people would
not be using the kind of system I'm using when they're on the road, this is
where I would recommend the Baggs. I think the B-Band is much more of an
analog-type sound whereas the Baggs is so accurate and so precise that it's
almost digital. So that would be something that would have to be
considered when choosing amplification -- do you favor an analog, or more
of a digital clarity? And also, what type of playing style you have. I
have seen Larry Pattis play, and for him I agree, the B-Band is much more
suited to his style and sound (which I enjoy very much). But when going
for the big "Michael Hedges" type sound and not wanting to have a Sunrise
in the soundhole, which blocks off half of the acoustic sound, I can get
the Baggs close enough for most intents and purposes and it produces the
upper-low frequencies that I am looking for and I can EQ the highs to be
much more smooth.

I also happen to really like the Highlander with their own (yes, they make
their own now) proprietary mic. I think it is the best sounding mic out
there for my guitars and I wish I could combine it with the Baggs or the
B-Band, still using a stereo jack. But, alas, it is a three-wire system
and everybody else is a two-wire system. One of these days I'll just have
to have two jacks in the back of my guitar. :) :)

So that's it in a nutshell. These are my opinions of these systems as
used in my guitars, so your test results may vary.

There is no perfect all-encompassing, right for every guitar, system. For
the same reason that you can't have just one guitar and expect it to give
you every kind of sound (for which we are very glad <g>). This is why I
build seven different body styles.

Lance McCollum
McCollum Guitars
http://www.svlg.org/member/mccollum/mccollum.htm

From: George Reiswig <george_reiswig@ccm...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Review
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 08:49:13 -0700
Organization: Intel Corp.

McCollum wrote:

> (SNIP)
>
> As far as the sound goes...The B-Band sounds very natural, but when the
> tuning is dropped, the low E and A (now down to D and G) will not produce
> the upper low frequencies that I desire in amplification of my guitars.
> We're talking the 80-130 cycle range. This is why a lot of people use a
> Sunrise. Because this is where that pickup excels. The tones I'm looking
> for are those typical of Michael Hedges and Richard Thompson to name a
> couple.

Hmmm...I haven't noticed this lack, but I admittedly haven't spent too much
time on a full PA. Most of my work goes through a Trace TA50R. My biggest
question would be which B-Band are you using? Are you using it as a single
source, or the dual-source B-Band? Which Baggs unit are you comparing it to?

>
>
> I have a very extensive rack system with about $10,000 worth of equipment,
> so it's not your typical "home stereo" setup. I also tested these two
> systems (the Baggs and the B-Band), albeit not in the same guitar, when I
> did the sound for the Doug Smith concert that I put on this month. We were
> running through a typical PA system with Bagend speakers. Both Doug and I
> agreed that for his playing style and mine, that the Baggs sounded better.
> Much cleaner.
>
> (CHOP)

> I think the B-Band is much more of an
> analog-type sound whereas the Baggs is so accurate and so precise that it's
> almost digital. So that would be something that would have to be
> considered when choosing amplification -- do you favor an analog, or more
> of a digital clarity? And also, what type of playing style you have. I
> have seen Larry Pattis play, and for him I agree, the B-Band is much more
> suited to his style and sound (which I enjoy very much).

Okay, now I'm REALLY curious: what is it that makes one digital and the other
analog to you? What is it about the different playing styles that makes
accuracy better for one style, and not for the other?

Great post, Lance. I don't know you, but judging from the reputation your
guitars carry, I have to respect your opinion on sound. As a result, I'm
really interested in your thoughts on these. I've used both a single source
B-Band and a Baggs Ribbon dual source in the same guitar, and I preferred the
B-Band sound. I even preferred the sound of the B-Band transducer plugged in
in place of the Baggs ribbon, but using the rest of the Baggs electronics. To
my ears, the Baggs Ribbon does not have a smooth high end, and sounded harsh
and artificial. The B-Band had plenty of "guts," which is what I'm guessing is
similar to the 80-130 Hz range that you described as being lacking.

The only thing that I can think of is that the Hedges style of playing is
tremendously aggressive, especially when using a pick. You want those bass
strings to sound like the acoustic guitar equivalent of a "power chord" on an
electric guitar...first and fifth of the chord, with tube overdrive, so the
major third comes out as a harmonic. For me, I'm too shy about my abilities to
be as aggressive as I know (intellectually) that certain music I try really
needs. When I back off the aggressiveness, the delicacy of the string sounds
prevails, and the B-Band really shines for that. Is that w