Sound performance of PALMER DACCAPO compared to pro rmp

C

Cthulh

New Metal Member
Mar 1, 2018
11
0
1
47
Hi everybody,
I own a radial pro rmp (2008 edition) and I'm not satisfied with it. I have modded it so the output level is not an issue anymore!!!!!! ( it piss@s me off to think all these years I spent trying to find what the hell was causing the problem with the gain staging :) ), but still it doesn't sound like someone is playing - the guitar tone sounds "distant" - not the "in your face" kind of sound in comparison with when someone is actually playing the guitar. I'm thinking about buying the palmer, so if anybody has tried both, I would appreciate your input. Does it sound more like someone is actually playing or my problem lies somewhere else? Is there a degradation in the sound quality concerning the radial, beyond the low output issue?
Thanks!
 
Thanks Martijn for replying, I'm also interested to hear from guys who have used both boxes to check if they too had that "distant" tone feel coming from the radial
 
Hi,

I owned a Pro RMP for some time and wasn't satisfied because of the infamous output problem. I had not modded it though, but was using other means to crank the signal (using Reaper to crank the hardware output of my interface). Hard to tell in all the chain what caused what, but I was never too satisfied with the tone.

I now have a Daccapo and I am a lot happier now. It does color the tone, as would any kind of device, but it does it in a positive way. It's obviously not a major coloring, but it sounds great anyway

EDIT: Specifically about the "distant" thing. I too had that kind of issue, but I was not able to confirm the RMP was causing it. I mean, I don't have a great room acoustic, and so on, so that distant sounding effect could be a room effect for all I know. Therefore, yes I had this. But no, I can't say it was because of the RMP
 
Last edited:
Thank you H-evolve for your reply. I just did a test in my studio, recorded myself playing the guitar straight through the amp, and then through the countryman di box - console - radial pro - amp, playing simple palm mute stuff and without making any changes to the amp, cab, or microphone and I have to say the difference is huge. I kept the gain saturation at the same level, but the radial sounded way to fizzy with drown mids and the guitar sounded choked - with some added sound "artifacts" I must add - in comparison. And this is what is has been bugging me for so long.The guitar sounds distant and choked. I know that the di, console pre-amps and so on also change the sound on some degree, but I have to say that this drastic change must be coming from the radial. I know my pre-amps and they are very neutral. So I'll try the palmer - I'm done with the prormp. Thanks for your help!
 
Cthulh said:
Thank you H-evolve for your reply. I just did a test in my studio, recorded myself playing the guitar straight through the amp, and then through the countryman di box - console - radial pro - amp, playing simple palm mute stuff and without making any changes to the amp, cab, or microphone and I have to say the difference is huge. I kept the gain saturation at the same level, but the radial sounded way to fizzy with drown mids and the guitar sounded choked - with some added sound "artifacts" I must add - in comparison. And this is what is has been bugging me for so long.The guitar sounds distant and choked. I know that the di, console pre-amps and so on also change the sound on some degree, but I have to say that this drastic change must be coming from the radial. I know my pre-amps and they are very neutral. So I'll try the palmer - I'm done with the prormp. Thanks for your help!
Click to expand...


I would LOVE to hear your recording with the Radial
 
@ Chesterfieldblues
tomorrow I'll export and post a few seconds of the radial followed by the - straight from the guitar to the amp-sound for comparison.
 
oh well, it seems I didn't keep the project so I did the process again- didn't have much time so I did it rather quickly.. Again, I didn't care about the sound and the mic position etc- the important thing here is the difference between the reamping and recording straight to the amp. It took me some time to achieve the same saturation for both times and it was not easy. What i saw was that if the reamping send level was say at 0db the saturation was the same for the slow parts. For the faster part the saturation from the reamping seemed a lot higher. I think this is because of all the artifacts caused by the radial. So I recorded the sound for the reamping two times one at 0db send level and one at lower level. The first thing you'll hear is the 0 send level reamping sound, then it is the guitar straight to the amp, and third is the reamping at lower level. To hear all the differences I suggest to cut the 3 parts and put them in different tracks and alternating between them. Listen to the faster part at the end of every section- I believe that is where the artifacts and loss of attack and definition of the radial shines! Think what happens if you have 4 layers of guitars!I noticed that the chugga-chugga-chugga guitar to amp sound becomes chugga -tzz - chugga -tzz kind of think through the radial - it inserts high frequencies?? (they remind me of radio static and crackle :)) and I think these artifacts and loss of attack is contributing to the guitar sounding more distant and muddy.
I would appreciate your feedback if you have the time to check them in your daw.
Try not to pay attention to the playing!! haha

https://wetransfer.com/downloads/ce...183b9b3a406332686150930820180303185610/0518e2

1st: Radial 0db send level
2nd: Guitar to amp
3rd: Radial -2db send level
 
Hi Burny, I know the thread, this what made me mod my prormp as well. I think so much loss of level is totally unjustified and bad design, and my guess is that you lose more than level on the way in and out of this box.
 
Questions: When you say you recorded your DI at 0 dB, I assume it isn't "Really" at a constant 0 dB right? It must be at something like... peaking at -2 or something, correct?

Second, your other lower signal DI used for reamping, what level was it? Was it that much lower? If so, I understand that you then adjusted the gain on the ProRMP to amplify the signal before sending it to the amp? Correct?

But, right of the bat, maybe my ears are just not as "experienced" as most people, but I don't hear a huge difference. I don't have time to fiddle with the file and split it to ease comparison. But in sequence like that, everything sounded quite similar for me.

Considering how you described the issue, I was expecting some major/obvious problem! :|
 
Last edited:
I was just listening to the fast part, this is a bit different when using reamp 0db or -2 from original miced one, sounds a bit thin and clipped, as if something wasn't right when picking string hard (reminds me emg 81 on one of my guitars who was set too high, strings were not vibrating correctly). And 0db sound clipped too, but I don't really get this "distant" feeling you were talking about at first (and I dont know about this mod, is there some way it was not done right ?)
 
@H-evolve: my bad, when I said 0db on the send level I just said it to differentiate it from the 3rd clip which was -2db send level. The recorded signal was lower of course and peaking at -1 to -2 when playing hard hitting chords . If you pay attention to the fast parts you will notice that there are a lot of artifacts in the reamped ones and they sound muffled and "dirty" in the wrong way. Not like a nice distorted sound.
@chesterfield:All were played with the same guitar and no the di signal was not clipped anywhere. I also checked with lower levels going to the radial (I had to raise the input gain of the amp of course to get the same saturation level) and the sound was the same as the 1st and 3rd clips. I don't know, I'll buy the palmer and be done with the radial and all the level matching problems.
Thanks again guys for your help!
 
Just an update for whoever has the same concerns as I did
I bought the palmer daccapo and I just finished testing it. Hands down it wins over radial in every aspect. Easier to set the levels and sound wise it blows radial rmp away!!!! Now my guitars sound like played directly from the guitar. Man! I can't believe all the time I have lost trying to get a decent sound from the radial box. For everyone who is wondering which one to buy just go with palmer daccapo
 
Glad it worked out.

I think that, just for the sake of not having to physically modify the damn thing in order to have decent output.... just for that reason... One should chose the Palmer over the RMP.
 
Yes sure you're right about that, but there is also a significant improvement in the sound with the palmer, so going with it is a no brainer for me from now on :) Anyway, thanks H-evolve for your help!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mickrich
Palmer Daccapo Reamp box :-)
Replies
42
Views
14K
Backline
KimJongPir2
K
PostMortem1666
Radial Pro RMP Question
Replies
7
Views
605
F.O.H.
PostMortem1666
P
CronosBeyond
  • Poll
Radial X-AMP vs. Radial Pro RMP (clips inside)
Replies
16
Views
4K
Backline
Skaldir
S
Deathprayer82
Kemper / Saffire Pro 40 reamping via SPDIF possible?
Replies
16
Views
2K
Backline
Deathprayer82
D
T
Reamping with Firepod -need help!
Replies
12
Views
2K
Andy Sneap
theBlackLOBSTERmurder
T
Top Bottom
Back