Sound / Tone vs. Volume
The basic tone changes because our perception of sound changes with volume. See: Equal Loudness

What are you amplifying
Even if you had the perfect microphone(s) placed in front of a great instrument - people don't put their ear(s) where you place the microphone(s)

To my ears, the sound of an Acoustic Guitar varies greatly depending on the listening position. So what is the accurate sound of an Acoustic Guitar? When playing amplified, I want a great sound, but I'm not bound to the sense that it must be "the sound of my Guitar unamplified, only louder".

Dynamic Range
As you noted above you have increased dynamic range if you choose to use it. You can do this with a microphone, but I find that I except for very quiet live environments, I get more dynamic range with a pickup than a microphone. But compared to running without amplification, with either one - pickup or microphone I have much greater usable dynamic range.

Note: If you use an L1® you have even greater dynamic range available to you compared to most conventional sound reinforcement rigs.

Compared do to conventional (point source) systems: You do not need to be as loud at the loudspeaker (Cylindrical Radiator®) to reach the back of a room, so you can play softer. You can still play louder if you want but this basically gives you a wider volume range in which to work. This is one of those interesting outcomes of using the Cylindrical Radiator® — wider dynamic range. I find the same concept applies when talking about an amplified versus unamplified acoustic instruments.

Greater range of sounds
I can do things when amplified that would simply not be audible without amplification.

This cuts both ways. Amplification brings out things I'd usually rather not hear like squeaky strings and thunks and unintentional thuds. But do any of those things intentionally, musically, and you've got a greater repertoire of sounds to bring to the mix.

Technique
When I play without amplification - playing louder means that I have to change the way I play a piece. I may strum instead of finger-picking. Or I my pick harder. This changes the sound. For good or bad, playing harder to be louder changes the nature of the sound. With amplification I can turn up the volume on the amplifier and not have to change my approach to playing.

Sustain
I have more sustain when playing amplified, and more so with pickups than with microphones. This sustain changes the way I play. My natural tendency is to fewer notes when playing amplified. The reverse is also true - I tend to play more notes when playing acoustically. I have to keep that reined in unless the song actually calls for it.

Please join the discussion that sparked these thoughts.  Microphones vs. Pickups

Hi all,

I wanted to clarify a small detail regarding ST’s review.

The unit ST used for his 3 day review was a pre production loaner L1 Compact. This pre production unit has a higher noise floor than the final production units. We made an improvement to the overall noise performance very late in our development cycle and this improvement WAS implemented into our production units.

L1 Compact units received by Tom Munch and RWJ are production units and accurately reflect the noise performance of the L1 Compact system.

Thanks,
Craig

• BeyerDynamic M88 (Dynamic Hypercardioid)
• Neumann KMS 105 (Condenser Hypercardioid)
• AKG C585 EB (Condenser Cardioid)

Guitars (electric and acoustic)

• Larrivée with L.R. Baggs iMix system (active)
• Morgan with Fishman Under Saddle Pickup (piezo) paired with a PickUp The World Quackbuster (passive)
• Larrivée Classical with Fishman Under Saddle Pickup (piezo) (passive)
• Various big box jazz guitars
• Strat, PRS 513,

Electric Bass
Musicman Stingray fretless with D-Dropper

Percussion
Porchboard Floor Bass

Compared to
Most of the comparisons were to the Model II with a T1® because that is what I use most often when performing. 

Sound
On stage and in the audience the Compact sounds remarkably like the Model II. This is very good for me because it means that I can rehearse in front of my Classic or Model II and perform with the Compact — and not have any surprises with respect to the sound.

Up very close I was aware that the Speaker Array was on top of the column instead of spread down the length of it. This just meant that if I was close enough to touch the column, I might be aware that there is not sound coming from the middle and lower portion. This was only an issue when I wanted to set the tone controls for the vocal microphone. When I bent down to adjust the tone controls, I couldn't hear the highs very well. Once I grow more familiar with the unit, I don't think I will be adjusting the tone controls very much.

As I got farther away from the Compact I found that the volume dropped off more quickly than the Model II. This was not a surprise, but it meant that if I wanted to sound equally loud (Compact and Model II) at 40 feet, I had run the Compact louder on stage to match.

Initially I was uncomfortable with the volume but after some experimenting, I found that I could put the Compact beside me, 3-4 feet away and perhaps just a foot behind me. It did not seem as loud as when I was directly in front of it. It also made it a lot easier to see the Channel lights that show if you are clipping when I was beside the unit.

Horizontal Dispersion
Exactly as advertised. The Compact sounds great off axis. That is - way off to the sides, you still get all the upper range. This will be great for monitoring in ensembles on shallow stages.

This is just about my only issue with the Classic/Model I. On a shallow stage, I cannot hear my band mates (running Classics) as clearly as they can hear me (running my Model II). I know this because we've swapped rigs just for testing.

From what I can hear walking around it, the Compact is going to give me a great experience monitoring on stage.

Volume on stage (compared to Classic/Model I/Model II)
It FEELS like I have to run a little louder on stage to get good solid volume at a distance. It's fine, it's just a little louder than I have come to like. After some experimenting I found that setting the Compact off to the side of me worked better than having it directly behind me. I finally settled on having it about three feet to the right of me, and a foot behind. This allowed me to run a little louder for stage level and to see the controls even if I was seated.

• Compact Power Stand (25 pounds)
• Compact Extensions (in carry bag) (5 pounds)
• Backpack (Beyerdynamic M88 dynamic microphone, microphone cable, instrument cable, computer)
• Guitar
  
• Microphone stand
  

How big is it? Well I would say that it takes less floor space than my three legged microphone stand. If you are familiar with the B1 bass module, the Compact Power Stand is just about 3 inches wider, 2 inches taller, and an inch shorter from front to back. It also weighs less than the B1.

How big is it? Well I have marvelled that I could put a Model II and a couple of B1s in my trunk although I usually travel with just a single B1. I could probably put three Compacts in the same trunk and actually have room for lots of other gear.

Size on the Floor - about the size of a B1
If you have an L1® now, you probably have a B1 and can relate to its size and weight. The Compact is just about the same size.


View from the Top



Side by Side



NOTE: the scuff marks on the Compact Power Stand - that's actually dust. Sorry about that.

Dimensions compared to a B1

Height — Compact is 2" taller
Compact: 16.5
B1: 14.5 (manual says 15)

Width — Compact is 3" wider
Compact: 13.25
B1: 10.25

Depth Compact is 1" shorter (front to back)
Compact: 16.75
B1: 17.75

Weight — Compact is .5 lb lighter (3.4 lb lighter than older B1)
Compact: 24.6 lbs (including Speaker Array)
B1: 25.1 lbs
B1 (pre mid-2007) 28 lbs



From the web site

L1 Compact power stand w/loudspeaker array

16.5"H x 13.25"W x 16.75"D ( 41.8 cm x 33.9 cm x 42.6 cm )

24.6 lbs (11.2 kg)


B1 bass module

15"H x 10.25"W x 17.75"D ( 38 cm x 26 cm x 45 cm )

25.1 lbs (11.4 kg)

Physical Comparisons

Assembly Clearance

You need 2 inches above the height of the Compact's fully extended height to assemble it.
Compact = 78.5 + 2.0 = 80.5

That is compared to four inches clearance for the
Model II = 84 + 4 = 88
Model I = 82.75 + 4 = 86.75
Classic = 82.75 + 6 = 88.75 (long bayonet setting)





Comparing the overall height - assembled

Model I / Classic: 82.75

Model II: 84 inches

Compact: 78.5 inches





Sorry - the camera angle makes it look like the Model II in the middle is taller than 84".

Table Top Mode
This is new, and for me the main application would be for spoken word (lectures and presentations) for an audience that is seated. I tried this out and it worked well. For live music, I would almost certainly take a minute to set the unit on the floor and run it fully extended. Running fully extended sounded the best to me when performing while standing.

There was a question about bass performance with the Compact on a table. Ken-at-Bose replied We're confident that the L1® Compact sounds really good in tabletop mode.

Half Stack
There has been a lot of interest in this from owners of other L1® Systems. I think this is because on occasion many of us have had to set up in rooms with low ceilings.

The people at Bose have consistently encouraged us to use the Compact on a table in the collapsed position, or on the floor in fully extended position.

So I had to explore this.

First, the Compact, fully extended is 78 1/2" tall or about 5 1/2" shorter than the Model II (84") or 4 1/4" shorter than the Model I (82 3/4"). This extra clearance should help all of us who have run into a ceiling that was just an inch or two too short.

Now if you use the Compact collapsed on a table (30" high), then the speaker portion is about 30-46" off the floor.

If you operate with just one extension, it's about the same; 32-48" off the floor.

Okay - let's talk applications. In most applications where I do public speaking - if there is a table present, my audience is probably seated so the Compact on a table is going to be close to ear height. So that make sense.

But if people are standing (or dancing) I would most certainly run fully extended with both extensions.



With Other Equipment
The Compact is clearly meant to run self-contained, ready to run a minute after you set it down. So if you have a dynamic microphone, and acoustic guitar with a pickup, and backing tracks. You are all set to go, setup up and running very quickly. I took the Compact out to a gig, just straight out of the box with no extra gear, and I would be happy to do that again. But this section is about options.

You can add a T1 ToneMatch® Audio Engine if you need more inputs or more control. There is no supported mechanism for adding bass support.

Coming from a background of using the other L1® Systems I resisted running the Compact in this seemingly limited way.

Adding a T1 ToneMatch® Audio Engine (T1®)
This works very well. You just need to add a power supply to the T1® and run an instrument cable from the T1® analog Master Output to the Compact Channel 2 (turn off the Preset) and you are ready to roll. I tried several tests with different instruments and microphones. I was very pleased because what I could hear was almost indistinguishable from the Model II when I was playing as I would on a stage. You can use a balanced 1/4 Tip-Ring-Sleeve cable if you have one. You lose 6 dB of gain if you use an unbalanced cable. But you still get plenty of volume and I would have no reservations about doing this on a regular basis.

I have my microphone stand set up with all the cables I need to use my T1®, so it would actually be simpler for me to operate with the T1® than to set up without it.

For anybody who wants to do some side-by-side testing with a Model II, try connecting the Analog Master output to the Compact Channel 2 (turn off Preset).

By default - you'll have sound coming from both the Compact and the Model II.

To kill the sound out of the Model II, got to

Prefs:
- Master Out
-- Pre Master Volume

Turn down the Master Volume knob.
This will allow you to hear the T1® to Compact connection without hearing the Model II.

This not something I'd be doing at a gig, but it is one of the ways that I was comparing the two units.

You could also use the T1®Master Analog output to an A/B switch (A - to Compact, B - to Model II).


Condenser Microphone / External Phantom Power

Summary:
Condenser microphone plus external phantom power battery pack - It works fine.

That is: I used an external battery pack and tried several phantom powered condenser microphones. They all sounded fine, although perhaps not as good as they do through the T1®.


After doing some testing, I think that when using the Compact, I'll just stick to a dynamic microphone just because it sounds great and it is the height of simplicity (or use the T1®).


More thoughts:

I doubt there is anyone here that enjoys his/her Neumann KMS 105 more than I enjoy mine. I was disappointed when I read that there only one Vocal Microphone Preset and that there was no phantom power. So, no support for my favourite microphone. But after listening to the Compact with my Beyerdynamic M88 (a dynamic, hypercardioid microphone), I think I'll be fine using the dynamic microphone with the Compact.

With a PackLite®

I tried using the Compact Line-out to a PackLite®. I won't be doing that live at least not without a a crossover.

The Compact Line-Out is full-range. So I was hearing too much low end (Guitar and Vocal) when all I really wanted was more in the sub 100 Hz range.

Trying this reminded me of how cleverly Bose engineered the Bass sub system (1 B1, 2 x B1, Bass Line Out, PackLite) in the other models.

Please understand, it's not that the Compact is lacking in bass. This was just an experiment.

I didn't like...

This is a very short list and some things aren't all that major.

Hiss
With all the controls at 12:00 o'clock, I can hear a hiss from the speakers. This is louder than the hiss from the Classic (that seems to drop off at 4-8 feet). This is louder than the almost non-existent hiss of Model II (that you have be within a couple of feet to hear).

I can hear this hiss 12 feet away and farther if I really listen for it. You probably won't hear it over the sound of an audience. But I noticed it, am aware of it when the Compact is idle, so I thought I should mention it. To put this into perspective, this is no louder than I have heard from just about any amplifier or powered speaker I've heard in a quiet room. I'm sure the main reason I noticed is that it is louder than the Classic or Model II. And those two devices are tough acts to follow.

Rick Jordan observed that the hiss is more pronounced from Channel 1. I can confirm this and that it is most noticeable if you have the volume turned up loud and nothing else is happening (no one on the microphone).

I had the Compact out at a gig last night (2009/05/04). This was a restaurant/pub and the hiss was inaudible over the ambient noise in the room.

• Level -10 dB
• Freq 500 Hz
• Width 2.0 oct

Last week I decided to install a pickup in my C-10BZ Larrivée (pictured to the right).

Today I picked it up at the shop. It had  the new LR Baggs iMix No Cut installed and proceeded to a gig. Actually I was several hours early so I just got set up and got to know the Guitar and the iMix.

I play through a Bose L1® Model IIBose L1® Model II (the new one) with the LR Baggs ToneMatch® Presets into my T1® just before I headed out the door. It was very simple to find a sound with this combination of gear that sounded great.

During the gig a very busy local musician dropped in and enjoyed a great meal and the music (so he told me). He was really impressed with how natural the Guitar sounded. He made a point of telling me so. My main Guitar for acoustic gigs for the past ten years has been a Morgan with a Florentine Cutaway, curly maple back and sides. I do a lot of acoustic lead work and this has always allowed me to cut through the mix with a Fishman Acoustic Matrix Under Saddle Transducer. About a year ago I added David Enke's PUTW Quackbuster. This has been working extremely well for me.

Compared to the Morgan, the Larrivée C 10 BZ is about the same size and shape, the neck is just a little narrower and seems to have a narrower radius. The Morgan radius is almost flat and I have it set for really low action and almost no relief. I am a finger style player and this Morgan has been terrific for giving me the room I need to work. The lovely Larrivée has seen very little play time over the ten years that I've had it because I rehearse with the same instruments and gear as I use when performing. Since there was no pickup in the Larrivée I wasn't playing it out and I wasn't playing it much at all. The net result was I needed a little time to get used to the Larrivée and the new strings they put on at the shop when they installed the iMix. I guess these are Cleartones. I normally play John Pearse strings on my acoustics and really like them. The new strings seemed a little noisy. Squeaky by comparison. On the way to the gig I picked up some Elixer 20/80s to try when I take the Cleartones off.

Anyway, after a couple of hours of playing and listening, a three hour gig, and some comments from players who happened by... The iMix was a good choice. I think that I am going to be very happy with the Guitar and the iMix. I will have to get used to changing between the I-Beam and the Element pickups on the fly. I may switch over to stereo mode and manage the pickups independently in the T1®. The Guitar sounds phenomenal (except for the squeaky strings). I'll have to see how that works out.

• Digital Les Paul (HD 6XPro)
  Gibson makes a point of telling us that this is a great traditional analog Guitar with new digital features. The digital features include a new hex pickup that connects to a breakout box providing summed output, stereo output, and individual outputs for the six strings. I'm still trying to figure out how you might use these. I can see running the analog output, or summed output to the T1™. Stereo into two L1™s, or individual outputs to six?
  
  
• Robot Guitar
  
  Robot?
  It has servos that drive the tuning pegs so it physically turns the tuners on the headstock to string-up and tune the Guitar. There is also digital assist for setting the intonation. Those features seemed novel, but not particularly compelling to me. I didn't buy into the argument that intonating a Guitar was a task that required you to surrender your instrument to a guitar technician and wait until your name came up on the waiting list.
  
  Alternate Physical Tunings
  What is interesting is the preprogrammed alternate tunings. (open E, DADGAD, Drop D, Open G, E flat, Double drop D). The strings actually change pitch. This differs from the virtual approach of using a hex pickup and doing the pitch conversion electronically. With this, you don't have the dissonance between hearing the strings on the instrument in one tuning, and hearing the amplified version in another that you get with the Line6, Roland VG, and guitar-synthesizer or midi approaches to alternate tunings.
  
  

And yes, they do look a lot alike.

Digital Les Paul and the L1™
Craig Anderton has a nice blog about his experiences as he is discovering ways to use the Digital Les Paul.


The nice win for the L1™ is that Craig Anderton tells us that his amp of choice, the L1™ serves both expressions of instrument, analog and digital.

Discussion: Gibson and the Digital Les Paul and the L1™

I've been reading through the tonnes of owner comments about Rick Turner's instruments on the Renaissance Forum
and a growing community of people at the D-Tar Forum who are talking about the D-Tar Mama Bear.

It took me awhle - and some reading to get my head around just what the Mama Bear is, and it's relationship to the RS6.  When I first started hearing about the Mama Bear, it seemed like too much work to read through the name to figure out what it was.

I wish I had done some of reading sooner. Rick Turner is extremely candid about D-Tar, the Mama Bear and the other things on which he has placed his hand.

There isn't a lot of time to devote to participating in forums but there is a lot to be learned in both of these. If you are considering an 'acoustic' instrument for live performance, or still in search of that  amplified acoustic sound, you will probably appreciate these two user communities.

Renaissance Forum

D-Tar Forum

Anybody out there played one of these? I've read the reviews at Harmony Central, but I 'm still curious.


-- click image for more info --

Rick Turner RS6

You will want to read about what happened when Rick Turner and Cliff Henricksen (Cliff-at-Bose) got together for the

Rick Turner and Lloyd Baggs Preset Pageant.

Disclaimer:
I have no formal affiliation with Bose Corporation.
My opinions are my own.

* Respecting various trademarks, I try not to use the term Bose PAS when referring to the Bose® Personalized Amplification System™ Family of Products.

Microphone Review - originally posted on the Bose® Musicians' Site - August 2004

The Lineup
(These are ordered in descending order by list price in $US dollars and the links are to the manufacturers' web sites)
Condenser
Sony C48 $1675
Microtech Geffel UMT70S $1,600
Neumann KMS105 $799
Rode S1 $599
Shure Beta 87a $462
AKG C535 $384
Dynamic
Beyerdynamic M88 $499
Shure Beta 58a $300
Audix OM5 $265

Quick Notes
I used the Sony C48 and the Microtech Geffel UMT70S for baseline reference. These are both large diaphragm condenser microphones with switchable patterns; omni, cardioid, hyper-cardioid (figure 8). When I had a Neumann U87 and TM103, the Microtech Geffel sounded very similar (It is rumoured that they all use the same capsule).
I would probably not recommend these for frequent live, on-the-road applications because given their value and relatively fragile nature they are probably better suited for recording. Neither is particularly suited for hand-held use. If you don't mind treating them with care, I would use either of these for an ensemble where you want to use a single microphone. Here, the switchable pattern (omni-directional) might do very well.

I have used the AKG C535 and Beyerdynamic M88 for many years, and they are old friends. I included them in my testing to help me to "listen" to the others.

This leaves for comparison
Condenser
Neumann KMS 105
Rode S1
Shure Beta 87a
AKG C535

Dynamic
BeyerDynamic M88
Shure Beta 58a
Audix OM5

See the section at the end (Testing) for the details about how I tested.

Conclusions
I think that any of the remaining microphones would be good performers, at least as good as the Shure Beta 58a.

Application - High Volume - Gain before Feedback
Audix OM5
Beyerdynamic M88
Shure Beta 58a

For high volume applications where gain before feedback is the priority, the Audix OM5 comes first. The Beyerdynamic M88 has a slight edge for clarity and is very close in feedback rejection. I also know the latter to be extremely rugged. I would use the either if I was working a small stage and could not get at least 4 feet away from the L1, or if having difficulty with reflections leading to feedback. If you can't get enough gain before feedback, it doesn't really matter how good the microphone sounds under better circumstances.

Application - Hand Held Microphone - Soloist
Neumann KMS105
AKG C535
Rode S1
Shure Beta 87a

Where sound quality takes precedence over everything else, the Neumann KMS105 is first. It has very low handling noise so as a handheld unit or on a stand with lots of mechanical noise this would do very well. I also found it to have the best resistance to wind noise and popping "p"s when "eating the mic". I think you would find it very suitable for female vocalists or any vocalists whose voice holds plenty of nuance. This microphone can be very present even at lower volumes. In the hands of a skilled artist, there is plenty of room for dynamics while maintaining detail in softer passages.

There is a quality that is shared by the Neumann KMS105, the Microtech Geffel UMT 70S and the Sony C48. If it could be said that a microphone sparkles, shimmers, or glistens - then these microphones do that. Not being a sound engineer, I don't have the words to describe it, but I hope you understand what I mean. It is the same kind of difference you hear going from a dynamic microphone to a condenser only more so. Think of the difference between red, and the candy-apple red you get with many layers of lovingly applied lacquer.

The AKG C585, Rode S1 and the Shure Beta 87a sound very similar to me. Well defined, accurate, but lacking the lustre of the Neumann KMS105.
The AKG C585 comes ahead of the others because it has switches to provide -10 db attenuation and low frequency roll-off. This is good for controlling the proximity effect that occurs with condenser mics when you "eat" them.
The Shure Beta 87a is at the bottom of the list because, of all of the condenser microphones, it was the most difficult to control for feedback. This would be a concern in a hand-held situation.

Application - On the Stand
Neumann KMS105
AKG C585
Rode S1
Shure Beta 87a

The list remains the same. With good microphone technique the bottom three would be pretty much equivalent when mated up with presets that seemed right for them. The differences will be more dependent on the singer's voice and range than anything I can detect in testing.

General Comments
A consequence of getting the Bose Personalized Amplification System™ is that I can hear everything better.

This is a significant improvement at a qualitative level. This means that the quality of the sound (or lack of it) has become much more apparent to me. I am enjoying playing, and performing more than I have in years.

Since getting my PAS I am playing more, performing more, and singing more.

In the past I practiced vocals using the Sony C48 and the Microtech Geffel UMT 70S, but since I couldn't hear myself anyway, there was no need to push the envelope (microphone quality) when performing live. I was singing harmony most of the time because I had not the confidence to take on lead vocals (couldn't hear myself). Now that I can get the same sound live as when practicing, it is time to find a way to closely get the same sound in both circumstances. This was relatively easy to do with my guitar sound, and now I'm ready to do it with the vocals.

What to do now
So for me, the Neumann KMS105 is a keeper.
The Rode S1 and the Shure Beta 87a are redundant, so I don't need to keep them.
The Audix OM5 would be a great addition to anyone's gig bag. I'll use the Beyerdynamic M88 (it's hypercardioid) when feedback is an issue. For the open stage type events, I'll probably continue to use Shure Beta 57s and Beta 58s.
For instruments I can use a couple of Neumann M184s or AKG C451s. There is even a preset for the latter to be used with acoustic guitar. I think there's a notch at 200hz to alleviate boominess from the sound hole.

Counterpoint
I'm not an audiophile. I don't have a trained ear. I will never be hired for my vocal skills. The primary expression of my musical voice is my guitar. Do I need to spend double the money on the Neumann vs. the Rode S1 (that I liked)? Probably not.

Why spend the money?
The difference is subtle. If I was still working through a conventional PA, much of the difference would be lost, imperceptible. I know from experience, I wouldn't be able to hear it in the monitors. But with the PAS, I can hear the difference. I used the Neumann last night at a gig. (Picked it up on the way there). I really enjoyed it.

A couple of days ago I traded in a beautiful 8 year old PRS McCarty to get a PRS Brazilian series Custom 24. Interestingly, the new guitar has the "sparkle and shimmer" that the other one lacked. This is a subtle nuance that could easily be lost in a conventional guitar amp. The PAS seems to transparently make it louder. If you hear those kinds of differences in your instrument or voice, then you might make similar choices given the same options.

A Gentle Warning about the consequences
After you get your Bose system, you will probably go through some changes.
Some, like parting with old gear that no longer seems appropriate are relatively easy.
You will probably play and sing more. But you may find that you end up upgrading the input since the amplification of it (the source), is so faithful. That was unanticipated, and the heart of the warning.

In closing
I hope that all of this is useful to you, and that I have provided a little of the experience in a meaningful way. I will have all of these microphones in my possession for another couple of days. So if there is anything specific I can try for you, or if this raises questions... just ask.

Testing
This is not all that interesting, but I thought you might want to know.

First - a disclaimer: I have no formal background in testing methods or sound for that matter. I was going to try to be scientific about this, testing and measuring with a sound level meter and a real time analyzer, but in the end, I just tried each microphone against its nearest competitors and listened.

Physical surroundings: 20' x 40' room. The PAS was about a foot out from a fairly reflective wall facing into the long dimension of the room. The sides of the space are reflective too.

Settings: I had the PAS running so the trims were set to only flicker red slightly (then backed off a little). I used preset 02 for most of the testing, but experimented with others. I turned down the gains at the remotes so at any given time, only one microphone was "live".

All the settings on the remote were set to 12:00 o'clock except for the master that was at 1-2 o'clock at times. It was loud! [edit - I took it up that high to find the threshold before feedback. I couldn't live with it that loud for long. The loudest I have ever taken the system running live is everything at 12:00 o'clock. I did some measurements today and this seems to hover at 100 db +- 5db. This is measured at ear level at 7 feet, same distance as the microphone ]

I tried the microphones several times set up at 7 feet from the PAS, and then for the feedback stress test I put the microphones 3 from the PAS. At 3 feet, I couldn't get the Shure Beta 87a to run higher than 12:00 for the master even when I was eating the mic. I could get the others a little higher. I had to turn things down below 12:00 o'clock if I wasn't standing between the microphone and the L1.

When listening for tone, clarity, and sound in general I turned the systems down to 12:00 o'clock on the master. The microphones were 7 feet from the PAS units for this part. I had four microphones going into separate channels (1 and 2) in two PAS units. I would sing the same phrases into each microphone and move them back and forth until I had them in an order I liked. Then to remove any "bias" inherent in the shape of the room or placement, I reversed the order (left-to-right) and listened again.

Not a trained singer, I can squeeze out a couple of octaves starting at the lowest note you can get from a guitar (E below middle C I think). I sang songs and scales, and just listened carefully. I had the microphones set up as you would playing live, so the PAS units were behind me. The microphones were angled upward about 60 - 70 degrees. (Looking from the left side in profile - about 2:30).

--- Go make music ---

See what others had to say about this review on the Bose® Musicians' Site

My PRS Hollowbody II was just too pretty to pass up, and it sounded wonderful at home. Sadly, that wonderfully round tone was too dark in performance. What I mean is, I couldn't get out "in front" of the band when that was what was required. The guys in the band described it as being too "dark". They kept telling me to crank it in the solos.

It would probably have been fine for a soloist or with a well behaved jazz group but we're not that kind of band.

I was pretty much resigned to enjoying this guitar at home.

When I got the Bose® system, I found that presence that had been lost in my regular rig. As you say, the tone was still there, but *now* I can switch to position 9 or 10 (why do they call it that?), you know the last two as you are turning clockwise on the rotary switch. Well that well-behaved beauty turns into a howling banchee. Just the perfect amount of feedback follow-on to sustain.

*** "You can't put too much water in a nuclear reactor!"
- Saturday Night Live

*** "So many paintings, so few walls"
-- The Moderns

Originally posted on the Bose Musicians' Support Site in response to a great post by Joseph

The Paul Reed Smith 513™ through the Bose® Personalized Amplification System™ Family of Products

Well, in addition to
- a new neck design
- new bird inlays
- 25 1/4" scale (versus the usual 25")
- did away with the pickup trim rings, just perfectly finished insets for the pickups
- Brazilian Rosewood neck (not just the fingerboard, the whole neck)
- new joint design (less intrusive than previous designs)

There is a new (for PRS) pickup system.
There are five single-coil pickups.

There is a new pickup switching system.
- 5 way knife switch - Pickup Selector
(like a Strat) (sorta)
- 3 way knife switch (like a tone control but not quite)
(Settings are Single-Coil / Clear Humbucking / Heavy Humbucking)

The designation "513" means
5 way switch
13 sounds

Trying it out

I grab the guitar and head for the "wank" room at the store where I had ordered it.

I can get the familiar 5 sound selections as with the standard PRS 5 way rotary, but there's hints of something more.

Now I'm sitting in the room where the youngsters crank the big Boogies and Marshalls and whatever else they can fit in there. It's supposed to be sound proof, but on a bad (typically) Saturday, you hear Stairway to Heaven, or Yngwie Malmsteen screaming out of there at volumes that no sound deadening can contain.

Okay, I think I can hear maybe 3 or 4 more "voices" in this axe. That is, the familiar 5 and then something more closely resembling the two "in-between" positions on a Strat.

So where's the other 4 or 5?
No matter what amp I run into, I can't quite make out the subtleties.

Now this hunk of wood is as alive and resonant as any solid body I've ever played. This much I can tell, and you guitar players know what I mean. You can actually feel the body sing, unamplified.

So unfulfilled I take a leap of faith, plunk down the dough and head home with it.

Fill in the "Why is a guitar better than a ... jokes here"

I flew in the door and hit the power switch on the Bose system. (It's always ready to go).

I plug in the guitar (straight in!)

Version 2.0 Presets:
00 - okay
35 - PRS Custom 22 - oooh, aaaah
25 - Electric Guitar Direct (same as Version 1, 12" speaker) - oooh, different aaaah

Are there 13 voicings in there with a standard rig? Probably, but I can't hear the differences.

Are there 13 voicings in there with the Bose system. Most definitely.

At the gig, I'm running my little V-Twin pedal into Preset 00.

We don't need to do sound checks anymore, so I leave the guitar in the case until the last possible moment.

There's something weird with the stage lights so there's not a lot of light on my side of the stage.

We run through the first set and the whole time, the other guys are doing double-takes. "Okaaaaaaay, what did you do?".

They can hear the different voicings too. They like 'em. Did you ever wonder (as a Guitar player, if the other guys in the band actually listen or hear what you are doing? At least with the Bose system they can if they want to).

So here's the thing.

Until I got the Bose system, to a certain extent, the subtleties of my better instruments were often lost. The amp was the lowest common denominator. This applied to mics, acoustic and electric guitars.

Getting into the new approach (Bose) is like getting new glasses.

This changes everything!

Originally posted at the Bose Musicians' Site