The T1 has an analogue output and a tonematch output. Is the (only) difference between these two that the Tonematch connection provides power for the T1, or are there other differences, if so what are they?

Thanks.

Hi SteverUK,

I believe that the signal is intended to be the same.

The T1® Analog Master Output is by definition, analogue.

The T1® ToneMatch Port Output is digital and is converted to analogue at the Model II Power Stand. As you noted, the ToneMatch Port also carries power for the T1®

We have some notes about this here:
T1 ToneMatch® Audio Engine / FAQ


So there is a difference in the way the signal is transferred to a Model II Power Stand. This may be audible, but I haven't been able to hear it.

We have some notes about that here: Latency and The L1®


In the early days of the T1® and Model II, there were one or two discussions and a few people said they could hear a difference. I don't dispute those reports but personally I haven't been able to hear any significant difference.

Finally, there is one difference related to the signal path. You can set the T1® Analogue Master Output to be Pre- or Post- the Master Volume control.

Other than a very slight delay in the analog output (because it converts the Tonematch output from digital to analog), there is no difference between the ToneMatch and Main outputs.

That delay is not significant in most situations; with the right (or 'wrong'!) situation some careful listening might be able to discern that delay, but it is very, very rarely of any consequence. If you are only using one OR the other output, you most likely won't be able to tell the difference.

(Parallel post with ST!)

Hi SteverUK,

I just added a note in the wiki about how you can change the T1® Analogue Master Output to be Pre- or Post- the Master Volume control.

Thanks guys. The reason I ask is that I'm considering using a feedback zapper between the T1 and the powerstand. This one:

http://www.behringer.com/EN/Products/DSP110.aspx

Obviously the Behringer does not have a dedicated connection for the Bose Tonematch output, so I would have to use the analogue output, then provide the T1 with power separately.

Intelligent feedback zappers are very effective at STOPPING feedback. The design of the L1 system greatly REDUCES feedback, but you can get several dBs more level with active units.

A few thoughts SteverUK:

One potential problem with the active feedback eliminators is when you have sound sources other than just vocal mics going through them.

For example, a sustained electric guitar wail, or an bagpipe drone, can end up activating a filter for "feedback suppression".

So, you might want to think about just where you want to place the feedback eliminator in the signal path.

If all you have on the T1 are vocal mics, then your plan is fine...

With the T1 and a Model 2 L1, it is tougher to separate the vocals from other instrumentals; one almost has to use the AUX output ...

However, with this Behringer device, I'd put it on the input side -- i.e. use it as a mic-preamp. Now, the connection from it to the T1 will be different, so you'll have to re-adjust the input gain staging, but then the feedback suppression will only affect the mic(s), not the other things going through the T1.

Thanks Dan. All makes sense.

For some gigs there's just vocals and acoustic guitars. I guess then it would be ok to put the Behringer on the output then.

Otherwise as you say, on the input. But I'd need either another behringer or a two channel version (which they do).

It's certainly something that would be nice to be part of an updated T1 isn't it? built in feedback suppression!

Keep in mind the way automatic feedback suppressors work:

Any single, non-fluctuating, sustained frequency that increases (or at least doesn't decay) in volume will be considered feedback. There's no way to separate that from a desired "musical" sound.

With voices, it's virtually never an issue, because most people can't sustain a single frequency without some variations in pitch or volume.

Not so with instruments.

I've heard the ringing harmonic of an acoustic guitar get squelched by an automatic feedback suppressor. Synthesized wind instruments? Happens all the time (that they get 'squelched').

May of these "feedback killers" also incorporate some type of "automatic room EQ" simply because the electronics needed to do some kind of EQ compensation for a poor room (acoustically) are pretty much already in place to handle feedback suppression. The problem is that you really need to separate the feedback suppression for just the vocal mics (preferably on the input side) while the "Room EQ" is best done on the output side -- and the equipment designers just don't get that issue. ("Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should.")

As a bit of a side issue: Room compensation is too often over-done, in that the assumption is that one desires a "flat" response from the room. Two problems with that assumption:

1) You can lose the "character" of the room. Now, admittedly there are times you DO want to change the "characteristic sound" of a room ... but live music is not a studio.

2) Electronic compensation will always "lose" in any battle with the architecture and geometry of the room. Especially in the bass frequencies. Especially in an all-wood room.

Furthermore, consider this: "Room EQ" is really changing YOUR SOUND to try to compensate for deficiencies which are not yours.

After you've worked and invested so much time and money to get "your sound" ... then you are going to turn that over to "someone else" to modify?

Please understand: I've been writing about live music with stand-alone amplification. "Room EQ" is indeed a vital part of "voicing" a built-in "house" amplification system. But I'm not sure it's best to use my "portable live music amplification" to "fix" the room.