Reamp'ing: X-Amp or ProRMP?

Discussion in 'Mixing & Song Critique' started by patrick_like_static, Aug 27, 2007.

  1. Radial Engineering recently put out the ProRMP, which looks like a cheaper alternative to the X-amp. What are the differences in a passive reamp box and an active one?
  2. moonbaby

    moonbaby Mmmmmm Well-Known Member

    Feb 23, 2005
    Radial Engineering lists the differences on the FAQ section for both products. Their claim is that the active X-Amp has better 'reach' (extended HF response), and that the active design is less 'finnicky' about impedance loads, rendering more stable level and tone. There is also an
    LED on the X-amp to help set levels.
    FWIW, I own a ProRMP, and bought it because it DOES use an isolation transformer. Because I'm using it (hello!!!) sources, I don't usually want full-range 'hi-fi' response. A little bit of HF loss is no big deal, in fact, I've found it desireable. Less 'harshness' in the top end, if you will.
    I've been experimenting reamping guitars, trumpets, synths, and bass, and have had no issues with it. It's been a great $100 tool.
  3. AudioGaff

    AudioGaff Well-Known Member

    Feb 23, 2001
    Silicon Valley
    All the Radial stuff is top notch. I've been looking into getting the Little Labs Redeye for my toolbox. A little more money, but it does the reamp thing AND can be used as a regular DI. I like the kill two birds with one stone approach.
  4. Thanks for the help, you guys.

Share This Page