Basic Bass Questions

bongolation said:
While we're at it, why do people think you need a DI box for guitar/bass when virtually every recording interface made already has dedicated Hi-Z instrument ins? :confused:
Click to expand...

Guitargodgt said:
Because dedicated bass DI boxes with tone shaping beat the shit out of going direct without it.
Click to expand...
That was my point, though: Not really.

They do some minimal 3-band EQ and a little crappy OD, maybe, but they're extremely trivial and crude compared to something like SVX or even some of the freeware bass VSTs on a good dry track.

Plus, the latter is infinitely more versatile in the sense of being able to change stuff when the mix makes it apparent your original bass sound wasn't all that hot after all. :facepalm:

For scratch recording with a little portable recorder or interfacing with FOH live where your options are limited, these things are OK, but for real digital recording, give me a cherrypicked passive bass, flats, a good cable and something like SVX.

What am I missing?
at3_ampeg_amp.jpg

at3_ampeg_cab_mic.jpg
 
Last edited:
Getting a good signal INTO the box is what the thread is about. A bass DI like the Behri BDI21 gives a good signal & tone that can THEN be manipulated once IN THE BOX. All the cute amplitube stuff is just fine but a solid, simple, relatively clean track that can then be non destructively manipulated until satisfied is what most folk are after.
Mind you I'm silly enough to want to get a good unVST'd track into the comp based on a few simple tools & my playing so PERSONALLY I aim to get a good sounding bass track (well one that I know will work within a given mix) from the outside.
 
rayc said:
Getting a good signal INTO the box is what the thread is about. A bass DI like the Behri BDI21 gives a good signal & tone that can THEN be manipulated once IN THE BOX. All the cute amplitube stuff is just fine but a solid, simple, relatively clean track that can then be non destructively manipulated until satisfied is what most folk are after.
Click to expand...
I have a BDI21, and it does nothing (0) to the signal that can't be done better with a VST on a raw track, except possibly increase input gain from a passive bass, which I've never found to be necessary.

Its use is itself destructive if you think about it, as it's irreversibly monkeyed with the native tone of the instrument before it gets recorded.

That's the whole point. It's just wet/dry 3-band EQ, and EQ is far more flexible in a more sophisticated equalization plugin if you actually know what you're doing.

How many layers of EQing do you want or need on a single track? I'd like to keep it at one as a matter of simple organization.

As far as I can tell, these things are just more redundant impedimenta in the primary signal path (though it's not as prohibitively noisy as the truly awful Behringer GDI21), an extra elbow you don't need, at best. That's why you don't normally use active-control basses in the studio -- you can do everything they do far better upstream, either in a pricy analog studio panel or a digital VST.

Redundant processing just isn't logical, and it certainly isn't necessary or beneficial.
 
I read your post as using the amplitube on the way in so recording a keeper with the VST in the signal path. Now, if you're on about VSTs after the basic tracking that's a different matter.
I disagree re the BDI21 - it's as good as the sansamp - better if value for money comes into the equation. I use it to create a track that meets my specs that I can then manipulate in the computer in accordance with the needs of the song.
 
wow, wth, I didnt see all these replies until just now. It usually emails me on every new reply but I didn't get them until just now :)

Oh well, good stuff and the theory stuff kind fo goes over my head but nice to read anyways hehe..

cheers to all!
 
Truth is, every way to record the bass is good and usable. It really all comes down to preference and not intrinsic dogma.
 
grimtraveller said:
Truth is, every way to record the bass is good and usable. It really all comes down to preference and not intrinsic dogma.
Click to expand...

I believe this says it all for me.
I'd like to hear opinions on the new Acoustic stuff too. I'm still using a pair of Acoustic 450's I picked up in the mid 70's and I think they rock.
 
Track Rat said:
I believe this says it all for me.
I'd like to hear opinions on the new Acoustic stuff too. I'm still using a pair of Acoustic 450's I picked up in the mid 70's and I think they rock.
Click to expand...

I would like to investigate them further, but from what little I've seen and heard in GC, the new ones are like the old ones in appearance only. Now, if they'd only bring back the 301 (I think) cab, with the 18"...

And I understand bongo's point. If I were strictly recording a composition, I can see where VST's might help me find exactly what I'm looking for and do a/b comparisons, etc. Otoh, I'm someone who can't play a guitar part, solos in particular, without hearing the sound that I'm creating to get the feeling as I'm playing. Monitoring with latency just doesn't cut it, besides you're not going to get the final vibe anyway. Yes, you can split the signal and get the sound you want live in the room, and still take a clean signal direct, but then again, I'd want the BDI21 for my sound in the room.

My whole point with the BDI21 was that I think it's a great piece of gear for any bass player, regardless of whether they're recording or playing live, and it's dirt cheap. I think it actually makes me a (slightly) better player, that the sound inspires me.

Just tryin' to help a brutha out.

There are many ways to get where you want to go, just remember to enjoy the ride.
 
bongolation said:
That was my point, though: Not really.

They do some minimal 3-band EQ and a little crappy OD, maybe, but they're extremely trivial and crude compared to something like SVX or even some of the freeware bass VSTs on a good dry track.

Plus, the latter is infinitely more versatile in the sense of being able to change stuff when the mix makes it apparent your original bass sound wasn't all that hot after all. :facepalm:

For scratch recording with a little portable recorder or interfacing with FOH live where your options are limited, these things are OK, but for real digital recording, give me a cherrypicked passive bass, flats, a good cable and something like SVX.

What am I missing?
ampeg_amp.jpg
ampeg_cab_mic.jpg
Click to expand...

Actually, I used to run with that setup for the stuff I'm doing (Ik ampeg). Switching over to hardware was night and day better. I honestly never even open IK anymore.

Truth me told though, bass is one of those instruments where the bass is going to have the biggest impact on the tone, fallowed by the rest of what you are running.
 
My son always DI's the bass and in our case that means into a ZED 10s high Z input. This has very good EQ but he generally leaves things flat and tweaks after.

One of the big problems with trying to mic up a bass rig (and I have a 6cu ft Fane 15" 200watter) is that every mortal thing in the room rattles!

Dave.
 
ocnor said:
I'd go with the combo because it has a 15" speaker. A single 10" won't cut the mustard when trying to jam with others. The combo also has an XLR direct out so you wouldn't need a separate direct box.
Click to expand...
ditto ....
 
NotCardio, the Acoustic 450 was a lot like a 360-370 (if you're familiar with Acoustic amp models). 170 watts RMS into 4 ohms. I played bass AND guitar through a pair for years.
 

Attachments

  • Acoustic 450.jpg
    Acoustic 450.jpg
    20 KB · Views: 35
I have not tried miking the amp yet (which by the way I ended up picking up a Fernandes bass and a Line 6 LowDown 300 off of craigslist) but I have tried a couple different ways of going direct.

I tried running the bass straight through my 2 different preamps (M-Audio Tampa and ART TPS II) and they sound ok except I am getting a little buzz (thought it was my preamp at first but the concluded later that it has to be the bass because I get no buzz when running my acoustic guitar direct or even a mic through the preamp). I also hooked the bass up to the amp and then used the XLR direct out on the amp to go through the preamp. Not only does the buzz lessen almost to non-existent but I also get to play with all of the cool sounds/effects from the amp and imho sounds much better.

Taking the bass to GC to see if they can fix the buzz but other than that I am happy with both the bass and the amp. I plan on getting the BD21 too to see how it sounds.

thanks all!

(now I just have to learn some more songs on bass so I dont keep playing the 3 bass lines I know - Jeremy by pearl jam, would by AIC and dazed and confused by zeppelin) :)
 
I would suspect that you have single coils on that bass? I've got a Boss noise supressor that works pretty well, but I've never tried it on bass.Glad you're having fun with it, because that's really what it's all about.
 
Track Rat said:
NotCardio, the Acoustic 450 was a lot like a 360-370 (if you're familiar with Acoustic amp models). 170 watts RMS into 4 ohms. I played bass AND guitar through a pair for years.
Click to expand...

Track Rat, I know I've said this before, but for years I played bass through an Acoustic 150 head and an Acoustic 6x10 cab (forget the model), both meant for guitar (the head had spring reverb). It was awesome. Talk about bite!
 
notCardio said:
I would suspect that you have single coils on that bass? I've got a Boss noise supressor that works pretty well, but I've never tried it on bass.Glad you're having fun with it, because that's really what it's all about.
Click to expand...

I guess its called a split coil and then another single coil?

bass.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top