well-defined, crisp bass attack

[dobro]

In the mix, what do you do when compressing the bass in terms of attack, in order to make that attack well-defined?

With vocals or guitar, I make the attack a bit longer when I want a clearer, better-defined attack. Is it the same with bass?

What's happening with some of my mixes is that the bass is getting a bit lost in the other stuff - the levels are fine, and the bass has got its own EQ niche, but it lacks a bit of punch. I think the leading edge of each bass note needs to be a bit percussive, if you understand what I'm trying to say...

 

[pglewis]

Yeah, I'd try increasing the attack time and see if that helps.

 

[barefoot]

Hey d,

You hit the nail on the head with this... "I think the leading edge of each bass note needs to be a bit percussive".

I spent a lot of time with this same issue myself. Then I finally realized that you can tweak all you want with the bass sound, but you'll never get anywhere until you start thinking of the bass and drums as a single rhythmic unit. A solid "bass attack" is almost always a combination of bass and drums - most especially the kick.

That said, you can get more attack into your solo bass sound as well, if you remember this. All finite sounds are a combination of many frequencies. Even a pure sine wave pulse must contain other frequencies in order to make it a "pulse". And if it didn't contain other frequencies it would have to go on forever. The shorter the duration of the sound, the more high frequency content it has. High frequencies are fast and they are the only things that can make fast sounds - like sharp attacks. So if you want attack you need more highs.

Likewise, for example, if you have a deep dark bass sound you can use a sharp kick to reinforce it's rhythm. In this case you would go for a "doom!" kick sound rather than a "thud...", if you know what I mean.

But, like I said, always remember that so much of it depends on how the bass and drums interact. Engineering can never substitute for musicality.

barefoot

 

[dobro]

pglewis - thanks, I'll play with that...

barefoot - near as I can tell, I don't think you answered my question directly, but that was the most interesting post I've read in a long time. I think I know the difference between a 'doom' and a 'thud' . But what you said about the connection between higher frequencies and shorter sounds sparked another question in my mind: what about frequency splitting for the bass, then? What about getting the higher frequency content of the bass off in one spot and the lower frequency content somewhere else in the mix? Maybe even applying different compression to each of them? Like longer attack on the higher, and shorter attack on the lower?

 

[chessrock]

Forget all that frequency-splitting stuff and quit overanalyzing the compression. These rules are the way and the light to any/all of your bass-tracking woes.

Chessrock's 5 rules to better-sounding bass tracks:


1) Change your strings. Does wonders.

If that fails, try one or more of the following:

2) Change the way you thump, pluck, hit, pick, or slap your new strings. If you're a thumper, try plucking or hitting. If you're a slapper, try slapping something else . . . and try plucking or hitting your shiny new strings instead.

3) Change where you're plucking, thumping, hitting, or slapping your new strings. I've found I get a much smoother yet defined attack simply by moving my plucking hand down towards the bottom pickup. I get a much different sound when I move it between the two, and the plucking is almost lost when I move up to the top pickup.

(I'm a plucker, by the way)

This method is the most difficult, because it involves changing the way you have learned to play, but you gotta' be flexible.

If you've tried thumping, picking, plucking, etc. If you've tried changing the strings to some funky neon pink steel-wound, and you've exhausted all of the different playing styles and none of these work for you . . .

Then it's time you try numbers 5 and/or 6:

5) New/different bass.

6) New/different bass player.


Those are the rules. I didn't make 'em up. I'm just passing them along for your reference.

 

[dobro]

Okay, plucker, I believe you. But only because what you say makes sense...

 

[cordura21]

Dobro: if you're interested in multiband processing, I recommend you this link. It was great for me, it's very helpful, easy to understand and with a creative point of view.

https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?threadid=66152

Check the mastering guide.

Cheers, Andrés

 

[zelmobeaty]

Forget all that frequency-splitting stuff and quit overanalyzing the compression. These rules are the way and the light to any/all of your bass-tracking woes.

Chessrock's 5 rules to better-sounding bass tracks:


1) Change your strings. Does wonders.

If that fails, try one or more of the following:

2) Change the way you thump, pluck, hit, pick, or slap your new strings. If you're a thumper, try plucking or hitting. If you're a slapper, try slapping something else . . . and try plucking or hitting your shiny new strings instead.

3) Change where you're plucking, thumping, hitting, or slapping your new strings. I've found I get a much smoother yet defined attack simply by moving my plucking hand down towards the bottom pickup. I get a much different sound when I move it between the two, and the plucking is almost lost when I move up to the top pickup.

(I'm a plucker, by the way)

This method is the most difficult, because it involves changing the way you have learned to play, but you gotta' be flexible.

If you've tried thumping, picking, plucking, etc. If you've tried changing the strings to some funky neon pink steel-wound, and you've exhausted all of the different playing styles and none of these work for you . . .

Then it's time you try numbers 5 and/or 6:

5) New/different bass.

6) New/different bass player.


Those are the rules. I didn't make 'em up. I'm just passing them along for your reference.

THIS IS GENERALLY GOOD ADVICE. NEARLY FRESH BASS STRINGS IN THE STUDIO IS A MUST. I SAY NEARLY FRESH, BEACAUSE IF THEY'RE BRAND NEW THEY MAY BE OVERLY BRIGHT.

I MIGHT ALSO AD - TRY FLAT WOUND OR HALF ROUND STRINGS IN THE STUDIO - VERY EASY TO MIX.

 

[sonusman]

Almost without fail dobro, I track bass a little bit brighter and tighter sounding than I would want it while mixing. The reason why is that I have found it MUCH easier to expand out the low end than to try to get attack to come out. So I concentrate on the attack while tracking.

A couple of hints about "mixing" bass.

Almost ALWAYS use post EQ compression! Often, it is the only way you can have the bass loud enough and still offer the benefit of additive EQ.

Make sure you use a long enough release time to keep distortion from happening. Depending too on the program material, you might want the effect of a bit of pumping on the release, but only if it sound musical in the song.

You will seldom need more than a 6:1 ratio.

I would be leary of increasing attack time too much on the compressor.

Fullness on the bass can be achieved quite well with a 60Hz boost. Attack will almost always come from the 500-1000Hz region. DON'T try to draw out the attack in the 2-5KHz region, this will start effecting the kick drum attack.

Don't be afraid to compress the hell out of the bass track. Really, don't. Just make sure you have it post eq and that you are using the eq in tandem with the compressor to shape the bass the way you need it.

On the last CD I mixed, we experimented a lot with using a track double of the bass track and splitting the frequency spectrum between them. I have usually had good luck using this technique on drums and decided to give a shot on bass. Me and the producer while quite surprised at the versatility this offered and it is something I plan to use again when the music warrents it. Having a lot of eq and seperate compression between lows and high on the bass guitar offers some cool advantages.

I have little else to offer as far as compression/EQ settings. It all really depends on how the track itself sounds, and the type of low end the mix needs for your production goals to be met.

Oh, the Alesis 3630 makes and EXCELLENT compressor for bass when you really need a big bottom to the sound. Any old timers around here have heard many excellent sounding mixes I have done where the 3630 was the comressor used on bass.

Ed

 

[barefoot]

Good to hear from you Ed!

"On the last CD I mixed, we experimented a lot with using a track double of the bass track and splitting the frequency spectrum between them.....Having a lot of eq and seperate compression between lows and high on the bass guitar offers some cool advantages."

Cool. I use this technique all the time because I write electronica and some of my distorted snarling "bass" sounds cover quite a bit of spectrum. But using it on a regular bass sound didn't occur to me.

Thanks,

barefoot

http://barefootsound.com

 

[cordura21]

good advise, Sonusman! Using an expander is a great alternative idea, never thought of that. Is there a standard spliting point for grabbing the low end, or you change depending on the material? Maybe you use those frequencies you posted as a guide?

I am also fond of the spectrum splitting technique, and maybe it's good to take it a step further on the chain an use it in a subgroup carrying the bass/drums combination.

One last question: if you don't have a multiband effect, what do you think is the best way for frequency splitting: a band pass filter or an equalizer? If the second, then what kind of eq, and whould I have some phase worries?
Cheers, Andrés

 

[barefoot]

Andrés, I'll share my experience with this.

The best (least damaging to the signal) way of splitting the frequencies is to use Hi-pass and Low-pass filters. These are essentially Hi and Low shelf filters with their cuts set to minus infinity. The first approximation is to set the hi-pass and low-pass frequencies the same. This method is rather hit or miss and, depending on the filter types, you could wind up with a +3dB hump at the crossover frequency, or worse, a deep null.

The two "knobs" you have to correct this are the separation in corner frequencies of the two filters and the relative phase. The phase can be adjusted by adding a delay to either the hi or low side. I can explain a simple method for checking and correcting any crossover issues, if you're interested. Personally I use the Waves LinMB multiband compressor as a crossover by setting the thresholds and ranges (ratio) to zero. This way I don't have to worry about these issues.

For me at least, the split frequency depends on the music, but I usually use 160Hz as a starting point.

One very powerful use of this technique I found, especially if you don’t have automated effects, is to open up the bass region for short duration bass notes in the midst of the main bass. For example, I might have a full and deep droning pad going on and I want to add a percussive bass throb (remember I write electronica ). Well, if I just throw the bass throb in there it will interfere with the bass in the pad and create a bunch of mud. So what I do is split the pad into highs and lows and then drop out the low track by several dB's every time a bass throb occurs. There's probably some sidechain way of doing this, but I don't have that capability, so I have to meticulously draw it out with volume envelopes. It's well worth it though because you can achieve very dynamic and complex bass textures that still sound open and never muddy.

I just upgraded to software (Acid Pro 4.0) that supports automated effects. Now I do the same thing with an automated low shelf filter on a single track rather than split tracks. I'll probably go back to my old method though, because the sound quality of the tracks split with the Waves plugin seems to be better than using the cheaper automated EQ. It also allowed me to add separate effects to the highs and lows. Reverb on the highs and no reverb on the lows is a particular favorite of mine.

barefoot

http://barefootsound.com

 

[dobro]

What Ed said and what Barefoot said goes together real nice.

I think I'm starting to see a way into this.

As always, get it right in the tracking. Later on, good attack can be enhanced in the upper frequencies. I think I'll look into the frequency splitting thing after all. Cool Edit 2.0 has that tool.

I don't understand the bit about a boost at 60 Hz, though. That'll just exaggerate every B that's played, right?

 

[cordura21]

thanks Barefoot, I knew you were the one to ask about crossovers.

I'll really like to know the technique that you use to get a good crossover without damaging the signal.
My guess was to throw some white or pink noise and look to the signal before and after the filters with a spectrum analyzer. But I don't have a cluse as to how calculate the delay time to resolve the phase issues.
TIA for you help. Cheers, Andrés