bi-amping with Aggy GS 12's?

[behndy]

hey conerheads and porters! i don't spend hardly any time in the Amps section and the TB search engine brought back NOTHING on bi-amp, so i'm sorry if this is a done to death question.

i've been running a pedalboard with a preamp at the end of the signal chain into a power amp into some combination of 2 GS112's and a GS212 depending on how much FOH support's at a gig. i'm about to start a new project and i've got some time off to fiddle with my setup, and there's a LOT of cats out there who have crazy good tone from bi-amping so i'm thinking of trying it. was wondering please.....

lulz, also - tl;dr version......

if i'm playing a show with no FOH, is a bi-amp setup with a pair of 12's per channel going to be WAY different in volume than one signal being pushed to 4 12's?

anything else i should keep in mind when i'm playing with this?

thanks Ampsorz!!

[billfitzmaurice]

I don't believe bi-amping means what you think it means. You don't bi-amp the same size drivers.

[Ewo]

Originally Posted by billfitzmaurice

I don't believe bi-amping means what you think it means. You don't bi-amp the same size drivers.

Yeah. Biamping would be running the unamplified signal through a crossover (i.e., splitting the signal at a particular frequency), sending the highs to one (usually smaller) amp and the lower freqs to another (the amp that does the heavy lifting!), and having the amp with the highs feeding just the tweets and the everything-else amp feeding the speakers.

Bill, help me out with the proper terminology. But that's the idea of it, no?

[billfitzmaurice]

Originally Posted by Ewo

Bill, help me out with the proper terminology. But that's the idea of it, no?

That's the idea, but it's not limited to woofers and tweeters. Where electric bass is concerned you'd get the best results with woofers and midranges, say fifteens and eights or sixes, using cabs and drivers specifically designed for bi-amping. But currently AFAIK there are none.

[behndy]

sorry. yar.... sounds like i'm phrasing it wrong.

i want to run one clean/mostly clean signal to one pair of 12's, and the effected to a second pair of 12's.

thanks!

[Ewo]

Originally Posted by behndy

sorry. yar.... sounds like i'm phrasing it wrong.

i want to run one clean/mostly clean signal to one pair of 12's, and the effected to a second pair of 12's.

thanks!

Piece o' cake. Basically you've got two amp stacks. Split the signal from your bass, run one to one stack, the other to the pedalboard to the other stack.

Like that?

[behndy]

yep! was wondering if there's gonna be a huge difference in volume for crap FOH gigs though.

going from one signal -> 4x12's vs 2 signals -> 2x12's each?

thanks!

[Ewo]

Originally Posted by behndy

yep! was wondering if there's gonna be a huge difference in volume for crap FOH gigs though.

going from one signal -> 4x12's vs 2 signals -> 2x12's each?

thanks!

Well, you'd have to decide where to take the DI for the house mixer, eh?

And you'd want to take care that both stacks are in phase, since one's got effects in front. (If there's a big loss in low end, it's an indicator they're out of phase.)

Sure this is worth the hassle?

[behndy]

also, what is the correct term for running two amps/signals off of one bass? i'd like to not look like (as big of) an idiot if possible.

thanks!

[Ewo]

The only term I know of is "splitting": one signal in, two identical signals out. Which you can then process/amplify/reproduce differently.

Good luck with it!

[BassmanPaul]

You are running the amps in parallel. Most often this is done using a stereo power amp feeding the same signal, or operating the parallel switch, into both channels. This is how I run my system.

[behndy]

Originally Posted by Ewo

Well, you'd have to decide where to take the DI for the house mixer, eh?

And you'd want to take care that both stacks are in phase, since one's got effects in front. (If there's a big loss in low end, it's an indicator they're out of phase.)

Sure this is worth the hassle?

the DI for FOH would be one from each end of chain i'd think. now i run my pedalboard with a Rusty Box and send the balanced out to FOH and the unbalanced signal to my stage rig. i'd think it'd just be doing the same thing times two ne?

lulz. i have NO idea if it's worth the hassle! there's people with just MONSTROUS tone (like Clatter, Death From Above IAlwaysForgetTheYear) that i've always read that a big part of their sound is blending two amps, one clean one dirty.

everything that i have on my board right now that i'm afraid of it killing low end has a blend on it. am i just doing pretty much the same thing without the added complications?

thanks!

Originally Posted by BassmanPaul

You are running the amps in parallel. Most often this is done using a stereo power amp feeding the same signal, or operating the parallel switch, into both channels. This is how I run my system.

yeah. i THINK what you're talking about is how i run my rig now. i go pedalboard 1/4 out -> 1/4 y-cable -> each side into a different channel on my stereo power amp. i was under the impression that you get very different tonal possibilities by splitting the signal to two different amps with different effects on each.

thanks!

hurm. i'm also a git about phasing. is phasing as issue if different sounds are coming out of each amp? like if Amp A was clean with a bit of OD and Amp B was a wall of fuzz with no clean blend on it?

again, thanks!

[BassmanPaul]

If you wired two drivers out of polarity one cone would push while the other pulled. One would subtract from the other cancelling instead of adding. If you have two amps in parallel driving two identical cabinets they must both either invert the incoming signal or not invert. If one inverts and the other does not you are back in the same boat as the previous example. In the case that you cite, one amp will be driven directly. The other through different pedals. If any one of those pedals invert the signal once again you are in trouble. The problem lies in which pedals do what. Using the pedals in front of the amp, polarity changes are immaterial.

Somewhat simplified but I hope it helps.

[rpsands]

Unless she's changed it out, the lady from Clatter uses a pitch shifter pedal to send to a guitar rig, and then runs an effected signal and a dry signal for bass.

This is just signal routing, not biamping. Even the guitar rig thing I wouldn't qualify as biamping because it's not cut off at a particular frequency point.

* Stereo's a decent word for it since you're using different signals to different rigs, but unless you're getting some kind of stereo imaging going on by moving the sources around I don't know if I'd call it that. Maybe.

[RickenBoogie]

If the 2 amps get differently effected signals, or, if you use a stereo fx pedal, you *could* call it stereo.

[aledeville]

What you need is an understanding FOH guy. If you send him a clean and a wet signal he definitely needs to know how to treat them.
You might go DI=Clean and SM57 = Wet
Then the soundguy can take some highs off the DI signal and some lows off the wet signal and *tataaaaa* you have a wonderful sound. Or you might already hipass the wet signal at lets say 300Hz...

I'd mic the wet signal, because fuzz/overdrive etc sounds quite harsh over a DI.

I used to do such kind of "bi-amping" with a bass and a guitar rig. Advantage there is, that soundguys automatically mic a guitar cab on stage... :-)
If it's a bass cab I'd have my own mic with a stand/clamp with me. I've bad some experiences with telling soundguys to mic my sound

Just make sure you don't put too much effort in it and then decide after two gigs that it's just way too much trouble for a gig with all that material (just like me ). I use a X&M from sfxsound now. However, I might go back one day

Tell us your experiences!

[aledeville]

Originally Posted by RickenBoogie

If the 2 amps get differently effected signals, or, if you use a stereo fx pedal, you *could* call it stereo.

Stereo is left and right and not one on top of the other.
In fact, that could give weird outputs if you make a monosound out of a stereosound...


...wait, just had a splendid idea:
You might do wet-dry-wet... meaning, the 212 in the middle with the dry sound (DI) and then the two 112s put at each side and run a true stereo setup with those.
Holy crap, that would be something!

[behndy]

Originally Posted by BassmanPaul

If you wired two drivers out of polarity one cone would push while the other pulled. One would subtract from the other cancelling instead of adding. If you have two amps in parallel driving two identical cabinets they must both either invert the incoming signal or not invert. If one inverts and the other does not you are back in the same boat as the previous example. In the case that you cite, one amp will be driven directly. The other through different pedals. If any one of those pedals invert the signal once again you are in trouble. The problem lies in which pedals do what. Using the pedals in front of the amp, polarity changes are immaterial.

Somewhat simplified but I hope it helps.

it does, and it's VERY interesting. thanks! but i was incorrect in using the term "bi-amp", i was talking about separate amps for separate signals.

Originally Posted by aledeville

What you need is an understanding FOH guy. If you send him a clean and a wet signal he definitely needs to know how to treat them.
You might go DI=Clean and SM57 = Wet
Then the soundguy can take some highs off the DI signal and some lows off the wet signal and *tataaaaa* you have a wonderful sound. Or you might already hipass the wet signal at lets say 300Hz...

I'd mic the wet signal, because fuzz/overdrive etc sounds quite harsh over a DI.

I used to do such kind of "bi-amping" with a bass and a guitar rig. Advantage there is, that soundguys automatically mic a guitar cab on stage... :-)
If it's a bass cab I'd have my own mic with a stand/clamp with me. I've bad some experiences with telling soundguys to mic my sound

Just make sure you don't put too much effort in it and then decide after two gigs that it's just way too much trouble for a gig with all that material (just like me ). I use a X&M from sfxsound now. However, I might go back one day

Tell us your experiences!

lulz. yeah. i have a few weeks before i have any gigs or important stuff, so i'm gonna get a chance to run through things at the house pretty extensively. i'm more worried about the volume output of 2x12's on each signal vs one signal through 4x12's.

and yesh, i'm not a big fan of being DI'd either. i use a LOT of fuzz, OD out the bum and a fair amount of filters. and the band i'm in right now DOESN'T have a guitarist. just me, keyboards and a drummer. so it REALLY irks me if they don't want to mic the bass. after a few times i just hope they know the sound of their club enough to make it all good.

bringing a mic and a small stand for it is a GREAT idea. i think i'm gonna start doing that. nice!

[IvanMike]

Originally Posted by aledeville

Stereo is left and right and not one on top of the other.
In fact, that could give weird outputs if you make a monosound out of a stereosound...


...wait, just had a splendid idea:
You might do wet-dry-wet... meaning, the 212 in the middle with the dry sound (DI) and then the two 112s put at each side and run a true stereo setup with those.
Holy crap, that would be something!

except then you will have nasty comb filtering issues - and if you spread them farther and farther apart you'll have some interesting interference (both constructive and destructive).

I don't know if there is an official term for running two amps both with the same full range signal - this gets even more complicated because some do it with two different amps (for different sounds), and some do it with identical amps (but one with effects). I tend to call it "dual amping" and that works for me. I would stack these puppys vertically, and probably put the clean one on the bottom as it will probably have more low end. This will be a bit odd for you as the effected signal will be closer to your ears - but oh well. I do this from time to time with my cabs and pre-power setup, usually just running a fuzz type unit between the pre out and power in of the side running the top cab, but even then, I often just use it for a few songs, so most of the time it's bypassed and both "sides" get the same signal. To be honest, if I had the gumption I'd probably use cabs designed to be biamped, use a crossover, and just send the high end thru effects to an 8 or a 6 with a few watts going to that and then send the clean lows to a lot more watts and a couple of 15s.

Edit: oh but back up - as far as the original OP query - no it should be just as loud, with the caveat that some effects may drastically alter the signal and cut the lows, in which case the sound may not have as much low end, have too many harsh mids, etc - but in theory (pretending that the 412 and 212s sound the same) it should be just as loud and sound quite similar.

Your other option is to split the signal, (or use a side chain effects loop with a blend) and then blend the wet and dry signals together into the same amp. I do that often - much less of a PITA.

[behndy]

woof. baby steps IvAnMicke. BABY STEPS! you getting all crazy and **** with it.

....... sounds AWESOME.