Recording bass HELP! Is there a secret formula?

nellie48 · #1 09-30-2009, 04:57 PM

Our band is in the studio this month. We are an indy/brit rock band. I have been unavailable to record and most everyone has already laid down their tracks. The guitars sounds great, drums sound huge and awesome and the vocals are also superb. So I expected magic to happen when it was my turn. After all, my tone when playing live is great. I play an Ampeg 8x10 with a SVT-VR head. However, we could not get my tone to sound good and we spent about 2 hours fiddling around with it so that it would have more presence in the songs. We recorded direct, with two mics on the my cab and we even had a 3rd mic to capture the ambient sound in the room. We messed with the compression, EQ, and basically had to change the tone coming out of my cab to sound really bright to get it to cut through in the mix. Do you have any advice? The recording engineer is good at what he does, but has admitted recording bass is not his strong suit. Also, I wonder if the huge kick drum is burying my bass in the mix. Any advice would be helpful.

screaminglucy · #2 09-30-2009, 05:01 PM

you can usually eq the low mids of your bass and the kick to make them play nicely.

Beck McCartney · #3 09-30-2009, 05:07 PM

You should play with your amp until it sounds the way you want to hear it in the song. I'd say one mic is fine if you're going direct too. I like to place to mic about four feet in front of my cab. Move it around with headphones on until you find the sweet spot. I use a large diaphragm condenser. Once you have that sound, blend it with your direct tone to get more definition. If you have access to the Ampeg SVX plugin, use it. It is really great. Good luck!

nellie48 · #4 09-30-2009, 05:09 PM

So, do I just get my tone the way I want it (by listening to just the bass track) and then worry about eq'ing the bass and kick together later? Are there any rules on the bass and kick competing with each other and fighting over certain frequencies?

limit6 · #5 09-30-2009, 05:15 PM

Huge, amazing sound kick calls for a dull bass to do a mix justice. Fat amazing sounding bass calls for a lackluster sounding kick. This is not unusual. Also, listen for the entire song to come to life, not how great each instrument sounds. Good luck!!!

lunarpollen · #6 09-30-2009, 05:21 PM

That's one of the dangers of recording bass last... The great bass sound you had in your head from the start just doesn't mix well with the tons of stuff laid down in the mix before you. Everything else was recorded with no regard of how it would sound with the (then-nonexistant) bass track.

Unfortunately, because some of the elements already recorded probably intrude too much into the bass' sonic territory, some of those may have to be tweaked in order to accommodate anything close to what you would like the bass to sound like.

Beck McCartney · #7 09-30-2009, 06:04 PM

Starting with Revolver, McCartney always recorded bass last. Of coarse back then engineers had to basically pre mix everything. The way most people engineer these day, you really wont be able to tell what it will sound like until you start mixing. Just make sure you recored a good signal, and get the perfect take. You can use EQ and compression during the mix, and really blend it into the track.

nellie48 · #8 09-30-2009, 06:26 PM

Thanks for all the advice. Im getting plenty of good suggestions, many of them different. But I think the general consensus is that EQ will make a big difference especially between the bass and kick.

wwittman · #9 09-30-2009, 06:38 PM

well then allow me to say that EQ is not the answer

The question is, are you getting the sound YOU want to sound like?

If the answer is 'yes', but THAT sound isn't cutting through, then the answer is at least in part that other things need to be adjusted to make room for YOUR sound every bit as much as the other way round.

I don't like the implication that the bass guitar is just the afterthought that needs to just adapt to not get in the way of the 'important' stuff

but a LOT of it has to do with arrangement, and not just EQ

Often the simplest answer, and it's the one frankly most used with McCartney!, is to just make the bass LOUD enough to be heard.

Ultimately, I have a problem with the idea that "The recording engineer is good at what he does, but has admitted recording bass is not his strong suit. "
these two things are contradictory.

Good at what he does should mean he makes the WHOLE band sound like the band sounds.

Does your sound WORK with the rest of the band's sounds live?
if so, it should work on record.

I also don't personally think that MOST people benefit from a more complicated approach.
This guy is admittedly not great with bass.. so giving him 4 mics and a DI is ASKING for trouble.

Back to McCartney? One mic. One cab.

And that's what I do (as a producer OR a player) 99% of the time.
Take that ONE good mic on ONE good speaker and then adjust the amp tone to sound right.
Then balance that sound into the mix (louder than he had it, if need be) and see what you get.

It's sometimes helpful to listen to just a bass and drums mix to find out how well the two are REALLY working together (back to that arrangement thing) before adding guitars and other things.

hope this helps

nellie48 · #10 09-30-2009, 07:35 PM

Thanks for your input wwittman. I agree with the simple approach and just getting a good tone (like what is played live). I believe the recording engineer's comment that "bass is not my strong suit" was probably just a comment made in modesty. He is good at what he does and the recordings are sounding really good. The use of multiple mics was more of an act of "the more options the better, if we only use one mic in end then thats okay".

I think our difficulties may be from me insisting on getting a bass tone that is prevalent in the mix. Maybe I should just have focused on a good bass tone and leave it at that and trust that things will be EQ'd and mixed down to all fit together in the end. But, because I'm recording last, we may be taking the approach that all the instruments so far sound kick ass, so dont mess with them and lets try to make the bass work with what's recorded already.

nysbob · #11 09-30-2009, 11:58 PM

Sometimes we have too many options in the studio.

I have had the best results using one source, be it DI or mic. When you try to blend them evenly, you run into phasing issues.

If you have an amp sound sound you love, put a good mic in front of it and run with it.

Otherwise, a well played DI track can be manipulated in almost any way imagineable.

Hope you get it sorted out!

ps - recording a bass is not at all the same as playing live. All the highs you need to punch in a live environment aren't necessary on a recording. Be flexible and do what it takes to make the track work!

klyph · #12 10-01-2009, 12:27 AM

Yeah. Phase issues bigtime (at least, that's what I immediately thought upon reading the OP). Try just the DI, or one of the close mics. Realize that there can also be phase issues with the kick drum. Not easy to fix, but possible.

BTW, not to be an **shole, but I read too much about "mic & cab" in reference to McCartney and Jamerson. Both of these artists recorded direct the MAJORITY of the time (read Emerick and Slutsky, if you don't believe me)

Beck McCartney · #13 10-01-2009, 08:55 AM

I have read Emerick's, Here, There, and Everywhere several times. And I quote:

"But when we were doing Pepper, Paul would often overdub his bass after everyone had gone home. It would be just Paul and I and Richard Lush, the second engineer. We’d spend a couple or three hours doing bass parts, and I started using a C12
on figure of 8 about 8 or 10 feet away from his cabinet, which I would bring into the middle of Number 2 studio. I’d bring it out into the open from the corner area, where it was baffled off because I wanted a bit of the room sound."

And this is from an interview Emerick did with Berklee:

Q: Did you ever take the bass direct?

A:Maybe once. I didn’t like the texture; especially,
not on Paul. I guess I never have liked anything
that went straight from electrics to electrics.
There’s something missing for me if it hasn’t any
natural acoustic sound.

Sorry Klyph, Just wanted to let you know that you have your facts wrong. McCartney didn't record direct, at least not in the Beatles days.

gweimer · #14 10-01-2009, 12:30 PM

Try cutting the low end below 100hz. That's where the mud is. Boost things a little at 250hz to give it the thump. String definition comes about 1250 hz. From there, if you want more low end, bring up the volume, not the bass.

LaBassGuy · #15 10-01-2009, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nellie48

Our band is in the studio this month. We are an indy/brit rock band. I have been unavailable to record and most everyone has already laid down their tracks. The guitars sounds great, drums sound huge and awesome and the vocals are also superb. So I expected magic to happen when it was my turn. After all, my tone when playing live is great. I play an Ampeg 8x10 with a SVT-VR head. However, we could not get my tone to sound good and we spent about 2 hours fiddling around with it so that it would have more presence in the songs. We recorded direct, with two mics on the my cab and we even had a 3rd mic to capture the ambient sound in the room. We messed with the compression, EQ, and basically had to change the tone coming out of my cab to sound really bright to get it to cut through in the mix. Do you have any advice? The recording engineer is good at what he does, but has admitted recording bass is not his strong suit. Also, I wonder if the huge kick drum is burying my bass in the mix. Any advice would be helpful.

What bass do you play? And why do you assume it is the amp or its settings? Whatever bass you use, try relying on the bridge pickup more, if it has a bridge pickup. That's where you get definition to cut through the mix.

FronTowardEnemy · #16 10-01-2009, 12:38 PM

Read this through.
http://www.tweakheadz.com/guide.htm
It should help.

DanRJBrasil · #17 10-01-2009, 12:44 PM

thats engineer complete fault, if you can get a good one maybe you can try what I did in my last recording with a bad tech, last time I recorded I did 4ch mike and di at same time and I use all at the same time to get that full sound and I also used the svx on the clean di ch,

Hamrhed · #18 10-01-2009, 01:20 PM

Ive always found the simplest method to be the best in the studio- at least for me, and thats been a decent DI box to the console. I actually last used a Sansamp Bass driver and only dialed 'drive' (dirt) in and out as I needed... Although I wouldnt say that the sound on that record is 'my sound', I was happy with it and it sounded cool to me...

dmrogers · #19 10-01-2009, 02:23 PM

The last time I recorded in a real studio, I used a Precision into a Tube head. The cab was mic'd with no DI. The head had a fair amount of mids and highs with very little lowend. This combination worked fine.

The last time I recorded locally, I went direct from DI and the guy running the board was very good. Got a great sound.

The last time I recorded a group, I used Garageband. The bass was the last instrument recorded, and we went direct into the board. I setup the sound using Garageband emulation. It too, sounded good.

I said that to say this, try to keep it simple, stay out of the muddy portion of the spectrum. Good luck.

gweimer · #20 10-01-2009, 02:36 PM

One other thing I learned in a recording class I took - cover the meters. You should record with your ears, not your eyes.