Steve discusses the importance of finding the right gear and the impact of input impedence on tone.
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Double Bass Steve Rodby on amplification
- Thread starter Greg Clinkingbeard
- Start date
Hey Clink,
Well I think most of us have a HPF Pre Amp or something like it. However, the interesing thing Rodby talks about is a "variable meg ohm load box" that goes from 1 meg ohm to 2 meg ohm. The only box like that commercially is the Summit Audio TD 100 and there was some talk here about the sonic possibilities with that box. http://www.summitaudio.com/td100.html
Steve's simple fix for phase shift was interesting and very cheap.
My ideal box would have Variable Phase and Variable Meg Ohm load. The Headway EDB-1 and the EA Doubler are pretty close to that. What Steve didn't know that Walter Woods reason for setting his amps to 1 megohm, was that he matched the input impedance to Don Underwoods then brand spanking new pickup. I only know that because I talked to Don once.
Ric
Jake deVilliers
Commercial User
- May 24, 2006
- 6,349
- 607
- Disclosures
- Owner of The Bass Spa, String Repairman at Long & McQuade Vancouver
That interview sounds like an infomercial for an FDeck Pre!
Big impedance - check!
Phase reversal - check!
High pass filter - check!
I thought that interview was pretty fascinating--phase reversal, yes, High pass filter, yes, I have and use both those things in my rig all the time
Variable input impedance--I just posted a thread about that. Does anyone make a variable input impedance control?
Variable input impedance--I just posted a thread about that. Does anyone make a variable input impedance control?
I'm not sure about the technical stuff, but I'd like to have his musical life - I'm very envious! 
I think you can get caught up in all that stuff or you can just get the sound out of your hands.
I just got a fishman and it is going straight into my GK and I am able to get a very warm, natural sound out of it - I can still get the nasty '70s sound if I want but I am surprised at how nice a sound I can get out of it.
Steve is an awesome player, I wish he would record more outside Metheny - I can't stomach Metheny's tone under ANY circumstances!
I just got a fishman and it is going straight into my GK and I am able to get a very warm, natural sound out of it - I can still get the nasty '70s sound if I want but I am surprised at how nice a sound I can get out of it.
Steve is an awesome player, I wish he would record more outside Metheny - I can't stomach Metheny's tone under ANY circumstances!
I don't disagree with the "tone in the hands" argument, and in general I'm not that fussy--I've been using the same pickup/amp combo for three years now.
But it would be really easy to plug in play some notes, twist the dial and THEN concentrate on the tone is in the hands.
An example. Years ago I had a bass with a full circle on it. Plugging it directly into an amp (AI clarus), into a fishman pro plat, and into an avalon U5 produced markedly different results right away. The Avalon was the best, by far, and it ought to be--it's an expensive piece of gear. But the fishman and the amp sounded very different, because of input impedance mostly. This would be a set it and forget it control.
But it would be really easy to plug in play some notes, twist the dial and THEN concentrate on the tone is in the hands.
An example. Years ago I had a bass with a full circle on it. Plugging it directly into an amp (AI clarus), into a fishman pro plat, and into an avalon U5 produced markedly different results right away. The Avalon was the best, by far, and it ought to be--it's an expensive piece of gear. But the fishman and the amp sounded very different, because of input impedance mostly. This would be a set it and forget it control.
I agree with the "tone in hands" concept whole heartedly. But a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.
I play acoustic as much as possible--Rodby's argument was just that if you have to go amped, get the basics down right. It's an interesting interview
True enough but 14 years ago or so I had the same GK, same bass and fishman and it sounded pretty nasty. I put it on yesterday even half-hoping for some of that gross over-amped sound and it sounds fine, even arco.
Look, can this thread be about the variable impedance thingie, and not the subject of tone being in the hands?
I'll say again that practicing is WAY WAY FAR AND A LOT more important and effective than anything else, including strings, soundpost adjustment, tone controls, endpins, or variable input impedance. I totally and completely agree with that. That being said, little things make a difference, and rather than spending ten years learning to get a good sound out of a pickup, I'd rather start with a good sound, and work to make it better.
I'll say again that practicing is WAY WAY FAR AND A LOT more important and effective than anything else, including strings, soundpost adjustment, tone controls, endpins, or variable input impedance. I totally and completely agree with that. That being said, little things make a difference, and rather than spending ten years learning to get a good sound out of a pickup, I'd rather start with a good sound, and work to make it better.
I think Rodby's discussion is, overall, quite insightful and could be helpful to many. I find him to be off the mark on a couple of points.
Rodby is correct about the importance of input impedance but he seems not recognize that once the input impedance is high enough, making it higher has little, if any, sonic effect other than to decrease the overall output. He claims that, as the input impedance is increased further and further, the "lows" increase along with it. That's not true. Basically, the interaction is creating a high-pass filter. Once you have a sufficiently high input impedance, you're good to go. In my opinion, there is no good reason to have, to build, or to operate a variable impedance device. (See here, for example).
With regard to phase, he speaks as if the speaker output is either in phase or out of phase with the acoustic output of the bass. Nothing could be further from the truth. Amplifiers, tone controls, and speaker cabs produce phase shifts that can range from 0 through 360 degrees. The output of the speaker at a specific frequency might be 90 degrees out of phase with the output of the bass. In such a case, inverting phase will get you nowhere, as that will cause the phase shift of 270 degrees (basically back to 90 degrees). This is the reason that sometimes phase inversion does not substantially affect feedback at all.
I realize that there is only so much detail that can be imparted in a discussion like the one in the podcast but I think these are important details.
Rodby is correct about the importance of input impedance but he seems not recognize that once the input impedance is high enough, making it higher has little, if any, sonic effect other than to decrease the overall output. He claims that, as the input impedance is increased further and further, the "lows" increase along with it. That's not true. Basically, the interaction is creating a high-pass filter. Once you have a sufficiently high input impedance, you're good to go. In my opinion, there is no good reason to have, to build, or to operate a variable impedance device. (See here, for example).
With regard to phase, he speaks as if the speaker output is either in phase or out of phase with the acoustic output of the bass. Nothing could be further from the truth. Amplifiers, tone controls, and speaker cabs produce phase shifts that can range from 0 through 360 degrees. The output of the speaker at a specific frequency might be 90 degrees out of phase with the output of the bass. In such a case, inverting phase will get you nowhere, as that will cause the phase shift of 270 degrees (basically back to 90 degrees). This is the reason that sometimes phase inversion does not substantially affect feedback at all.
I realize that there is only so much detail that can be imparted in a discussion like the one in the podcast but I think these are important details.
Sure. About the variable impedance thingie: Unless you are constantly on tour making good bread with a loud electric guitar, it sounds like a waste of time and money better spent on lessons and method books and practicing.
No disrespect to Rodby, but it has to be taken into serious consideration that what inspired him to work all this out was the Metheny gig which equals loud settings and big stages that are on a very artistic high level.
If you are faced with a situation like this then sure, explore this. I am sure it makes a difference. No question.
Nearly all of us need less, not more gear diversions. To be fair, I just had this BP-100 epiphany last night.
Not just the Metheny gig, but working in the studio, going for the best pickup sound, as most of the engineers asked for a direct source along with a mic in the recording heyday in Chicago, which I enjoyed, too.
I agree that gear, in general, is over-rated in importance...
Right! I NEVER even bring a pick up to a studio. If you even have it in the bag engineers will fight you for it!
Speaking of that heyday, Fred Hopkins always sounds great even though you can hear he has the grossest amp/pick up setup!
Well, working in commercial recording for producers, you had to show them that you had the goodies to satisfy the engineers, or maybe you wouldn't get hired again. I remember one session when the producer kept telling me there was something funny coming out of my pickup. I never heard what he was talking about, but later that day I called Underwood and he sent me a new pickup, free of charge. The only time I felt free to dictate anything in studio situations was when I was producing my own projects. Needless to say, I wanted to do this work.
Fred Hopkins (one of my first DB influences) didn't do this type of work, AFAIK.
To me the "tone in hands" only goes so far. While it's true that the instrument itself makes no sound on its own and needs a skilled touch to get the most out of it, if it was only about the hands we would all be playing some cheap Chinese POS with weedwhacker strings and sounding wonderful. But instrument, strings, setup and player all affect the final product. If you plug into an amp it becomes part of your sound as well. There is no replacement for starting with a good sound, but if you are using an amp (as most of us are), knowing how it works and getting the sound you want from it often takes time and practice of its own, and how could time spent on your sound really not be worthwhile?
I agree, and I am not reccomending people get a radioshack contact mic and run it through any old Peavey practice amp!
My input is to get a good bass, one of the good pick ups on the market (Not a BP 100, unless you have a thing for '80s free jazz lps - I do!) a good cable and a decent amp (a little GK or better) and then get on with it.
Looking for little magic boxes is a dangerous, expensive and time consuming road.
Like I said, if you are trying to get a good acoustic sound through Metheny, Mays and Gotlieb in a big hall for half the year You ARE going to the have the means and need for this.
For too many of the rest of us it is just a side track from other more important things.
