How can I get my B-15N to come thru an audio-interface. I want to start recording my band...my guitarist's amp has a jack to plug into an interface, but my B-15 has none of that. Will I have to bite the bullet and mic it? or can I use the "external speaker" jack to push it thru the interface?
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.
Ampeg B-15N to audio interface
- Thread starter UnDx3_bassist
- Start date
External spkr jack, no. Afraid you'll have to mic it, like they all did back in the day. The upside, 1) great tone, and 2) you'll own a mic.
BITE THE BULLET AND MIC IT?!?! Are you crazy?!? You WANT to mic it!
And it makes a pretty heavy sound DI'd as well. I just got a Countryman DI and I run it out the head through the speaker. You'll need a couple 4-pin XLR adapters from www.fliptops.net to do it with a B-15N, though. If I'm not mistaken, Jamerson used to run a line from one of the outs in the head for the preamp to go to the board for live work, but I like getting the power tubes in there, too.
But mic'ing it is a great way to go, and the most common way of using it. If your mic doesn't have enough low end, you can combine it with a regular DI and use the DI for the lows and let the mic do everything else.
And it makes a pretty heavy sound DI'd as well. I just got a Countryman DI and I run it out the head through the speaker. You'll need a couple 4-pin XLR adapters from www.fliptops.net to do it with a B-15N, though. If I'm not mistaken, Jamerson used to run a line from one of the outs in the head for the preamp to go to the board for live work, but I like getting the power tubes in there, too.
But mic'ing it is a great way to go, and the most common way of using it. If your mic doesn't have enough low end, you can combine it with a regular DI and use the DI for the lows and let the mic do everything else.
Micking it is the only way to get an amp tone.
In studio it's really not a problem.It's a must.
Like Jimmy said , I would suggest you to also use a (passive) DI in another track , 'cause the B-15 don't have good low end , and if the guy mixing your project needs any , he would have the DI track to give the song clean low end.
(I always do that the with a B15 bass track)
In studio it's really not a problem.It's a must.
Like Jimmy said , I would suggest you to also use a (passive) DI in another track , 'cause the B-15 don't have good low end , and if the guy mixing your project needs any , he would have the DI track to give the song clean low end.
(I always do that the with a B15 bass track)
Folks, you're wrong. You get air moving by mic'ing the speaker, but you can get the sound of the head.
Get an 8ohm Hot Plate. You can take the output of the head that way.
http://guitars.musiciansfriend.com/product/THD-Hot-Plate-Attenuator?sku=481283
I've used the 16ohm version to record my B-25B head and it does exactly what you want.
You can also mic the cab, but to get the "essence" of the sound, it's really the head.
When I record now I tend to use the Hot Plate to get a bit of grit, and a clean DI on my bass, and mix the signal.
Get an 8ohm Hot Plate. You can take the output of the head that way.
http://guitars.musiciansfriend.com/product/THD-Hot-Plate-Attenuator?sku=481283
I've used the 16ohm version to record my B-25B head and it does exactly what you want.
You can also mic the cab, but to get the "essence" of the sound, it's really the head.
When I record now I tend to use the Hot Plate to get a bit of grit, and a clean DI on my bass, and mix the signal.
no, YOU'RE "wrong"! <g>
the sound of the amp is through is speaker in the room.
Mic'ing it is a MUCH better idea.
unless there is a compelling reason why you CAN'T, then you can compromise.
I almost never record a DI (when engineering or producing other people OR on my own playing)
There's no reason at all why there wouldn't be 'enough bottom' out of a properly mic'ed (meaning with a good mic) B-15
the sound of the amp is through is speaker in the room.
Mic'ing it is a MUCH better idea.
unless there is a compelling reason why you CAN'T, then you can compromise.
I almost never record a DI (when engineering or producing other people OR on my own playing)
There's no reason at all why there wouldn't be 'enough bottom' out of a properly mic'ed (meaning with a good mic) B-15
You're both wrong. Any approach is equally valid, and the choice between DI, dummy load, and microphone will all vary depending on the player, the engineer, the music, and the situation. There's too many variables to say that any given approach is better than the other, even in a general sense.
My point was that you don't need to mic if you don't want/have to. While the cab is a part of the B-15 "sound", the biggest tone generators are going to be the bass and the head. Going DI with a dummy load lets you get the basic tone (sans speaker of course) with no bleed if you want 100% isolation.
A well mic'd B-15 will always sound good. I never said it wouldn't.
In general, it's always good in a studio to have a DI and a mic or something else so you can put the bass in the mix however it winds up sounding best. There's no reason to just do it one way especially if you've got tons of tracks.
A well mic'd B-15 will always sound good. I never said it wouldn't.
In general, it's always good in a studio to have a DI and a mic or something else so you can put the bass in the mix however it winds up sounding best. There's no reason to just do it one way especially if you've got tons of tracks.
If I could add if we talk B15;
The B15's speaker and cab IS a very big , if not the biggest part of that "B15 sound".
By-passing the cab of a B15 to have a B15 sound is like....... well.......I don't know........buying a Ferrari for the ride but leaving it in the garage (???)
You're both wrong...it's a floor wax AND a dessert topping!
OK, everyone calm down. Every way you can think of to use a Portaflex is excellent. But if I could only do one, I would mic it. The sound is just there when you mic it.
OK, everyone calm down. Every way you can think of to use a Portaflex is excellent. But if I could only do one, I would mic it. The sound is just there when you mic it.
Mic'ing just isn't always practical. The speaker/cab is just the delivery mechanism if you want it audible in a room. If you're recording, it's not cranked anyway; no need.
The tone mainly comes from the head (and then we can get into what tubes you're using), bass, and strings (but clearly different speakers can color the tone, and the construction of the cab has some effect, too). You can hook the head up to any 8ohm 15" and you may not get the exact sound of a B-15 cab, but it'll be close enough that most people won't know the difference.
The tone mainly comes from the head (and then we can get into what tubes you're using), bass, and strings (but clearly different speakers can color the tone, and the construction of the cab has some effect, too). You can hook the head up to any 8ohm 15" and you may not get the exact sound of a B-15 cab, but it'll be close enough that most people won't know the difference.
Sorry, but that's not the least bit true, even within B-15's themselves. A 70s B-15N cab sounds nothing at all like a 60's B-15N cab, and neither of them sound like an SWR or Eden 115. To suggest that the cab is immaterial is just wacky. Even you admit that there are tonal changes with cabs. And the thing about nobody knowing the difference is irrelevant...you can use a VT pedal and it'll be close enough that nobody will know the difference, but I'm still going to use my amp and cab for master recordings.
If you want to use just the head DI'd, I think it's a great sound. But let's not fudge the truth to further your agenda. It makes a huge difference in tone to use different mic'ed cabs.
If you want to use just the head DI'd, I think it's a great sound. But let's not fudge the truth to further your agenda. It makes a huge difference in tone to use different mic'ed cabs.
Well, you get into variances of the B-15N to the B-15S of the 70s, too, because a B-15 isn't just a B-15. We know this, but people tend to associate it as a generic thing. The bottom line to me having owned a lot of Ampegs over the years is that even going through another cab, you still get that 'Ampeg sound' as I like to refer to it. Even when I ran the SVP-CL through the Berg IP112, you can tell it's Ampeg.
So you need to think of the sound as a more complex thing than just the cab and speaker - which do play in - but at the core of it is that Ampeg sound people know and love. But you can still run a B-15 head into an 8ohm cab and get some of that sound, but you're not getting the matched cab. THAT's the difference.
I still find the VT Pedal to be too sterile compared to something like the Linden EQ + TruVoice. It's missing something that combo, as well as the B-15 (any of 'em!), have.
So you need to think of the sound as a more complex thing than just the cab and speaker - which do play in - but at the core of it is that Ampeg sound people know and love. But you can still run a B-15 head into an 8ohm cab and get some of that sound, but you're not getting the matched cab. THAT's the difference.
I still find the VT Pedal to be too sterile compared to something like the Linden EQ + TruVoice. It's missing something that combo, as well as the B-15 (any of 'em!), have.
yeah, fair and educated points, but beyond the initial 'idea' of a sound the concept of the 'ampeg' sound in recording is a little useless. similar for any big name in bass amps or even eq's or compressors. they have the character no matter what amp you use and a bit of that character will also be captured in the direct out of the head. but the point is that when it comes to making a record it doesnt make the blind bit of difference that the cab has the overall 'sound' of an ampeg or whatever. its the details and intricacies that really make a huge difference. And as such a mic'd cab is going to give you many more options to get THE sound you need to fit in with the track.
we did a session recently where we split the bass signal to two ampeg rigs, one vinatge svt to 8x10 (I'm not sure which model) ampeg cab, the other a new svt with new cab. they both had the ampeg sound but when it came down to the track they sounded SO different. we eventually went with a combo of both. 2 mics on each and 1 DI, sounded great, and huge. But during the session we were favouring one, then the other, they sounded so different that as we added different elements the necessities changed.
basically, what I am saying is that a direct out of a head is ok, but it is not the captured sound of a bass rig. it may work for some tracks but it is not a 'this will always work' scenario. on the other hand the sound of a particular 'make' will always be there but it means nothing in the scheme of getting a top recording as all the cabs, all the heads and all the combinations of both will vary massively in a critical recording situation.
I realise I'm probably going too 'in depth' for the statement you made, its not too much of a consideration of the small or home studio owner. but my argument is that you HAVE to consider a mic'd cab as a major source of the character of the bass, it has been for countless recording, from huge bands to little local bands. a direct amp output is great but only a little window onto the whole of the sound.
Let's not forget the original question wich is;
I think we all agree with a mike. The only way to capture that "B-15" sound the OP wants.
I think we all agree with a mike. The only way to capture that "B-15" sound the OP wants.
