• 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 AMT S25 Bass Mic

#141
Yeah, we all know about the soundguys. This one was above average, though. I should have been more specific. He wasn't really complaining that there was bleed, just remarked that there was a lot of it with the AMT "direct" feed, and not so much from the mic'd up amp. Which was strange because the AMT was feeding the amp too.

In a way my amp is a monitor, because it's angled up on a stand, towards my head so I can hear myself.

Thanks for the tips, fellers.
 
#142
Adrian Cho said:
If the signal is going to the house too, and is being monitored by someone, they may well be hearing the bleed but is it really enough to be an issue in the mix?

The isolated circuit is to avoid ground loop situations. The filtering is already done before it gets to that output. Through my own mixer, I always EQ out the top end anyway. And if I give something to the house, it comes from my mixer or the Pub and not from the AMT.

I don't know why the hell the guy would mic the amp. That's certainly not going to help things. Micing the amp is for guitarists and for setups where the acoustic sound of the bass itself is quite different to the final sound through the amp. He should be taking the Realist by itself and mixing that as needed or if you wish, just give him the mix you want him to use.
Click to expand...
I agree. The bleed is really not an issue for me. I should have just given him the blended signal from the Focus. But I'm confused - when is the acoustic sound of the bass NOT different from the sound through the amp???

Once I saw a concert with some big name players, and the guy had a mic on the bass player's contra - the midrange speaker! You can imagine what THAT sounded like.
 
#143
Chris Fitzgerald said:
You can also EQ out the higher frequencies that you aren't really using much - this will shut out a lot of what gets in your mic. That said, any soundguy that didn't bitch about mic bleed during a live show would make me worry he wasn't really a sound guy, you know? :eyebrow:
Click to expand...
IME, those higher frequencies both add to the naturalness of the sound I am getting, and help in making the bass audible, in the sense that these higher transients articulate the attack of the notes I am playing. Therefore, I would not cut these frequencies, but rather make sure that I am positioned correctly and that the rest of my gear is on par (i.e. NO BASS AMP!!)

YMMV, of course...

Vincent
 
#144
Vunz said:
IME, those higher frequencies both add to the naturalness of the sound I am getting, and help in making the bass audible, in the sense that these higher transients articulate the attack of the notes I am playing. Therefore, I would not cut these frequencies, but rather make sure that I am positioned correctly and that the rest of my gear is on par (i.e. NO BASS AMP!!)
Click to expand...

When it comes to high-fidelity sound, I'm as into it as much as the next guy. All my gear is full range gear and use it that way. I am not completely cutting out everything in the high end, just attenuating it. And I've experimented a lot and found little noticeable difference in the sound for live purposes (I'm not talking about recording here). The AMT is already filtering out some of the top end, but it still sounds great but not as crisp as a studio mic and that's one of the reasons why. However it's still damn good and works very well for bass for live performance.

One of the reasons in my case that probably helps is that I'm playing on gut anyway so the low end is strong. However I also play a bit with the bow through the amp and occasionally play harmonics above the octave too and they all come through clearly. Although in reality, the unwound gut G I use means I don't go much about high D on the G because it's dead up there anyway. With gut, most of the interesting sound besides the fundamental - the pizz snap on the attack and the sizzle from the bow for example, is not particularly super HF.
 
#145
T-Bal said:
I agree. The bleed is really not an issue for me. I should have just given him the blended signal from the Focus. But I'm confused - when is the acoustic sound of the bass NOT different from the sound through the amp???
Click to expand...

When the amp and the cab colour the sound enough. Some people (especially guitarists) have a sound that is created and that's why they love specific tube or whatever sounding gear. You'll hear these guys talk about how much the audio components are a part of their sound. Many slab guys that are new to 2xbass amplification take that approach too.

On the other hand, some of us work towards getting the acoustic sound and then we just want gear that gives completely transparent and natural reproduction so that the sound is not altered anywhere in the signal chain. In that case, the sound from the AMT should be the same as the sound from amp (not identical but close anyway).

To me it's the difference between sound creation and sound reproduction.
 
#146
T-Bal said:
Once I saw a concert with some big name players, and the guy had a mic on the bass player's contra - the midrange speaker! You can imagine what THAT sounded like.
Click to expand...

I think there are situations when the sound guy might want to mic the amp:

- The only outputs from your bass sound crap (e.g. no mic but just a ****ty sounding pickup)

- There is really a heck of a lot of noise on the stage or a lot of sound reflecting off the front of the bass. By mic'ing the amp, they get a higher output signal with less noise. Especially if the acoustic sound from the bass is not super-loud.
 
#147
Vunz said:
IME, those higher frequencies both add to the naturalness of the sound I am getting, and help in making the bass audible, in the sense that these higher transients articulate the attack of the notes I am playing. Therefore, I would not cut these frequencies, but rather make sure that I am positioned correctly and that the rest of my gear is on par (i.e. NO BASS AMP!!)
Click to expand...

I'm not going to go into the whole AMP/NO-AMP thing again. About about the higher frequencies, IME I can cut them from the mic and still maintain the natural bloom and "wood" from the sound while cutting out a lot of unwanted noise while keeping some of the higher frequencies in the pickup signal. Personally, I like the blend of the pickup and mic for live situations, especially loud ones with little or no PA support.

The worst I've ever heard the AMT sound was a couple of weeks ago...one of my groups played a function in the modern art annex of the local art museum, where the entire room was made of marble and stone. Put that together with a lot of people talking, and the signal from the AMT sounded like the soundtrack from a movie about having horrible hallucinatory nightmares in an echo chamber/insane asylum. I eventually dialed it out and just dealt with the pickup.
 
#149
Ah yes I did misread that. Well I honestly think when I play through the AMT and the Pub that the sound is definitely pretty damn close. It doesn't necessarily capture all the nuances and the character but it's certainly a completely story than some setups I've heard with Underwoods or Realists and slab amps and cabs.
 
#151
Vunz said:
IME, those higher frequencies both add to the naturalness of the sound I am getting, and help in making the bass audible, in the sense that these higher transients articulate the attack of the notes I am playing. Therefore, I would not cut these frequencies, but rather make sure that I am positioned correctly and that the rest of my gear is on par (i.e. NO BASS AMP!!)

YMMV, of course...

Vincent
Click to expand...

Speaking of the higher frequencies...have any of you guys with the newer AMTs found that almost too much high end has been filtered out? The mic sounds wonderful of course, but I am wondering how clear it sounds out front without the extra clarity. It seems as if I can't add any highs with my amp since it is all filtered out by the AMT preamp.
 
#152
Just a quick update - since I don't want to do without my AMT for any gigs anymore, and since I am sick and tired of lugging that #%@!!&**%$#! stupid plastic case around and attaching the mic to my bass 100 times a year, I had NNICKELLOYDIAN mount the mic to my tailpiece, then had Gary Falk rewire the thing with a Neutrik connector that fits between the E and A strings near the tailpiece. So now, I have the FC plug directly above the AMT plug, and can truly plug and play. I'll report back after the gig Thursday night.
 
#153
I have a new spot that I've been using with mine. I'm now putting it about 2-3" below the F hole, right between the bridge and the F hole and about 3" or so away from the body of the bass. I don't seem to notice any loss in volume, but it is a lot warmer/less direct sounding and the midrange is a lot more balanced. Also, to put it there you mount it on the lower bout which makes way out of the way of the bow, which is nice...
 
#154
Chris Fitzgerald said:
I had NNICKELLOYDIAN mount the mic to my tailpiece, then had Gary Falk rewire the thing with a Neutrik connector that fits between the E and A strings near the tailpiece. So now, I have the FC plug directly above the AMT plug, and can truly plug and play.
Click to expand...
I hope you can grace us with photos on that. I'm very interested in that idea.
 
#155
The AMT is not a full bandwidth microphone. The frequency response is nice and flat in the bass and in the mid up to about 5 khz, but there the high frequency roll-off starts.

This is either due to a low pass filter in the preamp or due to the design of the microphone diaphragm itself.
This is of course one of the reasons the AMT is usable at relatively high volumes even though you are standing near the drums - a lot of the treble is filtered out. If this wasn't done, you would here quite a lot of drums from your bass amp, and the risk for feed back would increase.

This makes the AMT somewhat unsuitable for recording since there is no clarity in the sound (very little frequency information above ~ 7khz). If you're looking for a duller sound, you might be okay though. At least this is my opinion.
 
#157
Robert said:
The AMT is not a full bandwidth microphone. The frequency response is nice and flat in the bass and in the mid up to about 5 khz, but there the high frequency roll-off starts.

This is either due to a low pass filter in the preamp or due to the design of the microphone diaphragm itself.
This is of course one of the reasons the AMT is usable at relatively high volumes even though you are standing near the drums - a lot of the treble is filtered out....
Click to expand...

AMT lists the frequency response at 30Hz-10KHz,The published graph shows the response down maybe 1dB at 7KHz and 4dB down at 10KHz. That really shouldn't have much effect on feedback, which is usually more a function of the resonance of the room or the bass.

There isn't a lot of information above 10KHz in a bass, and few of us over 40 hear much above 12KHz (or even lower), so I wouldn't think the response limits it, but you never know. There are probably all sorts of clicks and other cues with harmonmic content well into the 10-20KHz range and beyond that we pick up on. People regularly use mics like the U87 (which has a noticible boost in the 10-20KHz range) for bass and I assume they know what they're doing.

Certainly when it comes to stage amplification the AMT is easily the most accurate bass tranducer I've ever heard.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back