Banished to the DI Zone

[MDBass]

How did this happen to bass players? How did we almost all universally get shoved into the DI zone while our guitar playing brethren still get mic'ed without question?
I know this isn't a new thing. When I was a young buck reading paper copies of Bass Player in the 90s it was common knowledge that you were going to get DI'ed live and in recording sessions. I didn't question it at the time; it was just how things were.
But how did we get here? As much as people on TB love old recordings, where they mic'ed the cabs, no one bats an eye at having that part of our tone taken away from us.
Live, mic'ing a guitar cab just happens. No discussion. Bass players have to fight to get mic'ed, sometimes even bringing their own mic to try to coerce the sound engineer into doing it.
Hours are spent tweaking cab placement, selecting mics, and placing the mic at recording studios. Bass? "Here's cable, just plug into the board."

Was it the transition from tube heads to SS heads? Was it the advent of full digital recording?

No one spends “hours” moving guitar cabs or selecting/moving mics for them unless they are intentionally trying to run up their bill (as some major labels are notorious for doing) or just have no idea what they’re doing t all

Digital recording, and more specifically IR technology, has essentially done away with all need to actually mic a live cab for me personally...unless you’re going for a really unusual sound like a far room mic, and even that can be easily covered by something like UA’s Ocean Ways.

 

[JimmyM]

And there are a lot of not very good sound techs out there. At least in terms of getting a good bass sound out of the PA. Going DI removes several variables that can otherwise cause problems.

The last time someone mic'd my bass cab at a gig there was terrible feedback from the subs. This after I had suggested going DI in the first place. After trying to fix it for 15 minutes, delaying the start of the gig, they ended up not using the mic.

Might happen once in a blue moon. Again, more about incompetence than anything. That said, I'm totally with you...if you wanted a DI with no mic, then you should have gotten DI with no mic.

When I record I go from my pedalboard then DI through a beautiful tube compressor.
After tracking and any cleanup to the tracks, we send that signal back to the amp where we split the signal; one from the DI and one mic on the speaker. ( actually 3 mics, 1 near, 1 mid, 1 room). It gives me a lot of control and options for mixing.

Sorry, but nothing I hate worse than putting off decisions like that till the very end. No reason you can't DI and mic at the same time, and no reason you should need anything more than slight touchups in the mixing stage. I say get it down on tape the way you want it as it goes down, you save time and money, and unless the recording turns out to be absolute butchery once it gets mixed (rarely happens), then you're golden.

 

[bassbrad]

I know this will happen so I give the sound person the sound I want them to have, a pre EQ send from my GK MB500, essentially my pedalboard feed which ironically they never want. My stage amp is really nothing more than a stage monitor as I use my hands, basses & pedalboard for all my soundshaping and soundscaping.

 

[higain617]

If you use an amp without an integrated DI, you'll usually get mic'ed in my experience. I don't really care either way.

 

[Wasnex]

@agedhorse @lz4005

What is the rig everyone gets all happy in their pants about? The SVT-CL and 810 fridge. Neither are pure, or uncolored. After mucking about with sims, IRs, and an actual 810 in a rehearsal space, I've realized that the imperfect, slightly scooped, and a little wooly tone of that beloved rig is what makes it sit "in the mix" so well.

Does that make any sense?

Sorry but I had to drop in and say . I am happy with my SVTs, but I can't stand the sound of an 810E. IMHO, try not to overgeneralize, because not everyone shares your taste in rigs. This is not a critique of your tastes...810E are awesome; just not my thing.

If I ever run sound for you, I will be happy to put up a nice mic; especially if you are running effects or using your amp to develop a driven tone.

If you are not using effects or driving your amp into OD, I would try to convince you to plug straight into a DI. Getting a good bass sound live is very challenging. Taking a clean, unprocessed signal straight from the instrument tends to make it easier to get a bit more clarity and articulation, and also eliminates signal changes that occur when the player adjusts volume and EQ during the gig. The bass in a venue tends to be far less focused and articulate than the sound coming from your amp...so the increased focus and articulation provided by a DI can actually get you closer to the desired results. If time allows, I like to come up on stage and listen to the player's amp a bit so I can get an idea of the actual tone he/she has in mind. Something to keep in mind, the players tone does not always sit well in the mix, so obviously the audio tech needs some latitude to adjust EQ and compression.

Little secret...it's a hassle dealing with the signal changes from guitar as well. However, running a DI on guitar provides a different set of advantages/disadvantages. Bottom line after comparing guitar and bass with mic and DI: In general I prefer guitar with mic and bass with DI.

I don't have hard fast rules on these matters...it's always best to evaluate the specific circumstances and then pick the right tools. I can't say, I always do this, but I do try to avoid falling into the trap of always doing things the same way every time without consideration of the circumstances.

Asking an audio tech who has never mic'ed a cab to step out of his/her comfort zone is probably going to face resistance. In my experience they also resist using DIs they are not familiar with. Audio techs want to do a good job, and need to have tools they understand so they can make corrective changes intuitively. If you are likely to work with the same audio tech again in the future, maybe you can encourage them to do some experiments mic'ing bass cabs in a controlled environment, so you can use a mic next time.

 

[Wasnex]

You can buy a faithful recreation of what he used for less than your amp costs. It'd also be a heck of a lot easier to lug around than your amp. If you're always being plugged into a DI, and wanting to sound good, get your own DI. I don't know a single sound guy that wouldn't at least try your DI if you brought one with you.

I have fought with audio techs over using my DI before. It represents and unknown, so they would rather use their own. My DI was a Countryman Type-85, the provided DI was a rusty Whirlwind director or equivalent.

 

[Downunderwonder]

At least in part, it is physics. Bass signals are pervasive when projected from the stage, making the FOH engineers job difficult, because the bass contaminates some of the other feeds.

That has nothing to do with how bass signal ends up in the mixer. The usual bollox is everything else is bleeding into the bass mic yet the SPL at the bass mic well is over anything else on stage and somehow bleeding into a guitar mic never gets a mention.

 

[micguy]

My DI was a Countryman Type-85, the provided DI was a rusty Whirlwind director or equivalent.

I don't know any sound guys that wouldn't recognize (and welcome) a Countryman 85. It might not be their absolute favorite, but they'd be happy to work with it.

That said, I'd also be willing to bet your biggest issue that night was not what DI was in your signal chain - it was more likely the expertise/lack thereof of the guy handling the knobs.

 

[JimmyM]

I have fought with audio techs over using my DI before. It represents and unknown, so they would rather use their own. My DI was a Countryman Type-85, the provided DI was a rusty Whirlwind director or equivalent.

The Director is actually pretty darn good for a cheap DI. I'll take my REDDI any day, and the guy should have used your 85, but I was very surprised that the Director was as good as it is.

 

[Wasnex]

The last time someone mic'd my bass cab at a gig there was terrible feedback from the subs. This after I had suggested going DI in the first place. After trying to fix it for 15 minutes, delaying the start of the gig, they ended up not using the mic.

This is easier to achieve than some might think.

 

[bucephylus]

That has nothing to do with how bass signal ends up in the mixer. The usual bollox is everything else is bleeding into the bass mic yet the SPL at the bass mic well is over anything else on stage and somehow bleeding into a guitar mic never gets a mention.

Not understanding your point. Sorry. My experience with bass signals projected from the stage is that they can get picked up by the vocal mics. That “contamination” can be problematic for FOH engineers, who seem to prefer more isolated individual signals. The long wavelength of bass pressure waves makes them more pervasive.

 

[micguy]

The usual bollox is everything else is bleeding into the bass mic yet the SPL at the bass mic well is over anything else on stage and somehow bleeding into a guitar mic never gets a mention.

If I were running FOH, and you didn't keep a reasonable level on your amp, I would definitely have an issue with the bass bleeding into everything else (and messing up sound for the first few rows in the audience as well). Bass bleed is just as bad (sometimes worse) than guitar bleed. In the audience, the stage wash from the bass amp is far more destructive if not handled well than guitar bleed, as it has more audible phase cancellation. One of the reasons I never bring an amp when playing bass is I want to sound good everywhere; not having an amp on stage helps that a lot.

 

[Wasnex]

The Director is actually pretty darn good for a cheap DI. I'll take my REDDI any day, and the guy should have used your 85, but I was very surprised that the Director was as good as it is.

I get that now, but this one looked like it had been in the bottom of a lake for awhile, and then run over by a truck a few times. Luckily it still worked fine, because I couldn't convince the young tech to use the Countryman.


That was years ago, I don't stress about that stuff any more.

 

[Luigir]

As much as people on TB love old recordings, where they mic'ed the cabs,

Actually the most famous bass records have been DI-ied since there was not enough room for an amp or a least this is what the legend says:
The Real James Jamerson Amp

 

[agedhorse]

Wow. Two (anti?) DI threads in one day.

Experience and listening to the pros has taught me that a good DI is a "necessary" tool of Recording. (Anything goes in music, but this is what I trust) You can't take away unwanted noise once it's there. But it doesn't need to be your only tool.

When I record I go from my pedalboard then DI through a beautiful tube compressor.
After tracking and any cleanup to the tracks, we send that signal back to the amp where we split the signal; one from the DI and one mic on the speaker. ( actually 3 mics, 1 near, 1 mid, 1 room). It gives me a lot of control and options for mixing.

Do you spend the time and effort to time align the mic? What is the point of reference (tine = 0) that you use?

A Reddi* is an active DI - it isn't always about being cheap. Active DI's get you out of the impedance/gain tradeoff that a transformer passive DI puts you in. If you want a DI to preserve the tone of your instrument, and active one is actually better at that.

*and Avalon, Radial Firefly, Motown, Radial J48, Jule Monique, etc....

Most quality active DI's also include a transformer!

That has nothing to do with how bass signal ends up in the mixer. The usual bollox is everything else is bleeding into the bass mic yet the SPL at the bass mic well is over anything else on stage and somehow bleeding into a guitar mic never gets a mention.

Sometimes, but sometimes not.

Micing drums have the same challenge with bleed, especially from low frequency, omnidirectional sources such as bass. This is one of the two primary reasons that gating drums has become so popular. Frequency sensitive key signals take this to the next level and are also helpful in this case. Gates work well on drums due to their percussive, on and off nature of the signal. the attack envelopes are very short (typically less than 1msec) and the decay envelopes (depending on the drum) is pretty short too and it's often desirable to shorten it below it's natural decay rate. While it's uncommon to gate overheads, it's not uncommon to high pass them at 200Hz or higher.

Micing a bass cabinet is not unlike micing a kick drum, except that the signal has much longer attack and decay envelopes that do not lend themselves well to a gate (at least for natural reproduction). Because the bass is usually (though I acknowledge that this doesn't mean always) close to the drums, and also sensitive to what's being reproduced by the subs (assuming a decent sized system), both of these signals tend to bleed into the bass mic. Playing louder reduces this effect proportionally, but introduces other equally challenging problems. Close micing the bass cabinet reduces this effect, but can result in unintended distortion due to the air movement close to the cone interacting with the mic's diaphragm. There is also the vibration transmitted through the mic's housing and through the stand/clamp set-up that can become an issue at higher volumes.

I have dealt with all of this first-hand, the goal is to make the best set of compromises possible that retain the player's tonal intent but also helps fit the bass into the mix as it sounds out front. This is what a pro gets paid to do.

 

[Downunderwonder]

If I were running FOH, and you didn't keep a reasonable level on your amp, I would definitely have an issue with the bass bleeding into everything else (and messing up sound for the first few rows in the audience as well). Bass bleed is just as bad (sometimes worse) than guitar bleed. In the audience, the stage wash from the bass amp is far more destructive if not handled well than guitar bleed, as it has more audible phase cancellation. One of the reasons I never bring an amp when playing bass is I want to sound good everywhere; not having an amp on stage helps that a lot.

Bass bleed is the same regardless of whether the bass is mic'd or DI.

 

[BurningSkies]

If I see a stagehand or engineer coming my way with a mic, I often do my best to dissuade them from it.

I have an amazing sounding DI.
I don't use speakers for 'color'.
I have a 3 way speaker system have 2 or 3 mics on hand?
I don't always believe they'll have the mics for the job

The DI I use on stage is the same world class recording DI I've used for multiple recordings. What you're hearing in FOH is what you're hearing on the albums.

 

[socialleper]

Bass bleed is the same regardless of whether the bass is mic'd or DI.

Ya, I'm not understanding that logic either. If you DI me, I'm still going to be running my cab. That doesn't change if I bleed into other mics. Most of the stages I play on are pretty tight, so I can understand the idea of my cab bleeding into others, but given that the monitors in such places are also pretty iffy, and not good at producing bass, my cab is my monitor. That thing is set to broadcast no matter what.

 

[shughey]

Because often the bass sounds "better" through a (quality) DI, without the limitations of the speaker and bleed from surrounding noise sources contaminating the signal.

The answer to your question resllybus "it depends". If you are looking for low frequency extension and low distortion at the lower frequencies, IME a DI is often a better tool.

It's not a matter of a guitarist getting treated "better", they don't have that bottom octave of extension to deal with.

+1 to this. The only time it's annoying is if I'm playing a gig where I'm running a distortion/fuzz pedal that relies on my amplifier and speakers to smooth it out. Also, it's slightly annoying when I get treated like an afterthought at sound checks by a large amount of sound guys bc all they care about is that a line is going to my DI box. But agedhorse explained it well. The bass simply serves a different function in music. In the context of a band, bass typically sounds best when it's direct sounding and w/o reverb (natural or processed). It's just simply easier for most sound guys to get what they want from a DI signal (everything represented if it's a good DI) than a mic'd signal (affected by your EQing and adjustments to your on-stage volume). What sounds good to you on stage might be lacking as a template for the FOH sound.

Imo, it should be easier for a sound guy to adjust a guitar player who turns up or down his volume a little bit (he might be riding his gtr vol control all night too to control tone) over the course of the night, but the bass needs to be right there (constant). Tangent: but that is the main reason why I only like playing one bass per gig. At the end of the day, the sound guy ultimately controls everyone's sound, even the guitar player. He can make his tone different, and can easily make the drummer's sound different from what he hears on stage.

 

[byacey]

A DI is also consistent from venue to venue. Cab placement, room sound and it's inherent comb filtering / phase cancellations can certainly change the signal when micing a cab.