dear sound guy, thanks. (di box content)

[AndyLES]

Wow, what a thread!

While I haven't done it in a short while, I have mixed FOH before.

Personally, if the bassist wanted his rig mic'd, no problem. HOWEVER, I while say in some of my colleagues' defense that, sadly, the majority of bass players I'VE encountered (especially the younger set) haven't the slightest clue how to dial in their amps, often going for the "scooped" tone that sounds good at bedroom volume but hideous at gig levels.

So, their sound, from their speaker, sounds dreadful and hard to control out front. Also, IN SOME SITUATIONS, especially with bands that insist on playing loudly, having all that ambient mess flowing into another onstage mic clouds the low end and makes the subs work a lot harder than they should.

So yeah, just using a DI in necessary. However, I do agree with the sentiment in this thread that DEFAULTING to the DI, without considering the music or the needs of the musician/artist, is silly and counter productive.

I apologize if any of this has been discussed before....just my 2 cents from the other side of the equation.

 

[AndyLES]

Don't feel bad. Guitarists get screwed too. Guitar tone is very vulnerable to mic placement. I've seen plenty sound guys drape SM57s from the amp's handle pointing straight down. The mics cardioid pickup pattern rejects most of the amp's tone. A poorly miced guitar amp will sound way worse than your bass going direct. Trust me.

Actually, on some rigs, a 57 aiming straight down, 90 degrees to the speaker, actually sounds good. It depends on a lot of factors.

I even met one guitarist who insisted his cab be mic'd this way! Legendary engineer Tom Dowd did this all the time, too.

 

[fokof]

i think there's some merit to that. i wouldn't say it's the case for everyone because i see victor wooten with a mic'ed cab and an ss rig all the time, but it does seem that those with tube amps like to have them mic'ed more than those with ss amps.

I've seen Wooten with a miked cab AND a DI , and I think that's the way to go if you absolutly want to get miked.

and jehos, while i have tried a speaker di on a b-15 and liked it way better in comparison to a plain vanilla di, you're right...the magic of getting those amps into to the pa is really done with a mic, no question about it.

IMHO a speaker DI on a B15 defeats pretty much it's tone.
The cabs are a big part of that tone , on mine anyways. (I have a '69)

Again , and I answer that on all the "**** the soundmans thread" , best way to have it your way , is to hire yours.

 

[JimmyM]

Wow, what a thread!

While I haven't done it in a short while, I have mixed FOH before.

Personally, if the bassist wanted his rig mic'd, no problem. HOWEVER, I while say in some of my colleagues' defense that, sadly, the majority of bass players I'VE encountered (especially the younger set) haven't the slightest clue how to dial in their amps, often going for the "scooped" tone that sounds good at bedroom volume but hideous at gig levels.

So, their sound, from their speaker, sounds dreadful and hard to control out front. Also, IN SOME SITUATIONS, especially with bands that insist on playing loudly, having all that ambient mess flowing into another onstage mic clouds the low end and makes the subs work a lot harder than they should.

So yeah, just using a DI in necessary. However, I do agree with the sentiment in this thread that DEFAULTING to the DI, without considering the music or the needs of the musician/artist, is silly and counter productive.

I apologize if any of this has been discussed before....just my 2 cents from the other side of the equation.

i can dig it. but you know, if a player's tone sucks, there are better ways of correcting it than cutting a dude off at the knees. maybe have a talk with him and explain things...most musicians, especially new ones, are pretty open to suggestions. but if they don't want to listen, just do the best you can with what you have. it's their gig. then throw them under the bus if people start complaining.

 

[Eublet]

I disagree with so much of what's being said by the pro-mic group in this thread that I don't even have the energy to explain it. It's all good, though!

 

[JimmyM]

I disagree with so much of what's being said by the pro-mic group in this thread that I don't even have the energy to explain it. It's all good, though!

exactly. why would anyone care? just let me do my thing and leave me alone.

 

[Marcus Willett]

Again , and I answer that on all the "fuçk the soundmans thread" , best way to have it your way , is to hire yours.

That's a legitimate position, but I submit that's like saying if the bass player isn't playing the notes you want him to play, fire him and get another bass player. It's not a case where a soundman is unable to comply (the analogy for that would be a bassist who cannot give you what you want), he just doesn't like it. Just tell the bass player "These are the notes I want".

As Jimmy said, it ain't his call, it's whoever is paying for the event. And I think I've done literally one gig in all my years where the soundman was also paying, and yes...in that case he got to do things the way he wanted. Otherwise the way he wants to do things has all the weight and authority of a suggestion. If people are paying to see the band, he is working for them and what he wants takes a back seat to what the band wants. Almost all jobs in the real world are like that, so unless you want to open your own club and run sound there just smile and give the people who are paying you what they want. If what they want is (in your opinion) crap, then deal with it and do the best you can.

I can't tell you how many times I've had to do a track for someone and thought what they wanted me to do was rubbish. I'd make my suggestions, they'd make the call and that's it.

I disagree with so much of what's being said by the pro-mic group in this thread that I don't even have the energy to explain it. It's all good, though!

Thing is you totally missed the point. It's not about any one specific approach. It's about giving the bassist the time and respect for his voice; the same as is standard if you're a guitarist. It doesn't matter whether you think bass straight to a DI sounds great, it's not your voice. A soundman's voice (such as it is) is the mix and blend of what he is given to work with, not what he decides he should be given. Just as I have to work within the harmonic and rhythmic framework I am given. (unless I am writing the songs or paying for the gig, see above) Barring that, I don't get to decide which chords go where because I like how that sounds or I just know that's what sounds best.

 

[JMacBass65]

Also a bassist and sound guy, though I don't like to work too hard so haven't doing much live work lately.

I never like to see an 8x10 onstage. I'm always stuck fighting stgage volume, even if the bassist thinks they are keeping it under control. If miced, I would only use the highs anyhow. Of course, the guy'll complain if I put a 57 on it so I have to put a real mic on it and dump the low end on the channel eq... It's a pain.

I would bet that the "jerk" had plenty of your tone coming off the stage and just didn't need the mic signal.

+ 100

And to qualify....I'm a bassist, soundman, and the owner of a 1976 SVT rig.

 

[Marcus Willett]

I never like to see an 8x10 onstage. I'm always stuck fighting stgage volume.

Guitarists are usually the worst about stage volume since most want their amp cranked to get "their tone", yet somehow it always seems to happen that they get the mic anyway.

Of course, the guy'll complain if I put a 57 on it so I have to put a real mic on it and dump the low end on the channel eq... It's a pain.

That says it all and speaks volumes. "It's a pain" Do we really wanna compile a list of things in life that are a pain? Again, speaks volumes....

I'm done practicing, btw

 

[JoshB]

blah blah blah...I think we've beaten the horse long enough guys. This is a debate that will last a long, long time after most of us stop playing. Let's move on.