• 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.

DI or mic'd your opinion

H

heavyaslead

Apr 4, 2013
9
0
#1
In the studio I've always had the Sound guy say "just DI right here and you're done" while the guitarist mics his 'special' amp tone (which makes me a bit envious).

How many of you DI or prefer mic'd?

I wonder if that sound I get with my rig over years of experimentation with the speaker characteristics and amp nuances is really what I should have on a track.

Am I crazy thinking this way, I know the sound guy will roll his eyes when I insist on it!;)

Appreciate your feedback.
 
#4
Oh also I could be wrong about this, but there is a lot of good things said about Fearful cabinets. They are supposed to put out what you put in, so if people love them a lot I'd imagine micing them is not necessary sinces you'd be putting into the mic what the fearful is putting out which the fearful should be putting out what it is getting in.
 
#6
A good portion of my tone is a product of effects pedals, amps, and speaker cabinets. I researched those items and purchased them because of their contributions to tone shaping, not simply to make me louder. Like you noted, no different from guitarists who carefully select the signal altering items in their chain.

For my needs/wants I absolutely expect mic'd cabinets.
 
#9
I'm in the DI camp. I'm either straight DI for recording, or DI to FOH. I also have an amp and a cab, but I have never put a mic in front of the cab. The amp/cab is for sake of volume. Mostly stage volume. The volume for the audience comes from the FOH. PA amps and cabs. So, even if I had "my sound", the FOH would change it before it got to the audience, anyway. Whatever "my sound" I have, comes from my DI/preamp. Not my amp/cab.
 
#10
Both in an ideal situation. It's rare these days for me to have a session where the bass and drums are being tracked separately, so the bass usually gets DI'd so I can have him in the control room. Bass is also very easy to reamp, and there are tons of great amp sims for bass that are really impressive with a good DI, unlike guitar!
 
#11
In the studio it's DI dry, DI wet, and mic. That way there is always the option of re-amping and changing FX if the performance is right but the sound isn't. Live is a bit trickier, sometimes the only way to get the sound out is to mic it but other times the DI out is better just because the cab isn't.
For years in FOH I would have both set up and use the best, which was often a mix of the two (as others have pointed out).
 
#12
I've played the same venue several times in the past year and sometimes the sound guy mics my cab and sometimes he uses a DI...but never both. Doesn't matter to me since I'm not using any effects but it always puzzles me that he isn't consistent.
 
#13
Biggbass said:
I've played the same venue several times in the past year and sometimes the sound guy mics my cab and sometimes he uses a DI...but never both. Doesn't matter to me since I'm not using any effects but it always puzzles me that he isn't consistent.
Click to expand...

Whoops - was the initial question referring to live or in the studio? Did I screw up?
 
#15
seamonkey said:
DI and Mic later (re-amp) if you want good flexibility.
But you can monitor with a bass amp, if you're going to monitor you could mic also. Just be sure to know there's a phase shift between mic and DI and compensate for it if you want to mix them together.
Click to expand...

It blows me away that so many people aren't aware of phase when using two sources for the same performance.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back