Dismiss Notice

Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

Direct ,miked or both

Discussion in 'Recording Gear and Equipment [BG]' started by DiegoMcgee, Oct 21, 2001.


  1. DiegoMcgee

    DiegoMcgee

    Oct 20, 2001
    Providence RI
    I've done alot of recording and I have always
    plugged directly into the board.
    Now I'm no engineer, but I thought this was
    just common practice until I visited a friend
    at his session and he was going direct and
    miked.
    I'm happy with my bass sound on my bands cd,
    but is their a preferred way to record bass
    tracks?
    _______________________________________
    Jim Obrien
    http://www.illustriousday.com
     
  2. JMX

    JMX Vorsprung durch Technik

    Sep 4, 2000
    Cologne, Germany
    I guess that going direct is the most popular and fastest way to get a good bass sound with limited time and resources.

    If you do both, miked and DI, you can get the best of both worlds, but it's more work. You need to delay the direct track a little to match it with the miked track, for example, to avoid phase cancellations.

    There have been numerous threads on this topic over in Recording Gear and Equipment, and I guess one of the mods will transfer this there.
     
  3. Bass Guitar

    Bass Guitar Supporting Member

    Aug 13, 2001
    If you're happy with the sound of your bass, leave it as it is. I record direct too. People mike their amps because the amp can be part of their "sound". Nowadays you can use amp simulators like the Bass Pod to record direct with an amp sound.
     
  4. Pacman

    Pacman Layin' Down Time Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 1, 2000
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Endorsing Artist: Roscoe Guitars, DR Strings, Aguilar Amplification
    Right you are.
     
  5. I agree with you completely. Personally, i like to do both, but again, it is part of my sound and like you though, now you can get a Bass Pod and simulate micing
     
  6. crud19

    crud19

    Sep 26, 2001
    Missouri
    As a bassist/recording engineer, I thought I should weigh in on the mic/direct question. When you get right to the heart of the question, it comes down to two things: the gear you have available, and personal preference. If the place you are recording doesn't have the right equipment to record with a microhone, or if your amplified sound doesn't satisfy you, then you should go direct. If you like the way your amp sounds, and if whomever is engineering the recording thinks they can capture that sound with a microphone, then go that route. I personally think that direct bass sounds sterile and unnatural, so I prefer to mic an amplifier whenever possible. I encourage our clients to use my Ampeg B15, but if their personal amp is part of their "sound" I will use it, often with a DI as a backup, in case their amp tone does not end up fitting well in the mix. I am familiar enough with the B15 to know that it mixes well, so I can use it safely without a DI. A good DI can also fit well in the mix, as long as you don't mind that DI "sound". (Who knows, it might be just the tone you're looking for.) I hope this helps clear things up.
     
  7. Cogno

    Cogno Guest

    Jun 11, 2001
    South
    I prefer both. Many engineers don't have the patience to do it right.
     
  8. beermonkey

    beermonkey

    Sep 26, 2001
    Seattle, WA
    When I record, generally I use a Summit TPA-200B. You can coax a wonderful bass tone out of these things... you can also get Geezer Butler-esque Distortion of Doom(tm) if you over drive them.