• 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.

Direct Out - pre or post eq?

#24
If I'm running sound, it depends on the band and the bassist. If they're together and know what (really know, not just what they've read on the internet) they need I'm happy to work with them within the constraints of the gig. But if you show up with the smiley face EQ welded on your amp, crackling cables, etc. then you're going DI before the amp so I can eliminate all those crappy variables.

Funny thing is that the folks who are easy to work with also are generally the ones who know what's going on and how to do it...

As a bassist, my first thing is to make sure I know the sound guy's name and let him know that I respect his professional work as much as he respects mine. Unless I've already got a reason to dismiss his work, I assume he knows what he's doing. That's worked very well for me.

John
 
#27
JTE said:
Funny thing is that the folks who are easy to work with also are generally the ones who know what's going on and how to do it...
Click to expand...

+1 That is usually the case across many professions and situations. I have really never had a problem with a sound person. However, I do mainly the corporate stuff, and on the relatively low percentage of gigs where we have front of house, it is FRONT OF HOUSE A+ stuff. So, I guess I'm spoiled.

I typically say that I prefer to send a pre EQ signal from the amp but that I'm fine going through their DI. In virtually every case, when they hear 'pre EQ' (i.e., that at least I kind of realize what the deal is) and perceive that I want to work with them to make their life easier, it's amazing how well it goes:smug:

I assume most sound persons would have the same positive reaction if I said 'I really use my cabinet and amp as part of my sound... would you mind mic'ing me like the guitar amp'.

It's all about being professional, not copping an attitude, and at least providing some logic as to why you want to do what you want to do.

IMO and many, many years of IME!
 
#28
I always give a pre eq. Honestly I rarely use much EQ on my amp either so it doesn't much matter. But I'm a bass/cable/amp kind of guy which makes it really easy.

I also don't mind the house DI box as long as they let me throw a tuner in line so I can mute my signal to the house while tuning or if I want to unplug.

I always play nice with the sound guys and if they have a certain way they prefer doing things I will generally go with the flow.
 
#29
I can roll with whatever the soundman wants, but about 95% of the time I roll post. But then I'm a reggae player in a world of rock clubs. If I don't give the sound man as much mid or highs in my signal he can't boost it out front and screw up my sound. ;)

Usually I request DI out of my amp and I've almost never had any sound guy ask if I'm running pre/post. Usually they just say 'that sounds gooood'.

My all time favorite sound guy used to come up on stage EVERY time we played before soundcheck and ask me to play so he could hear the sound from my rig, so he could replicate it out front. He would say 'don't ask me what I want, tell me what YOU want to hear'.
 
#30
OK, I have a question. If soundpeople(trying to be "P.C.") always want us to be preEQ, or DI'ed before the amp, why is it that we bassists spend gobs of money on big loud amps, when we could just use a small combo for a monitor(i.e. Geddy Lee for example). Then we could spend our gobs of money on our own PA. Just a thought.
 
#31
ThunderousFunk said:
OK, I have a question. If soundpeople(trying to be "P.C.") always want us to be preEQ, or DI'ed before the amp, why is it that we bassists spend gobs of money on big loud amps, when we could just use a small combo for a monitor(i.e. Geddy Lee for example). Then we could spend our gobs of money on our own PA. Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Many do.

I have a hard time hearing myself on stage with a combo amp, and my band (and other bands I've been in) have too.

Also, many of us play a variety of shows with a variety of PA situations and room/outdoor sizes. Having an amp that can handle ANY of these situations makes sense. You can always turn down if you like.
 
#32
ThunderousFunk said:
OK, I have a question. If soundpeople(trying to be "P.C.") always want us to be preEQ, or DI'ed before the amp, why is it that we bassists spend gobs of money on big loud amps, when we could just use a small combo for a monitor(i.e. Geddy Lee for example). Then we could spend our gobs of money on our own PA. Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Much discussed topic. Three basic reasons:

1) Many of us gig regularly without front of house support.

2) Even with decent front of house support, many times there aren't separate monitor mixes or monitors capable of providing a pleasant bass tone on stage, and

3) Many do not use DI's but rather mic their cabs.

Yes, if, as a bassist, I could be guaranteed my own monitor mix and a killer monitor with specs that resulted in it sounding like a high end bass amp for every gig I do, I would stop worrying about backline. However, very, very few of us have that luxury IMO and IME.
 
#34
Post. My amp (GBE 1200) is dialed in to have some distortion from the tube channel, but also because I LOVE the GBE high-pass... seems like a lot of soundmen that I encounter leave way too much boom in the FOH, so I like being able to remove that factor from the equation w/ a combination of the high-pass crossover and my EQ.
 
#37
As a bassist, I prefer to run post-EQ, but will stipulate that I also run my amp fairly flat, don't tweak anything that'll affect the FOH once I'm soundchecked, and that my post-EQ sounds better than my pre-EQ send does...

That being said, *if* the soundman knows what he's doing, and needs a pre-EQ send, then I'll generally give it to him...

As a soundman, I prefer a pre-EQ send *unless* the player uses an approach similar to the above - although I'll work with whatever is necessary...


- georgestrings
 
#38
As a sound person in smaller clubs on and off for a number of years, I'll tell you it often doesn't make a bit of difference. I do prefer two things: 1) a DI before your amp (for those guys, like myself, who generally use INPUT gain for volume control on stage and leave output maxed), and 2) a mic on the cabinet. Best of both worlds- everything in between is, well, in between. #1 is more important than #2 in 99% of situations.

You do have to remember that there are FAR more crappy bass players out there than all of us ultra-polished, top notch TB'ers.... :)

Most of those guys bang on their basses so hard there's no resurrecting the signal anyway- give me a DI, and let me notch out the worst of the clank, compress the snot out of it to get it a semblance of consistency, and put some meat back in to the lower mids so people can at least tell they're playing notes.

Now, the players that know the QUALITY of the tone comes from the fingers/pick, also mostly end up the easiest to work with. These players can actually benefit from what the wankers are asking for- a mic on the cab to get the end result of 'their tone.' Ironically, they usually don't need it or mind if it's not available, absent players who use their rig to generate a lot of the tone.
 
#39
I basically set my amps to as flat as I can get them and then EQ from my StingRay 5's preamp according to the room acoustics and the song we're playing, so it wouldn't matter which I sent to the SR person, they'd still get MY tone. USUALLY though, once I dial-in a tone I'm happy with, I just set it & forget about futzinwidit.

In general, I think if the Soundperson really knows how to get good sound balance, then pre-EQ is better, but if you have someone who doesn't know or care, then post-EQ MIGHT be better.
 
#40
JimmyM said:
for newbies, i recommend pre. for more experienced players, i think post is perfectly fine. for guys like me who know exactly what they want and have the clout to get it, do whatever you want and make the soundman deal with it ;)

i hate soundmen who say, "give me pre-eq because it makes my job easier." sorry, but nobody cares about making my job easier. if an act comes into soundcheck with new songs, i'm learning them whether i want to or not. so the soundman can just deal as far as i'm concerned.
Click to expand...

I'm with Jimmy on this one. What the pre-post gives is the starting point sound for the sound engineer to use. If you've got a decent bass, your pre-eq tone will sound "decent" as a starting point. If you use your post-eq, that's their starting point sound, they can just as easily undo whatever precious tweaking you've done to sound good to you a few feet in front of your rig. Point is, what you sound like to everybody but yourself is still up to them.

Post-eq can bring up some issues that can make you sound worse though. If you've got too much bass dialed into your amp and the soundguy isn't paying attention to the bass then you've got mud, etc. Post can also bring more of your own "sound" to start with though.

I say, post is ok if---

A. You have your s*** together and know a little bit about what happens when your signal goes to the front.

B. You don't use extreme eq boost or cuts to get "your sound".

C. Probably the most important, you don't make any adjustments to your amp throughout the show and/or you have your pedals dialed in so there aren't any radical changes in output.

A big change in eq or output is going to play hell with FOH and the answer is going to be to pull you down and figure it out later.

A sound engineer's main priorities to start are vocals, kick, snare. Then other lead instruments, then bass, rhythm, etc. Supposed he's got you in an ok spot in the mix and you give him something radical to deal with, his only option at that point is to get you out of the way so he can sweeten up the lead parts that people are paying more attention to, then go back and figure out what the hell you did, because he doesn't know, you didn't tell him or he'd have told you "leave it alone" and try to get it back to 'ok' again. If you'd have left well enough alone, you would have been part of that sweetening process and your whole band could've sounded badass instead of sounding like a singer, a drummer, a guitar player, and some other guy.


That's all in a perfect world of course. Some people attain the title "sound engineer" because they're the only ones who figured out where to plug things in to make some sound come out. :rollno:
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back