Double Bass ehrlund contact pu-mike

[Huy Nguyen]

IMO, keeping the Underwood in the bridge wings will choke the sound slightly when you're trying to use the Ehrlund. Basically anything I stick in my bridge wings choke up my bass and will loose a little air to the sound.

Anyways, my Ehrlund still generates a little too much noise. I think I'm finally tired of the jack Front End Audio put in and will replace it myself. In the meantime, my BP-100 decided to work again and now I'm torn between the two. The BP is a touch less organic but definitely has more definition than the Ehrlund. I have both on my bass and will use the BP when I need more volume.

 

[bassphase]

I don't think you've found the optimum placement yet--probably too close to the F holes. I got a really boomy sound on my bass in that location although your ehrlund doesn't sound boomy so much as ill defined and unbalanced (very little high end/definition). I struggled a long time to find the best location and even though it's not very loud where it's located, it's very balanced and articulated--closet thing I've found to a studio recording with a proper mic.

Keep searching--it's worth the trouble.


bob

Hi all, got PU/preamp yesterday and what a difference compared to my Underwood.

The tone is so different as is the shape of the note. Here is a comparo track. I should say I haven't really got the best out of it yet, but already it streets ahead of where I was.

UnderwoodVSErhlund by simpleinnovation on SoundCloud - Create, record and share your sounds for free

P.s. the Underwood was plugged into a LR Baggs Para acoustic DI (set flat). I did this as I wanted to compare note for note the different and give the Underwood it's best chance. You'll hear the underwood first then the ehrlund, alternating every 10 seconds or so.

I listened to the cable tips and did similar to this...



Works like a charm and I don't have to pull everything apart to put the bass down (which is crucial as I play at church where I'm the pastor too) and it also means I can throw it in the case and run away.

 

[MrSidecar]

Hi all,

some words on placement- even though it's different per bass probably. Few caveats hold water though:

-the longer you get down from the f-hole, the better the chance for a balanced sound of all strings. My experience.
-stay away from bass bar vicinity, due to balance reasons again. Strange: the dyn-b with all its weirdities sounded BEST when close or over the bass bar- makes you think a lot about how (un-)balanced the pickup itself is.

For me, a great placement can be described as follows: Take the inner edge of the e-string f-hole. Draw an imaginary straight line down, enlengthening that edge. On that line, move the pickup down approx 15 cm from the f-hole. Point the triangle top so it points to the f-hole-edge, press reasonably firm to top. Again, mileage varies, ass basses differ.

With this placement, I recorded direct tracks and sounded amazing, and i just played a couple gigs (with and w/o drums) with this placement and a PJB Flightcase. Dynamite sound ("Coming from you, Bruce..." for all you SNL lovers). Is what the colleagues said, going so far as to say by far the best amplified bass sound they have heard from any of the guys they played with so far. I myself was quite blown away.

I might add, EQ on my Flightcase was almost completely flat, a hair boost on bass, som more hairs on high treble for definition. And I had to find a good balance of input volume and preamp-volume, with the preamp set to "high". The balance can make the difference between amazing and boomy-whoofy.

In terms of volume, with drummers it was absolutely sufficient and trouble free (some headroom left), and without the drummer, I could have easily gotten too loud (that was outdoors and far away from walls!).

Best

Sidecar

 

[Ric Vice]

I don't think you've found the optimum placement yet--probably too close to the F holes. I got a really boomy sound on my bass in that location although your ehrlund doesn't sound boomy so much as ill defined and unbalanced (very little high end/definition). I struggled a long time to find the best location and even though it's not very loud where it's located, it's very balanced and articulated--closet thing I've found to a studio recording with a proper mic.

Keep searching--it's worth the trouble.


bob

Bob,
Doing a clip that alternates between the pickups really emphasizes how drastically different the Ehrlund and the Underwood are. Thanks for taking the time to come up with this, it's an eye opener, isn't it? I had the same experience between the Realist and the Ehrlund, so much in fact that I took off the Realist and gave it away. For me, with my bass, it's been a liberating experience, especially when I play solo passages, or use a bow. Just my experience mind you

Ric

 

[engedi1]

I just used my Ehrlund to record a jam session with a jazz quartette and I couldn't believe how great it sounded at playback. Straight to the board with no effects or eq and it sounded really great. Hopefully, I'll get some MP3s and be able to post them. The Erhlund does take a lot of fiddling to find the right location, but it is worth it. The arco tone is simply unreal.

 

[MrSidecar]

I just used my Ehrlund to record a jam session with a jazz quartette and I couldn't believe how great it sounded at playback. Straight to the board with no effects or eq and it sounded really great.

I did this once for a demo session with my Schertler dyn-b, and it took A LOT of EQ wizardry to be acceptable, I mainly kept the whole thing because I liked how the bass sounded in terms of how the tone developed (that is what makes, IMO, other pickups too pickupish, compression, lack of air, and strange high freqs), and with tons of EQ i could somehow almost tame the nasty midrange monster. Still sounded, well, slightly strange.

BUT during my first trials with the Ehrlund, I took the demos and just for fun overdubbed basslines onto some of the tunes. Afterwards I found myself REALLY considering "well, now it sounds so amazing, let's just overdub the whole thing!". Had the exact same experience, without any EQ or other fiddlyfuddly on the bass track, the whole tune sounded much better and more natural... The overdubbed bass sounded in a strange way more "in the same room with the band" than the original track.

Best
Sidecar

 

[SplitNick]

Just posted an Ehrlund in classifieds if anyone is interested.

 

[Bass68]

Not sure if this has been answered - this thread is too long for me to read it all! - but I am thinking about getting just the Ehrlund contact mic and using my own LR Baggs Acoustic DI for a preamp.

Any ideas out there if it would suffice?

 

[Ric Vice]

Not sure if this has been answered - this thread is too long for me to read it all! - but I am thinking about getting just the Ehrlund contact mic and using my own LR Baggs Acoustic DI for a preamp.

Any ideas out there if it would suffice?

Bass 68
I have the Ehrlund and the Ehrlund Pre Amp. I tried several other preamps, the Headway EDB-1 was one of them.
None of them sounded as good as Goran Ehrlund's own preamp. You wont get the tone quality and warmth of the pickup without that Pre Amp IMHO, IME. It's worth the extra it costs.

Ric

 

[Bass68]

That's what I was afraid of....

Thanks!

 

[basstonaes]

I just cut some low-mid on my amp and those resonances are no longer a problem! You get problems with different freqences booming out depending on where you put the mic but on my bass I get the most even sound on the backside. If you put the mic on the front side you also have a problem with the cable touching the bass( the cable is very sensitive and makes distorted sounds if it touches anything).

The wilson doesnt´t sound very good but it´s a good complement if you need too play loud and if you put it in the bridge foot I think it sounds better than any piezo I have tried!
I havn´t seen anyone writing about it here on this forum, thats why I brought it up.
But soundwise it cannot be compared to the ehrlund or ordinary microphones.

Hi Kristian I'm interested on the mix ehrlund + Wilson k-1.
A lot of people uses ehrlund + Full circle or ehrlund + mic.
I haven't heard any clip about the wilson k1.Jonas says that it sounds better than the wilson k-4 but...I don't know why this cheaper version isn't more popular,Kristian,you says:
"The wilson doesnt´t sound very good but it´s a good complement if you need too play loud and if you put it in the bridge foot I think it sounds better than any piezo I have tried!"
I,m confused

 

[Ric Vice]

On my bass with my amps and speakers the Ehrlund has the most pleasant timbre, and plenty of volume. Before the Realist and Full Circle were introduced the Wilson definitely had some endorsers, because it produces a very discrete sound and has a great deal of usable volume. Drilling holes in a bridge to install a pickup isn't something that appeals to me. It's very tricky to install, and if it doesn't work you're stuck with a bridge that's been compromised. Just my opinion.

Ric

 

[basdanne]

Hi,

I have tested the thing now with my Phil Jones Flightcase.

It is a little more tricky than for recording- but still, 7 minutes of futzing about for getting the best sound ever is quite plug-and-play in my book. I wasn't too sure about where I placed the pu while I recorded, so I had to find a good spot, and so I tried with and without preamp.

Without preamp was clearly inferior and nothing to write home about- close to a disappointment, really. It sounded surpassingly midrangey, was a little on the weak side, and got boomy when playing a little loud.

With preamp, however, it's a different story- no midrange-honk, nice and round, but not boomy, much better evenness and transparency. Great pickup. You almost don't hear it because, like someone else wrote, it's pretty hard to tell if the amp is on or not. But yes, it is, and the ehrlund/flightcase combination works good with I guess any drummer that plays sane levels. I am not missing my dyn-b at all.

Plus, I really like the jack that Jonas attached to it, and the jack-holder that gets fiddled to the tail piece with the g- (or e- ?)string. Doesn't damp the bass as the other jack-attachments (in the string afterlength) do. I would go so far as to say, that this is clearly the pickup with the least interference with how the bass looks, works and sounds (with maybe the exception of the full circle at least IF you have adjusters on anyway, which I don't have). Underwood-types are really damping the bridge, others damp the after length, require you to drill holes in the bridge (yuck!) or sit under the bridge foot- this thing does not make a difference whether it is on or off.

It's of course a different approach and thus a different philosophy and sound you get than with f.ex. piezos, wherever they sit. The sound is much more ambient and less punch-focused, and some note that as a problem, but since that is exactly what I was looking for, I am happy and satisfied. My pick-up search (that lasted a mere 12 years) seems to be over.

Best
Sidecar

Very interesting Sidecar!
You have helped me before wth several advices about the dyn-B and its midrangy and boomy sound. This mic really looks and sounds interesting. The price is miles better than the dyn-B, which is a huge bonus...

 

[MrSidecar]

Very interesting Sidecar!
You have helped me before wth several advices about the dyn-B and its midrangy and boomy sound. This mic really looks and sounds interesting. The price is miles better than the dyn-B, which is a huge bonus...

Hi basdanne,

the sound is also WAY beyond. I have never bothered thinking about my dyn-b since. There is no midrange-problem, at least not with the preamp, which i strongly recommend. I also recommend ordering it at jonas lohse's, because that way you get it with a reasonable cable-length and with a fantastic clip for the jack. One thing I came to really dislike about the dyn-b was the way its jack was mountet in the afterlength, preventing it from vibrating thus worsening the response and dulling the sound when playing with the bow.

Anyway, get yours today, you won't regret it. And I am quite sure you don't have to bother with parametric eqs anymore.

Best

Sidecar

 

[drurb]

...And I am quite sure you don't have to bother with parametric eqs anymore.

Not unless the Ehrlund magically gets rid of speaker-room interactions!

 

[engedi1]

Not unless the Ehrlund magically gets rid of speaker-room interactions!

True. I have an Ehrlund, and love it, but still need to adjust the eq for each room. That, and I am still trying to find eq settings on my amp that work well with this pickup.

 

[Chris Symer]

Not unless the Ehrlund magically gets rid of speaker-room interactions!

God, I wonder how people ever delt with room resonance before there were amplifiers. Imagine the horror that playing acoustically must have been like.

 

[MrSidecar]

Drurb,

I somehow should have known this would come up... I should have been more specific. By "not bother with parametric eqs anymore" I meant something that basdanne and I had spoken about way back when he first got his dyn-b, and he found it overly annoying (at least so I remember) to use lots of eq-ing just to make the dyn-b loose its midrange honk and sound even remotely nice in an unproblematic room. Thus, my remark was kind of an inside comment (perhaps more adequately to be sent via pm) referring to his prior experiences, NOT a general "this pickup eliminates the needs for eq use, can percolate coffee and even save your marriage". Even though it probably came across that way.

Of course there sometimes can be the need to use a param eq to tame a problematic room situation (not that it occurred to me yet, but I'm most likely just lucky).

And just to make sure, no offense taken.

Best
Sidecar

 

[billyfalconer]

God, I wonder how people ever delt with room resonance before there were amplifiers. Imagine the horror that playing acoustically must have been like.

I read somewhere a description by a bass player from before the amplifier era. He said when they would go to a new hall he would head for a corner in the hall and play a bit, then try any other available corner and decide which sounded best. Then the band would set up around him. If no corners were available, he would set up against a wall.

 

[Ric Vice]

I read somewhere a description by a bass player from before the amplifier era. He said when they would go to a new hall he would head for a corner in the hall and play a bit, then try any other available corner and decide which sounded best. Then the band would set up around him. If no corners were available, he would set up against a wall.

I'm guess if it was feasible to do that it certainly would have helped. That said, some of those clubs had a actual stage so you wouldn't have been able to "move the band". Most of those players had higher string action, used gut strings, had instruments that produced a big sound, and knew how to get sound out of their instrument. They also worked on tone production. It's also important to understand how different drums were back then. Duke put Jimmy Blanton very close to the microphone when it was possible.

Ric