first timer

Discussion in 'Recording Gear and Equipment [BG]' started by MarkMcCombs, May 24, 2004.

  1. I just did my first recording using my computer and N-track software, and I'm not even experienced enough in recording to be called a Newbie! I've gigged on an off for about 8 years, however.

    I just have the audio card that came with (AC97 something or other) the computer. I recorded 2 tracks of acoustic guitar, bass, vocal, a metronome/click track, and some homemade percussion using an acoustic guitar with a sponge under the strings (actually gave a believable kick drum sound).

    anyway, I just wanted to comment on how different it seems you must eq the bass guitar for the mix, vs. how I normally have it sound for live/practice. I found I really needed up the high mids and cut back the lo lows. I think I read somewhere that a good bass track will be somewhat "noisy" when soloed, and I guess that's right. When I playback all tracks together and have the bass how I like it, and then solo the bass track, it's nothing like I would have it sound in a live situation. I wonder if I should EQ more like this for live sound now; maybe I'm getting lost in the mix for all the low-end mud. Note, for gigging I normally leave everything pretty much flat on my Fender Jazz, and have the Tone control about in the middle; I didn't want to give the impression that I'm a lo-end hog.

    Any thoughts/comments?


  2. bassturtle


    Apr 9, 2004
    In my experience you can't compare live eq-ing with recording eq-ing. Most of my time spent playing is in the studio. No matter who the engineer is I notice the same thing - my solo'd bass tracks sound NOTHING like I would want them too, but then you hear it in the mix and it sounds amazing. I wouldn't go changing your live sound based on what you are doing in a studio situation.
  3. thwackless


    Nov 24, 2003
    Smithfield, RI
    There was a band called "Player" in the 70's. They were a (just awful) top-40 act, but their big hit "Baby Come Back" was used as a demo/teaching aid to walk the listener (it was one of those flimsy records you could find in an instruction book) through the phases of a studio recording session. They went through laying down the basic tracks... and when they got to the bass track, I was pretty shocked at the real chincey, plinky (ugly) sound that went to tape!

    Now, I won't be heard saying that the resulting sound at the end of the record was mind-blowing! Because it wasn't... :meh: But, it was bass- solid, punchy, Fender bass. And if you'd heard the track solo'd, you'd probably have been as shocked and entertained as I was! (Really, I felt kind of bad for the guy at the time) :p

    This subject has been around the block on a couple forums...

  4. sorry, after I posted a saw a similar recent thread about this same topic. I guess it's common knowledge. It was just so shocking that I felt I had to comment.

    I've only done one "studio" record, and always thought the guy recording it (also a bass player) knew what he was doing. But now that I think back, my sound couldn't have been what it should have been. I sent my live EQ to the board. As a result, the bass is somewhat lost in the mix on the cd. Oh well, live and learn.
  5. thwackless


    Nov 24, 2003
    Smithfield, RI
    Yep, it's not a new concept, and since home recording has become such a booming endeavor/business, some of those "studio secrets"- that more fundamental (analog!) understanding that came before soundcards, VST plug-ins and bit depth- have gotten by the new wave of home-engineers! Yay for forums, and for those who inhabit their deep waters, to those of us who are in pursuit... :hyper:

    And it's funny how once you've learned something, it suddenly falls into the "Obviously" category... :p

    In this life, you shall have treble. Sorry. :rollno: