1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

Getting comfortable with IEM's

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by blskajn, Feb 5, 2006.

  1. blskajn


    Feb 5, 2006
    I currently play in a church band with Sensaphonics IEM's using the Aviom system to provide a monitoring solution. While I love the isolation and the sound quality, I find that the bass comes across as sort of "thin" sounding which makes it hard to play without taking a lot of treble out of the mix. Besides "thin", other adjectives that describe the sound include "harsh" and "sterile."

    I do have a theory on why just the bass sounds this way (other instruments sound great). My Bass is run direct through a preamp to the FOH console, into the Aviom and into the IEM's. All other instruments are mic'd or are sampled to sound mic'd or have some sort of ambience (keyboards, organs, drums, etc.). Bass is the only instrument in the band that goes direct and bypasses any physical aural translation such as through a speaker or through air. This has me thinking that I am missing the "speaker" component of the sound that I have in my head. I really can't get into playing when using IEM's.

    So, right now I am trying to determine which of the following two might be a solution that would make my IEM experience more satisfying:

    1.) Mic a bass cabinet and run this signal through the IEM's. This should translate the physical speaker sound into the IEM and give me the "live" effect. The con is that this increases stage volume.

    2.) Use a Buttkicker. While I have no doubt this will give me a lot of feel, I am not sure if this is the complete solution as the frequency response is only up to 200 Hz.

    3.) Use both.

    Any opinions or thoughts on this? Sorry for the long post and thanks a ton for the feedback.