• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

getting 'my sound' at gigs

How often has this happened:
The soundman spends about five minutes on each of the other instruments, then he gets to the bass...
"Can I hear some bass?"
[10 seconds elapse]
"Okay, thank you."
:hmm:
I used to think it was because I sounded "good"... but now I'm beginning to worry... thanks, guys... :crying:
 
Wow, I think we scared the soundguys...sorry...didn't mean to shout everyone down here ;)

You know, the one thing I never minded is when the soundman only takes a short time with me while doing the instruments. Bass is extremely easy to get a sound on IMHO, even when the bass player is me and my crap rig and mic ;) and the bulk of futzing with the sound is usually done along with the rest of the band. I'm all business at soundchecks, and I hate wasting time...cuts into my dinner time.
 
What if you don't like those low frequencies? Part of the reason I use an old SVT/810 now is that I don't like that much low end. Part of the reason I used to love a 58 is because of its rolloff. And when you show up to a gig with a highly directional mic that does 20 hz and is flat from 40 hz on as I do, I see no reason to question it, as a handful of soundmen do.

Nothing is absolute. The DI is not absolutely the best way to do it, and the mic is not absolutely the best way to do it. And those with strong opinions one way or the other should not be denied one way or the other. Again, you can say I'm a jerk, but on my gigs, I am not afraid to pull rank if I have to. I don't like it, but I will. And I'm sorry, but my needs come first.


I hope you don't think that I SAID you are a jerk. If I implied that at all, I didn't mean to. Just different strokes is all. I'm glad you know what you want and are willing to stick to your guns. And (as I stated earlier) most of the gigs I run into are local small-town deals with bassists who can't even really play, much less know what they are talking about when it comes to out front sound. And I don't get all up in their grill about it anyway. I try to teach them something if they are willing to listen. If not, I will go mic AND DI and choose what fits out front the best. I don't argue with them about it. I just tell tham that for the sake of time, lets do both and see what happens. I almost alway end up usind the DI send, but sometimes I can fade up the mic and blend, or solo the mic. I'm not a prick, but I DO have to uphold the rep of the SOUND COMPANY I'M WORKING FOR. Everybody has a job to do. It's a really good discussion we're having here. I'm learning and processing and throwing stuff out there at the same time. Again, if I implied that ANYBODY who prefers a mic is a jerk, I'm sorry. I'm only going off of what I see (hear) in my little world. Cheers.
 
Of course I know you didn't say I was a jerk. But there are a few soundmen I work with who think I am. But that's OK, I think they are, too...I don't dig the whole guilty till proven innocent thing. There was a time I was guilty till proven innocent...from 1978-79. I think I'm past that stage now ;)
 
Cool. Had me worried for a minute. I tend to get sound more worked up than I really am so I was just making sure. You'll have to tell me your 1978-79 story sometime. :hiding:
I had just gotten a V4B/810, my first big rig, and for the first 6 months, I was intent on letting people know how badass I was with volume. We got booked with this other band for a week at a very cool club. The owner loved the other band. But I almost got us fired the first night because the louder I turned up, the louder everyone else got as well, and we were blowing venues out with crap sound. We really wanted to play at this joint, and so we listened to what the owner had to say about what we were doing wrong. I thought he was full of crap at first, but we did what he said in order to keep the gig, and by Friday night, we got our volume and overall sound together so well that we ended up blowing the other band off the stage, and he gave us the headlining spot on Saturday and Sunday.

So that's when I learned about how important it is to strive for an overall good feeling sound onstage where everyone blends with each other and doesn't blast off into volume wars, nothing's too loud onstage, and we let the PA do the heavy lifting when possible. And then just tell people you're extremely loud from your amp so they think you're a badass ;)
 
Absolutely. He must do what is needed to make my (and others') sound to work in that room. He does not get to decide what that sound is at its' genesis.

I've not seen often , soundman passing bass sounds through COSM simulations of some sort...... Very hard on a console to change completly the sound or tone.
The job is to "tune" the EQ'ing so the musicians tone will all fit together and will suit the acoustics of the room.

When I do sound , I'm EQ'ing , I'm not able to change the tone "per say".
Except maybe on newer digital board with plugin ability (Yamaha VCM)

The sound coming in the DI is your tone , no question about it, there is never any doubt about that from my point of view.
Of course an incompetant Soundman can put a HPF to 200hz that will change the sound a lot , but normaly , it's EQ'ing.
I think we all agree on this.
 
The sound coming in the DI is your tone , no question about it, there is never any doubt about that from my point of view.
A valid opinion but one I do not share, much like pretty much any guitarist I know. My signal chain does not end with the 1/4" out of the bass. There are other links, and they are important ones that I do not like being deleted.
 
I think we need to back up on the definition of "my" (our) sound. To me, in reading this thread and in consideration of all the different discussions I've seen on TB, there appear to be two clear ways to define "our" sound...

1) Always with (XXXX) frequency boosted at (XXXX) DB's, and (XXXX) frequency cut at (XXXX) DB's, and bass at (insert number) and mid at (insert number) and treble at (insert number).

2) Whatever sounds "right" based on band dynamics, venue acoustics, stage setup and layout, temperature, humidity, volume and monitor mix to make the band sound good on a given day.

In my view - based on steady gig work with a variety of groups (including long runs with the same lineup of musicians), #2 wins - every time. There are simply too many variables I've encountered that trump any preconceived notions of what "my sound" must be like.

Yes, I know what I like my sound to be and how I'd like to fit into the stage mix...and I also know that the response of a crossed over PA rig is going to be completely different from a what a tuned bass cabinet sitting 5 feet beside me is going to be like. Consistency is one thing - but we must all remember that there is almost nothing consistent in live performance from one night to another!

Just my opinion.

Lonnybass
 
Helpful soundguy goes "So do you use your thumb, your fingers, a pick...?" and I goes "Yeah". He looked a little puzzled. So I helped him understand that we'll give him a good, representative soundcheck, then to relax, cuz I'll be switching dynamics, techniques, eq, instruments, and fx with each song as appropriate, but he'll get a good signal and he doesn't have to chase it. I can tell if it gets boomy, and I can tell if you can't feel it. The gp and I are both wireless, so we're able to roam during check (and the set), and we have an experienced entourage (family/friends--I'm not trying to be pretentious) that can give us additional feedback, esp after the room fills up.

I do expect the sound team to limit extremes, prevent feedback, and otherwise present the cleanest, more representative sound experience--and to work with me on achieving it. And the gp and I have worked on keeping off each other's toes sonically, so those boundaries need to be maintained. I never expect perfection, and I expect it to not be a disaster. It also helps that our regular sound guy represents when we're in a venue with their own system, and watches them like a hawk. We're pretty easy to get along with--life's too short and I'm too old, etc etc--but even then once in a while you're in a place with some guy and he's just not not gonna show off those new subs, or doesn't understand phase issues or...
 
Doesn't seem to be that much of a "problem" for thousands (perhaps millions?) of guitarists tho. ;)
You realize the GTR players are the only ones
needing an amp to have their tone , right?
(except a few exception,B3 , etc we named them earlier in the thread)

Do you mike the sax players inear ?
Would you mike the singer's monitor?
What about the drums ?

"Miking the singer's monitor" , sounds funny and weird eh!
That's the same picture as a bass player for me.
But I'll respect any singers who asks me to mike their monitors. ;)
EDIT; I think I'll stop here for that thread.....
 
You realize the GTR players are the only ones
needing an amp to have their tone , right?
(except a few exception,B3 , etc we named them earlier in the thread)

Do you mike the sax players inear ?
Would you mike the singer's monitor?
What about the drums ?

When people asks me what do I play , I answer "bass" , not "bass and amp".
(please refer to the exception above)

You do realize it's a bass guitar, right? It's not an acoustic instrument, like

sax: acoustic
singer: acoustic
drums: acoustic

Those comparisons are not valid. Comparing a bass guitar to an acoustic bass is a decent comparison but guess which is best? Which instrument was it designed after more than any other?

I don't know guitarists that say "I play guitar and amp", so......?

Hey if you like the sound of your bass straight to a DI, then board/PA/whatever...cool, more power to ya.

Why do some people seem unable to accept as equally valid that some do not like nor want that sound and are entitled to the same courtesy (as oh, let's say a guitarist) in getting their sound as anyone else?

EDIT: I never cease to be fascinated by the fact that I never tell anyone that there's something inherently wrong with wanting to go straight to a DI, and nothing wrong with liking that sound but whenever expressing not desiring that route, it's almost never responded to as merely a different preference. It's almost invariably treated as flawed/ignorant/inferior.
 
You do realize it's a bass guitar, right? It's not an acoustic instrument, like

sax: acoustic
singer: acoustic
drums: acoustic
.

Damn!!
Can't resist , sorry ;)

Should have put in there;
Keyboards , computers , "V" instruments , DJ , Samplers , CD players, etc... would you all mike those monitors?
Acoustic guitar is an interesting case , would you mike their monitors too?
Anyways , you get the picture......
 
Is it a circle, or a downward spiral, this "debate"? ; }

Anyway, the assumption that say saxes are an acoustic thing may be true for many, but not all. In my decades as a sax guy I probably used more effects than David Torn or Adrian Belew at times, and had my own ridiculously expansive rig. I sometimes mic'd and had a submixer too, for mic and several places in the signal chain where DI split off.

Anything is open for use. People who won't see another's approach as valid are such a drag. Probably on their own momentum, as well ; }
 
First off, if you mic someone's monitor, you're just asking for feedback issues ;)

Now on to the real issue...fokof, I don't know if you're just trying to be funny at this point or what, but it's unbelievable to me that you only see your way of doing things as the right way. What the bass is to you is 180 degrees away from what it is to me, but if I was running sound for you and you wanted a DI, you would get it. Why don't you want to give other bass players that same respect? I'm sensing that it may stem from deep childhood traumas. Did you lose your high school girlfriend to Bootsy Collins on an Eastern Bloc tour? ;)