getting 'my sound' at gigs

[JimmyM]

Maybe he deep down inside doesn't feel his cab is worthy of being miked, Jimmy.

How does that make you feel?

A little empty inside

 

[Marcus Willett]

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......

(FWIW, fokof and I have made nice via PM....no hard feelings here)

Again, invalid arguments. Why?

The difference between source and monitor.

When you mic and acoustic guitar, the guitar itself is the final source of the finished tone. All other examples as well....by the time you get to the 1/'4 output on CD players, "V" instruments, etc....that is the source of the finished tone. Micing a monitor would be just that...micing a monitor, not the source.

I'm saying your fundamental premise if flawed because in my case at least the source of the finished tone is not the 1/4" out on my bass. It may be for you, and that's all well and good.

In my case however, the source of the finished tone is in front of my speakers. If you mic the cab, send that to a monitor and then mic that monitor, then you would have an apples-to-apples comparison, and yes that would be stupid.

Within a synth, there are several layers producing the tone. There is the raw waveform. There is the ADSR data, and other program data. FX, possibly modeling and a host of other DSP done to the raw waveform or sample to produce the finished tone. Each one of these layers is part of what makes the finished tone. If you interrupt these layers and say to the synth player

"Hey yeah gimme your orchestral patch but without any of the onboard FX or EQ, turn off any amp modeling and make sure it's only playing the raw sample."...then you would have an accurate comparison.

Or say to a guitarist "Yeah, when you do your solos, just gimme a clean sound, I'll dial in your distortion/reverb/chorus/compression/whatever settings needed to sound best in this room....it's a tough room after all.

After all, all that tone shaping is distorting the original "pure" signal....might be harder to make it work in a given room. Best to give the soundman the absolute purest source of tone so he can make it work for the room....

You get the picture....

 

[fokof]

First off, if you mic someone's monitor, you're just asking for feedback issues

Your "smiley" make me think you got the joke ..... hope so....

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.

Everything I'm arguing on started on a point you said earlier about you imposing to soundmans if he should use a DI or a mike , you said you don't leave them no choice. it started from there and got ..... well ... all over the place.
It's that little detail that we don't agree on.
I agree that some needs a mike (like you and Marcus) , some Di , some both.No problem with that.
I as a soundman should make that choice.That's where we started to argue on.


Thats all.

 

[Marcus Willett]

I as a soundman should make that choice

We can agree to disagree, but I am curious.

"I as a soundman should make that choice"

Why is that? Is it because you know the room/gear/whatever better and as such are best equipped to decide such things? Does it not follow then that you should also decide what kind/type/brand of DI using the same logic?

Does it not therefore follow that you should have some say in what kind of pickups I use? Or strings? Why stop at the DI? Why when there is an invisible line drawn between you/me and the 1/4" out; that is perfectly valid, but if I move the line to my speaker cab it's somehow infringing on your purview?

I'm just asking: if there is some sort of authoritative position on what I should sound like out front that you hold, shouldn't it extend to every aspect of what makes the signal I'm giving you?

The 1/4" out of the bass seems an arbitrary line. What if I'm using an onboard pre? With a lot of EQ? Do I bypass that too, or do you just deal with it? If the latter, then why is it different when these electronics are on the other side (let's say the post DI out on my amp) of that magic line (1/4" out)? If the former, then you are not only telling me what I should sound like out front; you are also telling me what I'm allowed to sound like to myself.

Again, just curious about where lines are drawn and why

 

[akaTRENT]

We can agree to disagree, but I am curious.

"I as a soundman should make that choice"

Why is that? Is it because you know the room/gear/whatever better and as such are best equipped to decide such things? Does it not follow then that you should also decide what kind/type/brand of DI using the same logic?

Does it not therefore follow that you should have some say in what kind of pickups I use? Or strings? Why stop at the DI? Why when there is an invisible line drawn between you/me and the 1/4" out; that is perfectly valid, but if I move the line to my speaker cab it's somehow infringing on your purview?

I'm just asking if there is some sort of authoritative position on what I should sound like out front that you hold, shouldn't it extend to every aspect of what makes the signal I'm giving you?

The 1/4" out seems an arbitrary line. What if I'm using an onboard pre? With a lot of EQ? Do I bypass that too, or do you just deal with it? If the latter, then why is it different when these electronics are on the other side of that magic line (1/4" out)? If the former, then you are not only telling me what I should sound like out front; you are also telling me what I'm allowed to sound like to myself.

Again, just curious about where lines are drawn and why

Thank you for supplying that burn,

i am going to print this out and pass it every sound guy I encounter that gives me tude about micing my 8x10 w/ di

They always tell my my 8x10 is a moniter.

 

[Marcus Willett]

Thank you for supplying that burn

LOL...well, it wasn't intended that way.

I'm being 100% serious and am genuinely curious.

 

[akaTRENT]

OK, so maybe you guys are top-notch pro bassists. I don't see many of those at my sound jobs. So when I say that I kind of "tell" them what they will use, you have to walk in my shoes for a bit. Most bassists are just weekend warriors who have only been playing for a few years. They have read JUST ENOUGH stuff on the internet to make them dangerous. So the confrontations I have had are usually the guy with a $200 bass and a 1-15 combo who wants "his sound" through a mic out front. You show up with a MTD 5 and an Aguilar stack and I'll throw a mic on it AND run a line out from your head (so I can blend them) so fast it'll make your head spin. Stereotype? Yes. I don't care. Plus, you guys stated that you don't do major volume jumps, and I'm sure your gear is reliable. I would tell you that in MOST cases, I take one look at your rig and I can tell you whether or not I'm running a DI. If your gear looks like it has been drug behind a truck, I'm running a DI so that if your rig cuts out I still have signal. I could list 40 other reasons why MOST of the time a DI is better. If you guys a pros and have great gear, congrats.

So if I show up with My svt-cl my svt 8x10 an sm57 on a cab mic stand, and my fender jaguar bass or my rickenbacker and ask you (nicely) if you could blend my cab with the DI youll then reply yes?

 

[akaTRENT]

LOL...well, it wasn't intended that way.

I'm being 100% serious and am genuinely curious.

I am agreeing with you. I had a feeling my statement would come off the wrong way. Its just the sound guys here in north jersey are so mean sometimes they need a good tongue lashing. And that was perfect lashing. Everything you have said as well as jimmy has given me some pointers as to what i need to do on tour this summer to get the "key" parts of "my" sound that fit in the mix in the foh.

 

[akaTRENT]

Btw Jimmy or mark, I boost mids when i play. With a fair amount of lows, and little highs. Should the sm57 be okay on the 8x10? to replicate that tight mid punch with the the di on my head covering the lows? I read some other threads but dont get what the 40hz cut off on my mic means when i know my cab goes from 58hz to 5 khz I play a four string in standard tuning so I am not worried about extremely low pitches. thanks in advance

 

[JimmyM]

I agree that some needs a mike (like you and Marcus) , some Di , some both.No problem with that.
I as a soundman should make that choice.That's where we started to argue on.

Why should the soundman make that choice, though? You call it ego on the musician's part to insist on doing it a certain way, but I see it much more as ego on the soundman's part. The musician is doing what he/she thinks is best for their band's overall sound. The soundman, especially one who has no familiarity with the band until they're setting up, has zero clue of what the band is about until they start playing, and by then it's too late. So that decision is best left up to the band members. If you have a better idea, you're free to volunteer it, but I as the one up onstage whose life is invested in the music should always have final say, not a soundman who really couldn't care less after the set is over.

 

[akaTRENT]

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

While i understand this notion. I still havent seen the answer to these questions. Why do we have cabs in the first place. and secondly why bother micig the guitar cab if the direct injection on the back would give the sound guy more control. I sense a double standard here...

 

[greenboy]

Either can give equal control in many ways, so any issue is really not there. I just always hope I have a channel free to take both. Sometimes that's a problem in smaller shows because the mixer and mic contingent aren't up to it (which is another good reason to have your own mic and know its use). But I've often grabbed one off the drums as in smaller venues they don't need all them danged mics anyway.

 

[DeluxeRed]

...if your rig cuts out I still have signal...

If I stop sending you a signal due to equipment failure, accidentially stepping on a pedal, or deliberately turning-down the volume on my bass, that's my problem. If I'm sending you a good signal and it's not coming out front (well), that's your problem. I'm a grown-up; I own my problems, and don't give them to you (figurative) to try to fix-up as you please like you're my mother.

While i understand this notion. I still havent seen the answer to these questions. Why do we have cabs in the first place. and secondly why bother micig the guitar cab if the direct injection on the back would give the sound guy more control. I sense a double standard here...

If you want to see "Why we have cabs...", just listen to the difference between the DI and a mic'd cab on a Marshall guitar stack (why you're at it, listen to the guitar at its 1/4" out, too...). There is a world of difference--one is crappy, one sounds sweet. The effect can be just as dramatic for bass, depending on the sitch, just maybe not as easy to demonstrate.

 

[akaTRENT]

If I stop sending you a signal due to equipment failure, accidentially stepping on a pedal, or deliberately turning-down the volume on my bass, that's my problem. If I'm sending you a good signal and it's not coming out front (well), that's your problem. I'm a grown-up; I own my problems, and don't give them to you (figurative) to try to fix-up as you please like you're my mother.



If you want to see "Why we have cabs...", just listen to the difference between the DI and a mic'd cab on a Marshall guitar stack (why you're at it, listen to the guitar at its 1/4" out, too...). There is a world of difference--one is crappy, one sounds sweet. The effect can be just as dramatic for bass, depending on the sitch, just maybe not as easy to demonstrate.

Right thats the point im making. So then why is the bass standard DI as teh unspoken rule if mcing a a good cab obviously sounds better.

We can argue about frequencies with guitar as well.

 

[Marcus Willett]

I sense a double standard here...

IMO and IME, you sense accurately

 

[akaTRENT]

and at two fingers. With the rig cutting. A guitar rig can cut as well so why is there a double standard.

Can anyone answer me the why?

 

[akaTRENT]

and side note at mark. My mom loves celia cruz.

 

[DeluxeRed]

...So then why is the bass standard DI as teh unspoken rule if mcing a a good cab obviously sounds better.

Laziness.

 

[Marcus Willett]

why is the bass standard DI as the unspoken rule

What makes this more fascinating to me is how ubiquitous active EQ on basses is these days. If I show up to a gig with an external unit that gives me some tone shaping with a 1/4" out that I use as a front end into my amp; I guarantee you 99% of the time a soundman will push for me to give him my signal before the box.

Yet somehow if the exact same circuit is inside the bass, suddenly it's (we're led to believe) some sort of virtue that will make us sound better and the soundman will appreciate the increased presence and higher signal level.

What's fascinating is that it either is something that is an asset (or at least potentially...it could be abused like anything); in which case it should be used and exploited by the soundman.

Or, it is a hinderance, preventing getting a good tone in a mix and should really therefore never be used outside a practice room.

and side note at mark. My mom loves celia cruz.

Yeah she was great...got to work with her a couple times in my Miami days.

 

[Marcus Willett]

Laziness.

In defense of soundmen (I've done quite a bit of mixing myself), I think it's not just laziness; although if I had a dollar for every lazy soundman I've run across, I'd....well...whatever...I wouldn't need to work, that's for sure...

Bass is an incredibly difficult animal to make work in a mix. It occupies a spectrum of sound our ears are very insensitive to. It is capable of enormous dynamic swings, and yet it is a musical function where (generally) you don't want huge dynamic swings.

Often it is counter-intuitive. It's "bass" but often in a mix it will sound "better" (this being a highly subjective term) if you cut the low end somewhat.

If it's lacking "definition" it would seem like boosting the higher frequencies would give you said definition...seems to work with other instruments. But with bass what this tends to do is make the instrument noisy and clanky/metallic...maybe that's what you want, maybe not.

The true definition comes from working with the midrange but again it's not what's intuitive. If you're EQing guitar, you might think of "midrange" as more-or-less synonymous with "human hearing" midrange; i.e. in the 1KHz to 3KHz or so range (or so...the range in which human hearing is most sensitive).

But midrange for bass (I would submit) is more like the 350Hz-800Hz range (again, give or take) and it is in that region where proper manipulation yields the "definition" that any good soundman would be looking for.

Again, this depends on what kind of sound you want. It's important the soundman understand my sound. It doesn't have to be a mic..I've gotten great results with a DI.

But it does mean the soundman and I understand each other. If his idea of a great bass tone is a huge cut around 600Hz and a nice big ol' boost at 4KHz (or along those lines) then me handing him a straight send from my bass will guarantee I will not get my sound out front, and will probably make a bad gig for all involved.

On the other hand if we talk and work together (like my previous example) it can work out just fine.

To be clear: I don't insist the soundman give me a mic. I do insist he give me the same amount of consideration and time and respect for my sound as the guitarist will get 99% of the time.

It's when a soundman (again earlier example) makes it clear he doesn't care what my sound is "Just plug into this DI and I'll make it the way it should be"...then we are gonna have a problem. After all, if you don't care about my concerns, why should I care about yours?