Good mike choices for my cabinet

[JeezyMcNuggles]

Its never a matter of being heard, i just want more of the sound on stage to be FOH. Soundmen tend to be lazy, ill make it easier

Its not easier, it's much harder that way and more work for him. The sound on stage is what screws up his sound. Which is what the audience hears. But whatever man. Do what you want. Buy a cheap 57, or spend the money on a good one. Doesnt really matter. He wont be happy with any.

 

[Wasnex]

Best ive heard!!!

Sorry, this thread seems to be turning into a DI versus Mic thread rather than addressing your question. I generally prefer a DI for the reasons explained in post #28, but sometimes I think a mic is a good choice especially if distortion is used, and/or the amp and speaker is a huge part of the player's sound.

If there is already a SM57, or another suitable mic in the mic kit, I suggest asking your tech to use it. This will let you know if your tech has the skills and is receptive to working with a mic. Then if you find the existing mic does not go low enough to produce your sound, you can decide which mic you want to buy.

Some of the better and more expensive mics that may not have been mentioned: Beyer M88 TG, Electro Voice RE20, Heil PR40. These are all much more expensive and a bit bulkier than the Audix D4 I recommended earlier. Also the RE20 is unique in that it does not develop proximity effect. As a pro audio tech, I would probably put up an RE20 or M88, but as hard working bassist I would probably carry a D4.

 

[Basshappi]

My favorite is the Sen 421, The RE20 is fantastic but expensive.
I've used an SM57 many times, it gets the job done, the D4 is a solid roadwarrior as well.

 

[agedhorse]

Its never a matter of being heard, i just want more of the sound on stage to be FOH. Soundmen tend to be lazy, ill make it easier

Actually, the lazy way out is to simply smile, drool, stick a mic on the cabinet and go through the motions even if it doesn't work as well. Not caring how it sounds is so much easier...

The 421 clips aren't that bad. Just adjust the set screw and they are fine. Yeah it's not the best design. But most people ignore the screw and tape them.

It's also the clip breaking below the swivel joint.

 

[Redbrangus]

The MD-421 and RE-20 are both much better mics for a bass amp than an SM-57 but the OP specifically said he didn't want to spend $300. Speaking as an old sound guy, if I can only allow one input for the bass, I would infinitely prefer to take the direct signal; I'm a lot more likely to get a usable sound from that and I don't have all the stage bleed muddying up things. (You're fooling yourself if you think a mic only picks up what it's pointed at.) If I can only budget one input for bass and the bass player insists on that being a mic, I'll mark him down as a nim-rod and may or may not invest any effort in convincing him otherwise. But I would not attempt to torpedo his sound in the PA system...nor do I know any real sound guy who would, if for no other reason than a crummy bass sound equals a bad overall sound. On the other hand, don't be too surprised if the sound guy doesn't share your concern with capturing the subtleties of your exquisite tone...he might be assuming that most of the subtleties will be buried in the mix. Obviously it's better if the bass can be both mic'd and taken direct, but I've certainly been in plenty of situations where inputs are at a premium and choices have to be made. It probably would be better if you don't tie the sound guy's hands by insisting on using the mic exclusively, no matter how good a mic it is. Just my opinion, of course.

Also, don't imagine that a sound guy leans toward the DI because of 'laziness'...IME, it typically takes more effort to hook up a direct interface than it is to just stick a mic in front of an amp.

 

[JSandbloom]

I blend a AKG D112 with my DI signal. Great combination.

 

[bigtone23]

Audix D4 & AT Pro 25 are my favorite budget bass mics. I have tried the AKG D112 and Audix D6 which work OK, but they both have EQ sculpted for bass drum and bleed a lot.

 

[Gizmot]

Here's my two cents - as the graphs posted by others have illustrated, an SM57 has no low end. It can't because it's diaphragm is only 0.5 inches. The RE-20, the 421, the D-112, etc have 1 inch diaphragms and it's easy to hear the difference that the larger capsules make. Large diaphragm condensers can also do a good job. However, with the mics with more low end, you need a mixer with better EQ so you can dial in what sounds good and roll off some of the LF garbage that you'll get.

 

[dBChad]

About 10 years ago, the guys I was playing with at the time used a kick drum mic on the bass amp. It was alright, great for capturing the lows but flaked out on the upper register (where other people are in the mix, so I guess that worked out alright).

I've also used an SM57 and a Senhheiser 609. I preferred the SM 57 but both were good.

 

[GoesThump]

It's one of my favorites as well... except for the damn clip!

What, you don't like duct tape? Why not?

Agree w/Agedhorse & several others : Senn 421 is a good choice here. BYODT.

(Bring your own duct tape...)

GT

 

[GoesThump]

The 421 clips aren't that bad. Just adjust the set screw and they are fine. Yeah it's not the best design. But most people ignore the screw and tape them.

Yeah, at least it isn't as terrible as the 441.

Slightly OT, but the mounts w/a lot of mics are getting worse over time. The super-fragile thing that comes with the C414 xls is stunningly cheap given that the mic is $1500.

GT

 

[Dirk Diggler]

I think the suggestions of SM57's are crazy, they are barely usable for vocals, snares, and guitar cabs maybe. Unless all you're looking to enhance is mids and highs. You really need a dedicated bass range microphone.

That said it never hurts to try, and placement is the key to good microphone sound.
Good luck,
Dirk

p.s. a personal observation, the shortened name of a microphone is the not the same as a persons name. It's not spelled Mikerophone is it? Sorry I couldn't resist.

 

[GoesThump]

Here's my two cents - as the graphs posted by others have illustrated, an SM57 has no low end. It can't because it's diaphragm is only 0.5 inches. The RE-20, the 421, the D-112, etc have 1 inch diaphragms and it's easy to hear the difference that the larger capsules make.

Sorry, but that's not how mic capsules work. Diaphragm size does not limit LF response of a mic at all. To take one example:

Invalid Link Removed

Capsule size is about 1/2 that of an SM57, and it goes sub-audio.

GT

 

[bass40hz]

Sennheiser e602ii...designed for kick drums, bass cabs and tubas...not much else, I use it and the amount of low end it captures is tremendous.
HNY and Rock on.

 

[Gizmot]

Sorry, but that's not how mic capsules work. Diaphragm size does not limit LF response of a mic at all. To take one example:

Invalid Link Removed

Capsule size is about 1/2 that of an SM57, and it goes sub-audio.

GT

Sorry, but that's not how mic capsules work. Diaphragm size does not limit LF response of a mic at all. To take one example:

Invalid Link Removed

Capsule size is about 1/2 that of an SM57, and it goes sub-audio.

GT

I was less than coherent because I posted in the middle of the night when I couldn't sleep. BUT - my comparisons were of typical-size capsule DYNAMIC mics vs large-diaphragm DYNAMIC mics. What I wrote was correct. Yes - condenser mics (whether electrets or externally-polarized capsules) can achieve wider response with smaller capsules, but I don't think your measurement mic would work very well on a bass rig.

 

[DanAdams]

I feel like if you insist on a mic, you are doing so for yourself and maybe other bass players in the audience. Since the members of the audience are a majority of NOT bass players, I would side with soundguy who is trying to make your notes heard, which I think is a nice goal, and often rare in live situations.
There is usually not time for such finagling, plus bass and guitar have different techniques.
Using a DI isn't lazy, it solves problems rather than introducing a whole bunch more.
mic-ing a rig doesn't necessarily bring the character of your rig to the mains, but it can host a load of new technical problems. A cool sounding solo-ed bass mic during soundcheck probably won't benefit the full band live.

I might experiment with mics when recording (re-amping), going on a tour with a dedicated soundman, or with LOTS of spare soundcheck time... but even then I would probably go DI and have time to get a nice sandwich

 

[KevInDaBassment]

...Im looking for suggestions for a solid/tough, roadworthy mike...

I hear this Mike is pretty tough...

 

[Jim C]

I've engineered more that 250 recordings with a twin 24-track remote recording truck. I think may of the techniques used for live recording also apply to live sound.
Manytimes the multi-track masters were sent back to the label's producer/engineer.
I would usually call ahead and find out if they would like the sessions cut with or without EQ, how much compression, and what type of gear would they like to be used.
My own opinions were usually the same as the request.

For rock electric bass: RE20 (my favorite) but am also very happy with an MD-421
I think either of these could be found in the $200ish range on the used market. If you really want to buy a dedicated bass/drum mic, it's worth it.
I've also been asked to use a D-12 which I didn't love.

For jazz UB: With a quiet ensemble a U-87 or U47
With a louder group I'd see if I could sneak a gobo in to control bleed.
If not, then the RE20 was a decent choice

I do like having the ability to use a mic but would not say that it is always the best solution.
Very rarely was the mic'd track used alone, sometimes blended, and sometime not used at all.
Sometimes a dry DI sounded best and this was back when the best available was a Countryman 85 (which I still use depending on the application). For passive, I liked the old blue Sescom's that had Jensen transformers.
If the player requested a DI be taken from the amp, I would still run my own DI with it.
I wouldn't try an untested amp DI on my watch. If it failed in any way, it would have been my fault.

I like the opportunity to try a mic on bass during soundcheck but as an opening act, that isn't always a possibility. Bottom line, if you could only use one source, the DI was most important.

Stupidest request:
Use Monster Cable from the stereo out buss to broadcast / 2-track mix for a guest engineer.
Apparently 5,000+ feet of Belden mic and snake cable was OK for the inputs but not for the stereo mix.
We got to use regular TT for the patch bay too.
Go figure

Andy; is the live mix school of thought still to use a passive DI on an active bass, and, an active DI on a passive bass?

 

[Ulf_Hansson]

I was less than coherent because I posted in the middle of the night when I couldn't sleep. BUT - my comparisons were of typical-size capsule DYNAMIC mics vs large-diaphragm DYNAMIC mics. What I wrote was correct. Yes - condenser mics (whether electrets or externally-polarized capsules) can achieve wider response with smaller capsules, but I don't think your measurement mic would work very well on a bass rig.

No, a measurement mic is not a suitable choice for micing a bass cab, as it is supposed to have a flat freq response and (with the small capsule) not necessarily a low noise floor. But the response was still correct, the size of the diaphragm does _not_ decide whether a microphone (dynamic, condenser, electret) can capture low frequency signals. There are many other interesting properties/trade-offs related to the capsule size, such as SPL limit, resonances, generated signal level (contributing to the aforementioned noise floor), etc....

 

[Mugre]

As a reference, look at the data sheets of any mics that interest you. There will be a frequency response curve for each mic. That will tell you how flat the ideally set mic is.

Moving the mic position will affect the EQ. You can do wonders with this.

Below is the curve for the SM57. It falls off below 200Hz, a bump starts at around 3K.

View attachment 3268182



Invalid Link Removed

I expect this plot doesn't account for proximity affect which would add energy in the low-mids around the octave 125 to 250.