Help please with my signal chain

[lowfreqgeek]

As others have said, before you spend a lot of time and money buying new gear, spend some time working with the SansAmp. You can easily get a very clean and articulate P-bass sound with the SansAmp by keeping the blend down and judicious use of the bass control. Also, you have a mid control on the V2. Don't be afraid to adjust the mids to get some articulation. Perhaps turn of the Speaker Simulation, as well.

A compressor can help if you know how to set it up, but it can also completely muddy up your sound if you don't set it up right. The HX Stomp is really great, but there's so many options and it's very easy to get a really poor sound from it unless you know how to work with each model and how to set it up to achieve the tonal goal you've set.

Another often over-looked aspect is your plucking technique. That alone can be the difference from mellow and muddy to in-your-face aggression. Perhaps you need to spend some time making sure that you're getting the most from your technique.

 

[Wasnex]

One particular problem that has not been addressed so far: The signal should be processed for specific location and intended use. In other words, you need different processing in the IEMs than will be used to balance your sound in the house mix.

Unfortunately, each channel only has one set of controls, and they are generally used to optimize sound for the audience. Because different processing is usually needed for the monitor mixes, often the sends are set to Pre EQ, Pre Compression, etc. In other words, you get a flat, unprocessed signal in your monitors, regardless of the tweaks the audio tech makes to your channel.

There is a way around this, but it's complicated, confusing, and labor intensive. The trick is to dual assign all of the channels across two fader levels. In other words, channels 1-16 are duplicated across channel 17-32: So, Channel 17 uses the same input as Channel 1; Channel 18 uses the same input as Channel 2,... etc,. Then Channels 1-16 are used for FOH, and Channels 17-32 are used for the monitor mixes.

I don't personally like to play bass with much compression, and some amps give me more compression than I want. However, when I am mixing, I do prefer a fairly large amount of compression on bass most of the time.

If you like the sound of your Sansamp, I suggest using it so you have some basic control over your sound in the monitors. You may need to negotiate a bit with the person running sound if you use excessive EQ. Also you need to get your sound dialed in early and then lock it down for the show. The reason is because if you tweak your sound during the show, it will impact all of the mixes rather than only your mix. If you need a bump in volume during the show, either ask the person running audio, or have the board setup so you can control your own mix using a smart phone.

 

[StudioGC]

As others have said, before you spend a lot of time and money buying new gear, spend some time working with the SansAmp. You can easily get a very clean and articulate P-bass sound with the SansAmp by keeping the blend down and judicious use of the bass control. Also, you have a mid control on the V2. Don't be afraid to adjust the mids to get some articulation. Perhaps turn of the Speaker Simulation, as well.

A compressor can help if you know how to set it up, but it can also completely muddy up your sound if you don't set it up right. The HX Stomp is really great, but there's so many options and it's very easy to get a really poor sound from it unless you know how to work with each model and how to set it up to achieve the tonal goal you've set.

Another often over-looked aspect is your plucking technique. That alone can be the difference from mellow and muddy to in-your-face aggression. Perhaps you need to spend some time making sure that you're getting the most from your technique.

All good points, I just spent an hour or so trying different settings on the Sansamp. I realized that the default setting on many of the suggested settings is to have the blend almost maxed out, so I've brought that way back to good effect.

I haven't given enough time with the Mids button/setting knob. Time to get that dialed.

I'm not wedded to my P bass(s), I'm going to be giving my converted '73 Ric 4000 a go, just waiting on a new harness and real Ric neck pick up.

 

[StudioGC]

One particular problem that has not been addressed so far: The signal should be processed for specific location and intended use. In other words, you need different processing in the IEMs than will be used to balance your sound in the house mix.

Unfortunately, each channel only has one set of controls, and they are generally used to optimize sound for the audience. Because different processing is usually needed for the monitor mixes, often the sends are set to Pre EQ, Pre Compression, etc. In other words, you get a flat, unprocessed signal in your monitors, regardless of the tweaks the audio tech makes to your channel.

There is a way around this, but it's complicated, confusing, and labor intensive. The trick is to dual assign all of the channels across two fader levels. In other words, channels 1-16 are duplicated across channel 17-32. In other words, Channel 17 uses the same input as Channel 1; Channel 18 uses the same input as Channel 2,... etc,. Then Channels 1-16 are used for FOH, and Channels 17-32 are used for the monitor mixes.

I don't personally like to play bass with much compression, and some amps give me more compression than I want. However, when I am mixing, I do prefer a fairly large amount of compression on bass most of the time.

If you like the sound of your Sansamp, I suggest using it so you have some basic control over your sound in the monitors. You may need to negotiate a bit with the person running sound if you use excessive EQ. Also you need to get your sound dialed in early and then lock it down for the show. The reason is because if you tweak your sound during the show, it will impact all of the mixes rather than only your mix. If you need a bump in volume during the show, either ask the person running audio, or have the board setup so you can control your own mix using a smart phone.

Ya, I've never had an exceptional IEM monitor sound, and I have some decent in ears with multiple drivers, but it's plenty to get the job done, but it may be the next step to upgrade (again....) my IEM's and see if I can get better sound.

I hear you on keeping things set and not touch a darn thing during a show. It's why I favor a good quality passive P bass as I want the sound person to say "well....it's not the bass that's the issue!". It's also why I use just a simple Sansamp and no other pedals I'm constantly watching our lead guitarist disconnect, fiddle, throw pedals around because he's not happy or something in his chain breaks down, granted he's only lead guitar so not as important if he stops playing!

 

[Russ Frost]

In addition to cutting the low and boosting the mids a bit, also try plucking closer to the bridge.

 

[lowfreqgeek]

IMO, the SansAmp is an amazingly versatile piece of gear, IF you learn how to use it in your own context. I get that it's really easy (especially at first) to just use their suggested settings, but those suggested settings are all developed in one particular environment. If you spend some time with it, though, it really can do a lot of stuff.

I've got a number of preamp options, including the BDDI V1, and I admittedly don't use the BDDI as often as the others, but every time I plug it in, I'm reminded that it *could* be my primary live preamp/DI if needed. That's my opinion, though.

 

[40Hz]

If a Fender P is boomy and inarticulate, it's not a new bass that is needed. I've never even heard a Squier Affinity that sounds like that.

Agree.

The likeliest culprit is the EQ settings.

The PB is kinda middy prominent. And a lot of players mistakenly crank their bass pot to get more bottom and end up with a boomy sound.

The Helix someone previously recommended is flat out overkill for the OP unless he also wants cab and amp emulations plus a rack of other effects to go along with compression.

I’d suggest starting with an inexpensive high pass filter. A Broughton Audio or FDeck HPF can be purchased for under $100. Park it at the end of your signal chain just before your DI to filter out any low end sludge.

If more signal remediation is needed than that, then a transparent limiting type compressor is your best friend. Properly set, it won’t affect your dynamics in any negative way. It’s also good to control your own compressed levels whenever possible rather than leave it exclusively to a soundman to manage. There’s a lot of sound people that get way too heavy handed when mixing bass guitar and tend to put ridiculous amounts of compression on a bass feed if it’s even slightly problematic in the house mix. Providing FOH with an already workable feed level goes a long way towards keeping them from heavily squashing your signal on the board.

I also have to disagree with an earlier poster who said most bass players don’t need compression. Based on my own experience I’d say the majority of bass players would find a compressor to be a very useful tool to own once they learned how to use it correctly. And I’d go further to say that about half the bass players I’ve heard over the years would not just have benefited, but also desperately needed to use some compression.

 

[Bonafide]

I also have to disagree with an earlier poster who said most bass players don’t need compression. Based on my own experience I’d say the majority of bass players would find a compressor to be a very useful tool to own once they learned how to use it correctly. And I’d go further to say that about half the bass players I’ve heard over the years would not just have benefited, but also desperately needed to use some compression.

Poor technique is the number one need for compression. Outside of that it is an effect, a personal choice for any number of reasons and a choice that has consequences both ways. But... actually what I said was "Most bass players do not need compression, there is a great deal happening by default"...

 

[Bonafide]

Poor technique is the number one need for compression. Outside of that it is an effect, a personal choice for any number of reasons and a choice that has consequences both ways. But... actually what I said was "Most bass players do not need compression, there is a great deal happening by default"...

In a live setting... which is the topic at hand.

 

[40Hz]

Poor technique is the number one need for compression. Outside of that it is an effect, a personal choice for any number of reasons and a choice that has consequences both ways. But... actually what I said was "Most bass players do not need compression, there is a great deal happening by default"...

Disagree completely with your premise. Compression cannot correct for poor technique, as you yourself probably already know. If anything, it makes poor technique even more obvious. Which is one big reason why compression often gets such a bad name.

And it is also not an effect - unless you choose to use it as an effect.

I also disagree that there is a great deal of compression always happening if I’ve read you correctly. To that I’d say: it all depends. In some cases yes. In others no, or at least not to any significantly audible degree.

If I misquoted you earlier, my apologies. Still, I’d be more inclined to say compression isn’t always needed. Nor is it necessarily an “always on” device for every player since it won’t make up for bad technique.

I have a small number of compressors of different flavors for different purposes. And I don’t always see a need use one. Because a compressor isn’t a one size fits all tool. It can, however, do several things it would be difficult or impractical to accomplish otherwise. And when you want to accomplish such tasks, the appropriate type of compressor, when properly employed, can be a godsend. Especially in a live performance situation when and if needed.

 

[Bonafide]

Disagree completely with your premise. Compression cannot correct for poor technique, as you yourself probably already know. If anything, it makes poor technique even more obvious. Which is one big reason why compression often gets such a bad name.

And it is also not an effect - unless you choose to use it as an effect.

I also disagree that there is a great deal of compression always happening if I’ve read you correctly. To that I’d say: it all depends. In some cases yes. In others no, or at least not to any significantly audible degree.

If I misquoted you earlier, my apologies. Still, I’d be more inclined to say compression isn’t always needed. Nor is it necessarily an “always on” device for every player since it won’t make up for bad technique.

I have a small number of compressors of different flavors for different purposes. And I don’t always see a need use one. Because a compressor isn’t a one size fits all tool. It can, however, do several things it would be difficult or impractical to accomplish otherwise. And when you want to accomplish such tasks, the appropriate type of compressor, when properly employed, can be a godsend. Especially in a live performance situation when and if needed.

I hear you and I understand. I also appreciate that you disagree completely, I genuinely do. Still it doesn't change anything. We may have a different understanding of what compression means, or it's real-world use on bass. Or it may simply be our different ears are used in different ways. It's all good, though 100% moot. And anything other than subtle compression, *is* an effect.

Ill substitute the word 'poor' for 'lack of' speaking to technique.

For technique, at some point in a players development they can manage volume dynamics, note to note levels, note definition or making the notes bloom or articulate more, all with the fingers. And they would want to. The same results, albeit not as seamless as the right use of compression (which is subtle, if not used as an effect). Nothing can help poor performance, lack of development or immaturity, we agree on that, but lack of technique can be supported in many ways. If you have ever produced a record with a musician lacking in it, you'd have been in need of those solutions.

If you find your sound suffers or your playing is less smooth when you don't use a compressor, that is a technique issue, not a lack of compression. Not that technique development is required, but it does exist.

My current compressors are an original Carl Martin Comp/Lim pedal - Origin Effects Cali76 - Emperical Labs Distessor - Manley Elop - Anthony Demaria Comp/Lim. All very different. The pedals are used on occasion for a classic country guitar sessions.

 

[40Hz]

We may have a different understanding of what compression means, or it's real-world use on bass. Or it may simply be our different ears are used in different ways. It's all good, though 100% moot.

I can readily agree on all of tge above. And you’re right. It is all good.

And anything other than subtle compression, *is* an effect.

Well, me being a believer in using effects with subtlety most times (for my own music anyway ) I could split hairs. But why bother? At the end of the day it all comes down to one’s personal preferences. If it works within the context of what we’re looking to accomplish then that’s all that really matters.

I think we’re both on the same page about that point. [/QUOTE]

 

[Bonafide]

I can readily agree on all of tge above. And you’re right. It is all good.

Well, me being a believer in using effects with subtlety most times (for my own music anyway ) I could split hairs. But why bother? At the end of the day it all comes down to one’s personal preferences. If it works within the context of what we’re looking to accomplish then that’s all that really matters.

I think we’re both on the same page about that point.

Cool. Agreed. And splitting hairs is what musicians do.

One thing to mention is the OP @StudioGC sounds great for how long he has been at it (6 years?) is that right? Ya'll are 'pub band' tight and sound completely competent and sincere. While I genuinely can see how reduction in the fatness will help your tone, the worst of it is behind you with the Rick. That said, even though ya'll do the Beatles things alot, the Hofner style bass can be a constant challenge. Maybe you wrangle it well but the Rick tone seems to match the modernity of the other players and still support the set. - Anyway, sounds great.

Thanks! Excellent points made. I've always assumed (I think correctly!) That Sansamp is a fine DI. It's all I've ever used for the 6 years I've been playing bass. I'll give those tweaks a try and see what works.

 

[drumvsbass]

The secret to great sans amp tones is in the blend knob.

 

[el murdoque]

As long as you're running the Sansamp 100% wet (blend maxed) you already have their baked in cab sim which has a HPF around 50Hz.

I'd dial back on the drive to get a cleaner tone and then set the EQ to taste.
On my PBDDI the first setting I ever used was their SVT suggestion with the drive set to zero. That tone worked well with IEM.

 

[GreyBeard]

My signal chain is Broughton HP/LP filter -> Boss Compressor -> Mesa preamp DI. I have never gotten any complaints from a FoH tech with this setup. I have the Driver/DI and the Bassman setting IS pretty boomy. Try backing off some of the bass and boosting the mids a bit. This will cut down on boomyness and add some articulation. This sound through your monitor may not sound right to you as your ears have become so accustom to your old setting. Be patient and work with the tech.

 

[Ethereal Thorn]

I personally felt the sansamps weakest point was it's cab sim and I ultimately sold it and got a different preamp. To me analog cab sims have always felt too choked. I almost always have preferred using a properly dialed in di without a cab sim unless I have the option of moving up to a cabinet impulse response.

 

[StudioGC]

Cool. Agreed. And splitting hairs is what musicians do.

One thing to mention is the OP @StudioGC sounds great for how long he has been at it (6 years?) is that right? Ya'll are 'pub band' tight and sound completely competent and sincere. While I genuinely can see how reduction in the fatness will help your tone, the worst of it is behind you with the Rick. That said, even though ya'll do the Beatles things alot, the Hofner style bass can be a constant challenge. Maybe you wrangle it well but the Rick tone seems to match the modernity of the other players and still support the set. - Anyway, sounds great.

Ya, the Beatles thing was a one off celebrating their 50th anniversary recording at Twickenham Studios (Get Back Sessions), we also combined the Show with the Stones as it was their Anniversary playing Eel Pie Island down the road.
We're mostly doing theatres and larger clubs now (with the occasional wedding etc,), hence the need to nail the tone a bit more as the theatres are a bit more unforgiving than a pub.
Funny thing is for the Beatles/Stones gig is I used a modded Ali Express "Walnut" Ric for some songs and it sounded great (granted I did have a real Ric neck pick up and harness in it). It was just damn heavy and the neck was a baseball bat.
I ran my Sansamp through a Rumble 500 for stage monitoring and then DI'd out to FOH.

 

[StudioGC]

As long as you're running the Sansamp 100% wet (blend maxed) you already have their baked in cab sim which has a HPF around 50Hz.

I'd dial back on the drive to get a cleaner tone and then set the EQ to taste.
On my PBDDI the first setting I ever used was their SVT suggestion with the drive set to zero. That tone worked well with IEM.

Excellent suggestions. Thanks!

 

[Omega Monkey]

I think the suggestion of an HPF is probably a good. I would put it first in the chain, not last. Why have your compressor going crazy over low end that isn't going to be there later on? Why try to take out tubbiness with EQ when the HPF should be doing most of that? Etc...

To set up, while playing, gradually increase the cutoff frequency until the bass thins out too much. Then back it off a bit until it sounds full enough.

Granted, the X32 has an adjustable high pass on every channel, so you could just use that, at least as a start. Somewhere between 35-100 Hz is probably a good place to start.

You could also probably benefit from a nice parametric or semi-parametric EQ, 1-3+ bands. The X32 also has this, but you might find it beneficial to have a nice analog one at your feet that you can adjust quickly and easily. I have a Carl Martin 3 band that is really nice. I think it's BBE that makes an Ampeg style tone stack pedal, that may do the trick too. I would probably start by trying a modest but ideally narrow cut somewhere in the 50-120 Hz range. There's also a strong possibility the band PA may have certain frequencies that are more boomy than others, especially in certain rooms. The key is to take out enough of the offending frequency to avoid that tubbiness, but not so much that you lose the power of the low end. It's a balancing act, but if you find the right frequency, width, and amount of cut, it shouldn't feel like you're missing anything, just cleaning up the sound. You can also push the overall bass level to compensate.

And then a good compressor probably makes sense. I really like my MarkBass Compressore. Studio style tube compressor pedal. it's got all the normal "studio" compressor controls, so you can do anything from super subtle to squash city.

Now, for practicality, you probably want to have the SansAmp last in your chain to use as a DI, but from a signal chain and processing standpoint, I would do bass, HPF, SansAmp, EQ, compressor (and then just any generic DI should be fine as long as it's not noisy). I would start with what you have now, just plugged into the SansAmp into the mixer, and then try some of the suggested processing at the mixer level, and also explore the possibility that the PA subs need to be EQ'd a bit. if you run a sine wave generator through the subs, you should be able to step through notes from 30 to 100 Hz or so without any particular note or notes overtaking the room. If they do, those frequencies need to be tamed and that should be happening at the system level, since it will also affect kick, any lower end keyboard sounds, potentially the low end of guitars, etc... This is also likely to change depending on where you are in the room, so walk around with the ipad and try to find a happy medium everywhere (but with the main focus being center mass of the audience area).

The HX Stomp would not be a bad choice, and that way you could have presets to simply recall. BUT, it will take a fair amount of programming and that does not come naturally to everyone. And there's a certain vibe to just using nice analog processing vs modeling. The advantage of the modeling is preset recall and flexibility. One thing to keep in mind, is that air is what makes sound sound good. You are kind of bypassing that with either the HX or especially the SansAmp (where the cab simulation is more of a "also included" component than the main focus). With the HX at least you can try a zillion different impulse responses to find something that sounds good with your setup. if you are dedicated to the ampless lifestyle ("not that there's anything wrong with that!" says Jerry), you may want to consider a proper dedicated cab simulator, especially if you're playing more "vintage" style music where a bass direct into a full range PA is not really the vibe. As an example signal chain, an HPF, SansAmp, nice analog EQ, analog compressor, dedicated cab sim, would be fairly simple but also pretty flexible and yield about the best results you could probably get going ampless. Which of course by that point you've spent like $1k maybe and probably could have just gotten a PF-20 and a nice single 12 or 15 cab, and just sounded like a bass into a tube amp into a full range cab instead trying to recreate that with... other stuff.