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

Double Bass Large diaphragm, small diaphragm or dynamic mic?

AndreasH

AndreasH

Apr 8, 2005
493
44
39
Sweden
#1
This is something I've been thinking about for a while.
What would be the best for live use with minimum leakage?

When recording in the studio I've been using a SE electronics Titan large diaphragm condenser mic placed near the f-hole in height of the bridge and a Sennheiser MD421 dynamic mic placed at the upper bout near the fingerboard. This is a killer combination but I do not own these microphones and couldn't possibly think about buying them on my tight budget.

I would like to hear about different live solutions which doesn't cost a fortune. I've read something about a small diaphragm and rubber bands(?). I have a fully carved German Götz 1957 strung with guts and Velvets. I have a pretty decent acoustic output.
 
#2
Andreas, I noticed that the second thing you said was "minimum leakage." This is probably a very broad generalization, but I think in that regard dynamic mics for live use will pick up less bleed than condensers.

There are some good threads on this topic if you haven't seen them yet:

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=254667

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=306325

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=440087

FWIW, my current gigs are completely unremarkable, and my credentials are modest. But these days I use a Beyer M 88 TG (dynamic) on a H-clamp, often blended with a piezo pickup. I also own an AMT mic, but it is more sensitive to bleed IME.
 
#7
I'm playing with guts too. I ran an AMT mic with a tailpiece mount up through the bridge legs. I get a great, very natural sound with it and I can crank it up loud enough with a bass amp to use on a medium volume gig. I should note that I tried this setup with steel strings and it didn't work very well. I couldn't get it very loud before feedback and it didn't capture the acoustic sound of the bass very well.

Btw: I checked out your Myspace page. You get a great recorded sound.

mark
 
#9
I picked up an Audio-Technica ATM650 awhile back. It's a hyper-cardioid dynamic - to my ears (if I had to compare it to something) it sounds a bit smoother than an SM57. So far I've been getting really good results with it.

I've basically been attaching it to the bass with a drum-clip that I found lying around in my gear box. One of those little K&M dealies that is supposed to clip onto a snare-rim. I've been experimenting with a few spots - but usually it goes on the rib-side edge of an f-hole, where it doesn't cause much dampening of the top. It has to be tightened a fair bit to stay on (NOT recommended for a carved top) so I'm considering it a temporary solution until I can spare the scratch for an H-clamp.

The last time I used it - it was with a 4 piece w/drums. I just plugged it straight into our pa - rolled off the bass some, and it sounded great. If it's a gig where I need to use my amp, I've had pretty good results going into an ART tube MP preamp, Boss eq (just to take off some 10kHz and 50Hz) and into my Eden Nemesis combo. Not the most hi-fi of rigs, but with some attentive tweaking, it can sound pretty natural.

Back to the mic - I'll say this: I've tried this setup with a couple of other dynamics (an AKG vocal mic, and a cheapie Audix) and the AT is far superior. Much easier to get a good sound, quite a bit more resistant to feedback, and some note-to-note imbalances that I was getting with the AKG have all but disappeared.
 
#10
Heven't found a dynamic that I can stand.( I've still yet to try the Heil, but I'm dubious--maybe just a dumb, or possibly well founded prejudice against dynamics) I laugh seeing all of the Re20's around. Might as well use a D112. You can't use a large diaphragm condenser live IMO. You"ll pick up more of the drums (way more) than the bass. I use the Audio Technica ATM 35 which has been replaced by the 350.Not the Pro35 which is anything but pro. Not the last word in detail, but much warmer and natural than the other tiny condensers. With the exception of the B & K small capsule condenser. Made a rubber band mount and recorded a European tour for Blue Note with the B&K. Absolutely stellar. Wayy too much $$$$. I just finished a European tour last week. The sound they got on a Kawaii piano (no less) on a gig in Poland was AMAZING. I looked to see which large diaphragm condensers they were using. I couldn't see ANY mics they were using. Turns out they were using two tiny (1/4" long 1/8" wide) condensers made by a company named DPA. I'm sure that some of the more techinically oriented guys here have heard of them. They make omnis and cardioids. I think that they are pricey, but I'm dying to try one.
 
#11
Mike Arnopol said:
...recorded a European tour for Blue Note with the B&K. Absolutely stellar. Wayy too much $$$$. I just finished a European tour last week. The sound they got on a Kawaii piano (no less) on a gig in Poland was AMAZING. I looked to see which large diaphragm condensers they were using. I couldn't see ANY mics they were using. Turns out they were using two tiny (1/4" long 1/8" wide) condensers made by a company named DPA. I'm sure that some of the more techinically oriented guys here have heard of them. They make omnis and cardioids. I think that they are pricey, but I'm dying to try one.
Click to expand...

Actually, DPA microphones basically are B&K microphones. B&K was split up in the 90s and DPA (Danish Pro Audio) is the name of the company that continued the studio microphone line. Sounds like you have pretty consistent, and expensive, taste in microphones.
 
#14
Mike Arnopol said:
Heven't found a dynamic that I can stand.( I've still yet to try the Heil, but I'm dubious--maybe just a dumb, or possibly well founded prejudice against dynamics) I laugh seeing all of the Re20's around. Might as well use a D112. You can't use a large diaphragm condenser live IMO. You"ll pick up more of the drums (way more) than the bass. I use the Audio Technica ATM 35 which has been replaced by the 350.Not the Pro35 which is anything but pro. Not the last word in detail, but much warmer and natural than the other tiny condensers. With the exception of the B & K small capsule condenser. Made a rubber band mount and recorded a European tour for Blue Note with the B&K. Absolutely stellar. Wayy too much $$$$. I just finished a European tour last week. The sound they got on a Kawaii piano (no less) on a gig in Poland was AMAZING. I looked to see which large diaphragm condensers they were using. I couldn't see ANY mics they were using. Turns out they were using two tiny (1/4" long 1/8" wide) condensers made by a company named DPA. I'm sure that some of the more techinically oriented guys here have heard of them. They make omnis and cardioids. I think that they are pricey, but I'm dying to try one.
Click to expand...
DPA (Danish Pro Audio) and B&K (Bruel & Kjaer) are tightly connected. The DPA website used to spell out the details of the company histories and how they were linked, but they've taken that web page down. I did find this on another site though:

"DPA took over B & K microphones in 1992, when the company decided to stop marketing them. The quality is still the same, but the mics are more spread around the world these days.

Best regards

Morten Støve

DPA Microphones A/S
Gydevang 42-44
3450 Allerod
Denmark"​

Edit - I see now Michael Glynn beat me to the punch.
 
#15
Not discounting Mike A's comments re: dynamic mics at all. Far be it from me.

But FWIW, according to some BP articles I recall, Avishai Cohen uses (or used to use) an RE-20 blended w/ a Realist. John Clayton uses the RE-20 too. Too heavy for my H-clamp though.

I've seen and heard the DPA 4021 mini-condenser. Incredibly natural sound. And tiny. And pricey like Mike said ($1500-1600 U.S.) The player (John Brown) has a 1929 Hawkes that has a huge sound on its own. And John's technique ... heh, he played my bass once, and he pulled so much sound out of it I thought he was gonna break it. :)
 
#16
The Sennheiser MD441 is a great sounding dynamic with a hypercardioid pattern and a full sounding low end.

Mike Arnopol said:
I laugh seeing all of the Re20's around. Might as well use a D112.
Click to expand...

I disagree, the RE20 is far more versatile than a D112 and way better for bass, I would call the RE20 a classic bass mic. Their frequency responses are very different from one another; the D112 is pre EQd for modern sounding kick drum while the RE20 is relatively flat.

Check out the on axis response for the D112 here in the first pic; it's +4 db at 100 hz while the RE20's on axis response in the second pic is flat.

d112_FREQ_RED.gif


re20freq.gif
 
#17
I'm not talking about frequency response. I'm talking about immediacy of sound and response. Dynamics are slow. I was playing the devil's advocate in comparing the Re20 to the D112. Obviously the Re20 sounds better. It just cracks me up as far as the bass scene in the past 20 years. In 1965 the Re20 was a great choice. It still sounds good. But I think that the ongoing fascination with it has the religious ferver that having guts and inch off the fingerboard does. There HAVE been advances in all areas of technology and technique since 1965. Some good, some bad. Hey, I was one of those guys in the 70's with an Underwood and spiros set really low. That very legato (and not too functional) 70's amplified sound. Lots of guys I know never evolved past that. Hopefully I have. So while being aware of technical advances we return to the past and hopefully have the perspective to sift through the chaff to find the essential. An example. PC's arco sound. There used to be a joke that he could just leave the bow on the strings to turn pages. Now PC turned the bass world on it's collective ass as far as showing that a great solo in the bebop language could be played arco on DB. But let's be honest: with the advances in steel strings and amplification it is possible to get a much better arco sound in jazz. Don't get me wrong---I love and respect PC's playing and contribution to jazz. But I'd prefer to learn my lessons from him and evolve past that. But there are many guys (one quite notable) that think the holy grail is to have the same scratchy arco sound that PC had. If PC was alive today, I guarantee that his sound would have evolved to embrace whatever technology that would yield the best sound. Same with mics. The Re20 was the best choice back then. It isn't now despite the romantic fascination with it. The 421 never was a good DB mic. The Re20 sounds like a U47 by comparison. Damn, I sound like one of the crabby old farts that I used to hate.
 
#19
Mike Arnopol said:
I'm not talking about frequency response. I'm talking about immediacy of sound and response. Dynamics are slow. I was playing the devil's advocate in comparing the Re20 to the D112.
Click to expand...

I have heard some dynamics with smaller transducers that do have a more immediate, edge detailed sound like a condensor. The Beyer M101 comes to mind although it wouldn't work that well for live use on bass in most cases because it's an omni. I've got a recent recording of shakers and various latin percussion instruments through that mic that you would swear was recorded with a condensor - and a near perfect one at that. (I haven't tried it on bass yet, but I will sooner or later.)

Not to get into philosophy, or the obvious, but I would just say that while I agree with you that dynamics are generally slower as an objective statement, that doesn't make them objectively better or worse than condensors. They're all potentially useful sounds for some situation. If you're looking for accuracy and detail in the bass sound, SDCs are the default tool. But I use LDCs and dynamic mics (including ribbons) frequently. I usually end up cutting a lot of highs out of my bass sound when I mic it with a condensor; with a dynamic, I usually don't have to, and for a lot of things I like the slower, old school dynamic sound. It's very much a stylistic and mix dependent choice. (I would never use a D112 on upright, and I have tried it; they are surprisingly good for vocals, though, and I do own an original D12 which I have used on upright and electric bass with good results).

I'm guessing a lot of upright bass players would consider it a positive, to have a sound that resembles a professional recording from the mid 60s. My tastes aren't everyones, but many of my favorite bass sounds would be from that period or earlier. Then again a KM84 into a 70s Quad Eight channel strip would also make me quite happy.
 
#20
Typically, the recordings in the 50's and 60's used fabulous large diaphragm condenser mics. Seldom were Re20's used for recordings with the exception of some live recordings. Large diaphragm mics are one area where most engineers prefer the old tube preamp mics. When I go into a studio and they have newer U87's or the like and I see and old U47 or Telefunken I'll usually say "hey can we use that?" Now Jim Anderson (one of the best engineers in the biz) uses two small diaphragm Sanken mics on my bass and I haven't gotten a better sound. On one recording when my bass was sounding a bit under the weather he pulled out a very old stereo mic. (I forget if it was an AKG or a Neumann) and it sounded great. So, there are really no rules. (although I do have a tendency to get on my soapbox and pretend that there are) Ribbons were mentioned. When I was in high school (early 70's---I was a major gear geek even back in those prehistoric times) I used two Golden Spirals and two Spiros (much to the dismay of my teacher who is still the principal with the CSO) and I bought a Beyer 160 ribbon mic.Wouldn't use a pickup. ( I was a LaFaro wannabee) That is still a great mic and if I were a mic-only guy I'd consider one of those wrapped in foam under the bridge. After high school, I switched to all Spiros and an Underwood and became a Mraz wannabee. (still am, I guess)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back