• 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.

Micing setup?

D

dechristimo

Guest
Oct 24, 2011
39
0
Pittsburgh
Disclosures
Just a student working at The Music Mart
#1
I'm looking for as many opinions as I can get on this, since I will be starting my first project solo recording project. I have an ESP LTD b-416, Hartke 3500, and Ampeg 410 HE and what I figured would be my favorite setup would be to have a DI out from the hartke, then also have a dynamic mic (audix I5) micing the cab. My thoughts are that I can grab the full power of the bass simply from the DI and then get a lot of the tone (mid-range area) from the mic, and I chose dynamic because it doesn't get as much low end but has good response to the mid range.
But I've seen people use DI and Kick mic, DI and condenser, just condenser, just kick, etc. I just wanted to hear opinions and explanations for each, so I can be sure I choose what will be my favorite setup.
 
#3
BULLSH**!!!

You are totally 100% 0n the right track. Tried and true method is DI and mic'd amp. As for mics I prefer a kick drum mic (cause it can handle amp cranked to produce high Sound Pressure Levels) and, if possible an sm57, but there's absolutely nothing keeping you from using the mic you already have.

F*** it dude - Recording is MAD SCIENCE - there really is no right or wrong. Experiment with whatever you have at your disposal and HAVE FUN!

The Beatles certainly didn't follow the rules and just listen to those recordings - on a 4 track no less. John Bonham recorded using two mics in a stairwell and everyone's been tryng to cop his vibe ever since.

GO FOR IT!!!!!!!

BTW, lots of recording vids on you tube - feed your head.
 
#4
Find the tone you're looking for on some recordings you like and see what they did (if possible).

I imagine a large diaphragm dynamic mic should be a good place to start. Experiment. Especially if you're recording digitally - it's not like you're wasting tape or anything...

Good luck.
 
#5
As has been said by many a famous engineer: "One mic, one problem. More mics, more problems."

With multiple captures of a single source, you need to be aware of phase relationships, and how multiple tracks occupying much of the same bandwidth can be as harmful as they can be useful.

If you can get it done with just a DI and some post processing (EQ, compression, saturation, impulse responses, etc.), just do that. If you don't feel like you're getting what you want from that, add in another signal. When you add in the other signal, make sure and phase align the signals as accurately as possible. The number of guys I've seen record a DI and a mic without phase aligning in post is staggering. It's always hilarious when they can't figure out why muting one of the tracks makes it louder than playing both.
 
#6
im never opposed to taking as many sources as possible. i tend to stack amps as well. your plan is idiot proof. personally, i'd use a software amp on the DI track, but i absolutely cant stomach the sound of a bass DI.

theres some math about how much quieter a track has to be before it doesnt cause phase problems. but realistically, unless you cut tape, which would imply that you didnt have to ask these questions, you can phase align your tracks if you have a problem. if you turn the mic track up and it sounds worse, you need to fix it.

pretty simple procedure. zoom in on both tracks. if the peaks arent lined up, scoot the track that is later back until it sounds better. just keep nudging it until it sounds good. sometimes a little phasing makes things sound cool. not normally the case with bass, but as stated, recording is a mad science.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back