Mic'ing techniques for tracking double bass in studio

[N. Kentucky Bass]

There are many effective ways to mic a double bass in a sound treated studio. Among those emphasizing the bass sound in context of the room is to place a large diaphragm condenser about three feet or so in front of the bass with an omni polar pattern. Another is to place a matched pair of LDCs about the same distance in front of the bass.

Has anyone here tried placing a Blumlein pair of LDCs about three feet in front of the bass? I'm curious about pros / cons from a sonic perspective -- particularly compared to the single omni configuration.

 

[AGCurry]

You'll probably get better responses in the Double Bass side, but here goes ...

The omni three feet off the bass's top plate is a good way to go (although I don't know why you specify large-diaphragm condenser). Want more bass? closer. Want more "room"? farther. An omni can be used to good effect very close to the bass, because there is no proximity effect. I like my Electrovoice RE55 (an excellent dynamic omni) for this.

Due to the nondirectional nature of low-frequency sound, I don't see much point in any kind of stereo tracking, X/Y, Blumlein, or otherwise... especially if your room isn't excellent. The Blumlein configuration would give you the room sound, but it would be in stereo. I would certainly not pan bass tracks in a mix, so what's the point of recording for that? K.I.S.S.

And why LDC? Smaller diaphragms are better for uncolored sound.

All that said, the absolute best way to find out if something works is to try it! Just keep in mind that evaluating bass tracks on their own may not tell you how they will sit in a mix.

 

[AGCurry]

Has anyone here tried placing a Blumlein pair of LDCs about three feet in front of the bass?

I have done Blumlein for choral groups, but with ribbon mics, which are naturally bidirectional.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

Two stereo array's are prepped. The LDCs are in Blumlein pair config. and the SDCs are X/Y coincident pair. The LDCs can be instantly switched to mid-side. I'll also move the LDCs and SDCs to various positions for individual mono takes. It's a new double bass so I'm figuring out what works best for this one.

What's the tracking wisdom on height of these arrays in relation to distance from the bass? I'm starting with what's always worked well in the past: about 15 inches in front of the bridge. For each take one foot further away, should the mics be raised about the same distance?

 

[AGCurry]

I'll also move the LDCs and SDCs to various positions for individual mono takes.

So you're going to sum each pair to mono? That may be a recipe for "more is less."

At the risk of sounding like a repetitive curmudgeon, I think you're way overdoing it. A single good mic correctly placed is a time-honored recipe for recording the bass well.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

So you're going to sum each pair to mono? That may be a recipe for "more is less.".

No, the experiment is to hear how close different types of stereo tracking come to "MB" played acoustically. I plan to create a range of recordings (including traditional mono) in different positions to hear the differences. Kind of a systematic stroll through the options. It could well be the "winner" is a single mic in mono. I've already had great success blending a LDC near the bridge and a SDC pointed at the top of the fingerboard (near bridge). So I'm not prejudging any of the options. I'll let the results speak for themselves.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

Also, I put this thread here because there is no forum on the DB side dedicated to recording that instrument. Frankly, I'm getting far more practical feedback over on GearSlutz.com. Most of the "recording" threads on TalkBass are rudimentary. But you never know who might see the query here!

 

[AGCurry]

Fair enough. As I said before, trying stuff out is the best way to learn.

You'll probably get more varied opinions in the "Double Bass" here. There are a lot of great, experienced bassists there.

 

[Wasnex]

You'll probably get better responses in the Double Bass side, but here goes ...

The omni three feet off the bass's top plate is a good way to go (although I don't know why you specify large-diaphragm condenser). Want more bass? closer. Want more "room"? farther. An omni can be used to good effect very close to the bass, because there is no proximity effect. I like my Electrovoice RE55 (an excellent dynamic omni) for this.

Due to the nondirectional nature of low-frequency sound, I don't see much point in any kind of stereo tracking, X/Y, Blumlein, or otherwise... especially if your room isn't excellent. The Blumlein configuration would give you the room sound, but it would be in stereo. I would certainly not pan bass tracks in a mix, so what's the point of recording for that? K.I.S.S.

And why LDC? Smaller diaphragms are better for uncolored sound.

All that said, the absolute best way to find out if something works is to try it! Just keep in mind that evaluating bass tracks on their own may not tell you how they will sit in a mix.

First a disclaimer. I don't have any practical experience mic'ing string bass for recording purposes. But I do have a lot of experience with live sound reinforcement and playing upright bass in a live environment.

My assumption is an omni will be better for extreme low end, but your going to pickup up a lot more room sound, so it's going to be imperative that the room sounds nice. I also have to wonder if capturing the extreme lows will be beneficial.

Another issue is the acoustic level generated by a string bass is incredibly low compared to most instruments. If the player generates any fingering noise, it's going to be problematic using an omni mic at a significant distance from the instrument.

The stereo technique will capture the room better and create a more realistic sense of space around the bass. There may also be some interesting frequency dependent information from the instrument that is better captured with a stereo technique. Let's not forget that the bass has plenty of mid range frequencies, so not every tone and harmonic is omnidirectional. I doubt hard panning is the way to go though.

Perhaps a better technique would be to use a near mic and a far mic in two separate channels that can be processed/blended to taste. This will give you one channel that emphasizes the bass and another channel that emphasizes the room. Perhaps a small diaphragm in one position and a large diaphragm in the other.

The ideal mic position will likely be different between arco and pizz.

 

[AGCurry]

My assumption is an omni will be better for extreme low end, but your going to pickup up a lot more room sound, so it's going to be imperative that the room sounds nice. I also have to wonder if capturing the extreme lows will be beneficial.

Actually, the omni will be better at not coloring the sound. Omnidirectional mics inherently have the most faithful response curves. And of course the room must sound nice, regardless of miking technique. The OP specified a "treated" room.

Another issue is the acoustic level generated by a string bass is incredibly low compared to most instruments. If the player generates any fingering noise, it's going to be problematic using an omni mic at a significant distance from the instrument.

Are you saying that the noise will be proportionally greater than the bass's top plate as distance increases? I don't know how or why that would be true.

The stereo technique will capture the room better and create a more realistic sense of space around the bass.

Granted. I'm not convinced that that's a critical need with a bass instrument; we typically hear the "air" around higher pitches.

There may also be some interesting frequency dependent information from the instrument that is better captured with a stereo technique. Let's not forget that the bass has plenty of mid range frequencies, so not every tone and harmonic is omnidirectional.

If you want that information dispersed spatially, then yes, use a stereo configuration.

Perhaps a better technique would be to use a near mic and a far mic in two separate channels that can be processed/blended to taste. This will give you one channel that emphasizes the bass and another channel that emphasizes the room. Perhaps a small diaphragm in one position and a large diaphragm in the other.

I would be concerned with phase cancellation. A single omni provides both source and room in a phase-coherent way.

 

[And I]

If you want to mix this double bass with other tracks, stereo miking will make that more difficult. I'd suggest a nice ribbon mic about a foot or two from the instrument, more or less aimed at the F hole. You'll if course want to move the mic around a bit and find a sweet spot.

I have used a shiny box 46 mxc into a cloud lifter into a shiny box si4 preamp and loved the accuracy, realism, and fullness. Condensers tend to accentuate the finger noise and slapping sounds.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

Not sure if there is "one" correct way to execute this. Depends on the scenario. I agree a more focused sound for mixing is probably achieved better with one mic, or a mixture of two in mono. But if you are showcasing the bass, soloing, showing something for an internet video, etc., my bet is one of the stereo modes might give a realistic sense of hearing the bass in person.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

Really interested in thoughts about how high the arrays should be placed. Should the height rise as distance between bass and arrays increases? Is there a proper ratio to observe?

 

[AGCurry]

Really interested in thoughts about how high the arrays should be placed. Should the height rise as distance between bass and arrays increases? Is there a proper ratio to observe?

I think that's something that can only be determined through experimenting. If it sounds good, it is good.

 

[Wasnex]

Are you saying that the noise will be proportionally greater than the bass's top plate as distance increases? I don't know how or why that would be true.

Basically the further the mic is from the bass, the more fingering noise you will hear versus a pure body tone.

This is very simply the inverse square rule. With a directional mic you use aiming to ignore undesired noise. With an omni you use distance ratios. If the mic is significantly closer to the intended sound source than the source of the noise, the noise will drop off more due to distance. As distance is increased from the primary sound source, the two sound sources are closer to equidistant, so they both drop off at a similar rate. Whether it's a problem or not depends on the player's technique and the sound you want.

Obviously you can get place the mic too close as well, and may not get a balanced representation of the basses tone.


I agree with all of your other comments, but whether they are relevant depends upon how the track will be used and @Ukiah Bass 's goals.

IMHO this seems like an opportunity for experimentation, learning, and fun. If the situation was more dire, I would be inclined to put up one mic and go with it.

Perhaps an important point on Omni mics, is they are not omni-directional across their entire bandwidth. So take a look at the mic's polar pattern and keep it in mind when you are aiming the mic.

 

[Wasnex]

Not sure if there is "one" correct way to execute this. Depends on the scenario. I agree a more focused sound for mixing is probably achieved better with one mic, or a mixture of two in mono. But if you are showcasing the bass, soloing, showing something for an internet video, etc., my bet is one of the stereo modes might give a realistic sense of hearing the bass in person.

You also have to consider how much the player moves around. Depending upon the orientation of the mics, this could possibly cause an annoying shift in the stereo localization. The closer the mics are, the more this is likely to pose a problem.

If you have figure 8 patterns, you could try a mid-side array. This would give you a mono mic and the ability to blend in stereo as desired. The mid part of the array can be omni or directional.

You may find the thread interesting: Invalid Link Removed

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

You also have to consider how much the player moves around. Depending upon the orientation of the mics, this could possibly cause an annoying shift in the stereo localization. The closer the mics are, the more this is likely to pose a problem.

If you have figure 8 patterns, you could try a mid-side array. This would give you a mono mic and the ability to blend in stereo as desired. The mid part of the array can be omni or directional.

You may find the thread interesting: Invalid Link Removed

I will also try mid/side ... curious how dramatic the side manipulation would be in my small room. I marked preliminary points for the endpin placement. I don't have to move around and when the bass is balanced, it's always in the same position. Definitely lots of experimentation ahead!

 

[seamonkey]

Try a mic off the back of the DB also. There's a lot of good sound that comes off the back.
The player hears this naturally from where they stand. It can add some interesting textures.
DB makers don't ignore the effects of the back plate when they make their instruments.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

Try a mic off the back of the DB also. There's a lot of good sound that comes off the back.
The player hears this naturally from where they stand. It can add some interesting textures.
DB makers don't ignore the effects of the back plate when they make their instruments.

interesting! What kind of mic would you use for this and how would you place it?

 

[seamonkey]

interesting! What kind of mic would you use for this and how would you place it?

Well Omni and play with the placement.

The sample libs always include many mic placements. Not to mix them, but chose one for the task. So a few placements may be worth trying just like you're doing out front.