Miked Cabinet Vs. DI Sound Differences

[Al Kraft]

Of course with the NV610 being a sealed cab, the port issue won't be a problem.

 

[MYLOWFREQ]

Sometimes the direct sound of your bass through a clean DI doesn't sound right. There are some DI's (such as the legendary sansamp) that 'color' the sound and work better imo.

If you mic the amp, any changes you make on the amp is going to affect the foh sound, and piss off the sound person.

 

[G On Bass]

If there is an in-house sound guy, I usually let them do what they prefer, to a point. At Friday night's gig, the sound guy mic'd the guitars and wanted to DI my bass. I play through a V-4B which is all tube and in order to get the full love from the amp I always bring a speaker level DI and go out of the cabs. I had everything set when he got there and when I pointed to the DI, he kinda rolled his eyes and in a smarmy kind of voice said 'Oh. You're going out of there'. Not sure why he needed to throw some shade about it, but whatever. My people in the crowd said it sounded great.

 

[PolkaHero]

Thanks for the input, guys! I'm going to suggest to my bandleader to give the Sennheiser 421 a try at our next gig. Where exactly should I place the mic in relation to the speaker? For the e902 I had it right up against the grill pointing at the center of the speaker.

 

[someguyfromNC]

I prefer a good mic over any built in DI everytime. I also prefer a RNDI or RDDI over a mic. If I was in the studio I might do it both ways and blend them.

So I guess it just depends how good your DI is to begin with. I prefer a good DI because its easy to control with no mic bleed.

 

[Chris 'Wighat' Jordan]

I just don't get the DI thing. So much of my sound is amp and cab. Now having said that, my bandmate and sound person insists on putting my bass in FOH and we always use a direct box. We are usually at small venues and my stage volume is easily carrying the mix but there's still just a touch in the mains. I think it's just to satisfy the sound guy control issues said bandmate has.

I would add two things: 1) I have recently started using a quality DI (Sonic Nuance TDI) and it sounds way more natural and not as sterile what with the Jensen transformer and 2) I'd really like to try a great microphone.

 

[Al Kraft]

Having a touch of bass in the mains never seems to hurt even when I'm carrying the room with my cab(s). I like hearing a little more low end sound as I play, but the bass and total mix often sound better to the audience if the bass is a little brighter and less low end focused - up close/on stage is not always what sounds best in the room.

As for mic placement, in general I find that close up at mid cone (edit: I probably should have said centered on the speaker) usually gets the tightest sound, slightly off center, slightly angled and/or pulled back a bit will get a more mellow/warmer sound with more low and low mid present. Since each mic has its own pick-up patterns and sensitivities, a little experimentation always seems necessary to get things well dialed in.

 

[seamonkey]

Moving the mic just a nudge to point at a different point on the driver makes a big difference. Don't forget to mic the tweeter and port - sound/tone comes out of those too.

In a studio, you'll probably get your best sound if you move the mic away where all these blend together.

A good modeler includes the mic and room in the model. A good modeler is a wonderful to drive a DI.

 

[Al Kraft]

In my experience in the studio they frequently used at least one mic a little ways back to allow the sound to "bloom a bit" or at least that was the phrase the engineer used. Such a technique would be quite impractical in a live sound environment in almost any indoor gig situation I've ever played.

I've got a couple DI's (Countryman 85 and Radial JDI), some SansAmps (BDDI, PDDI and VT Bass V2), and MXR M-80 and Tone Hammer I can use when I find a live sound tech who doesn't want to use the DI from my amp. My Mesa, GK and Aguilar built-in DI's are quite excellent by the way and I've never had a complaint from a sound tech once they actually tried using them as a signal source.

Mic'ing the bass cab in a live situation on a tight stage and/or smaller venue has proven to be lower on the benefit vs "more trouble than it's worth" scale than mic'ing a cab at an out door event. As always, YMMV!

 

[Downunderwonder]

The only gigs I do with PA bass are outdoors or big halls where there is no issue with the sound on stage being off, it's the room booming. So don't gimme that horsehockey about eq'ing for stage being wrong for the room. Fix the room eq!

 

[JimmyM]

Biggest problem with miking cabs is that your cabinet probably doesnt do very well at tge lowest frequencies. Especially if it's ported - at the cabinet tuning freq, most of the sound comes from the port, so miking the cabinet means a lumpy, liw end deficient sgnal in most cases. When I've used a mic on a bass cab, I'll high pass that mic, and mix it with a DI to get a solid low end. That typically works better than a miked cabinet alone. Of course, you also have to have 2 channels on the board for that.

Don't care. If I wanted that kind of low end, I wouldn't want to mic, nor would I use a HPF filter set at about the same as my cabs.

 

[JimmyM]

Thanks for the input, guys! I'm going to suggest to my bandleader to give the Sennheiser 421 a try at our next gig. Where exactly should I place the mic in relation to the speaker? For the e902 I had it right up against the grill pointing at the center of the speaker.

Center of the speaker for me, too. That gives you the brightest tone IMHO.

 

[jimfist]

I think it is worth mentioning that the term DI, in today's world as applied to live sound reinforcement for bass, could mean any of the following in terms of type of hardware used to produce the DI feed, and with respect to location of the DI (feel free to add anything I've missed):

Type of DI interface:

- passive or active "simple", relatively neutral (ex: Whirlwind IMP II or Director, Countryman FET85)
- "colored" or tube (ex: REDDI, Baer VTDI, Sonic Farm 2di4)
- cabinet emulated DI (filters) (ex: SansAmp, Hughers & Kettner Red Box, ADA GCS3, Radial)
- cabinet emulated DI (impulse response) (ex: 2 Notes Torpedo C.A.B., AMT Pangaea, Logidy EPSi)
- basic preamplifier rack or pedal (ex: Sans Amp BDDI or RBI, Aguilar ToneHammer, ISP Beta)
- preamp/multi-fx rack or pedal (with cabinet emulation) (ex: Zoom B3, Boss GT10B, Tech21 Bass Fly Rig, AxeFx, Kemper Profling Amp)
- bass combo/head preamp out
- from amp's speaker output via "simple" speaker level DI (ex: countrymany FET 85, Whirlwind Director)
- from amp's speaker output via cabinet emulated DI (Radial JDX48, Palmer PDI09, Hughes & Kettner Red Box, Aiken Gold Brick)
- from amp's speaker output via reactive load DI, no speaker emulation (Suhr Reactive Load, Fryette Power Load, Rivera Rock Crusher)
- from amp's speaker output via load box with cabinet emulation (filter or IR) (ex: 2 Notes Torpedo Live/Studio Digital Load Box, Palmer PDI03, Radial HeadLoad)

Location of DI:

- first thing off of instrument (bass), parallel feed goes to the rest of bass rig
- after stomp and rack processors, before stage amplifier
- from stage combo/head preamp out
- from stage combo/head speaker output

So, depending on what type of DI interface you're using, where it's located and how you implement it, you will get wildly varying results. And depending on the type of bass tone you're shooting for, there is no single "better" solution. Thus, IMHO, any discussion of DI has to also come along with it a qualifying statement that describes what you're using as the basis of the DI feed, and where it's coming from.

For example, a bassist may love the tone of his boutique bass, unfettered, and the preferred stage rig is a very neutral, clean sounding speaker system, with no effects or processing between the bass, amp and speakers. All tone comes from technique and the bass instrument tone controls. In that case, you could say that a simple, high quality DI box off the bass is all that is needed, and mic'ing a stage cabinet is simply off the mark.

Another example would be someone who loves the tone of, lets say, an old Ampeg Fliptop B15, who plays on a very low volume stage with many using IEM, but wants all of the flavored goodness that this rig has to offer. Perhaps that player would benefit greatly from a speaker level reactive load box with cabinet emulation. Or, taken further, with cabinet emulation consisting of a digitally captured cabinet impulse response (IR) of the actual Fliptop as captured in a studio using multiple vintage/boutique mics and studio grade mic preamps. Considering a very low stage level and that, perhaps, the amp sounds best mic'd from 2 feet away or so, using an IR capture is a much more practical way of feeding a mic'd cabinet tone to FOH since it is not subject to the negatives of distance-mic'ing a bass cabinet on a stage.

Clearly, some DI methods are simpler, less expensive, and more practical than others, just as mic'ing a cabinet is a fairly straightforward process. I'm not advocating one over the other, necessarily, but I will say that for all intents WRT live sound reinforcement, there are direct feed methods and products that will give you nearly every bit as good a result as you might get from close mic'ing a bass cabinet on stage. In some cases, the result may be superior, more flexible, and more predictable vs. a single mic on a cabinet.

In the end, use what works best for you.

 

[s0c9]

Clearly, some DI methods are simpler, less expensive, and more practical than others, just as mic'ing a cabinet is a fairly straightforward process. I'm not advocating one over the other, necessarily, but I will say that for all intents WRT live sound reinforcement, there are direct feed methods and products that will give you nearly every bit as good a result as you might get from close mic'ing a bass cabinet on stage. In some cases, the result may be superior, more flexible, and more predictable vs. a single mic on a cabinet.

In the end, use what works best for you.

I'm with Jim !!!

 

[filmtex]

I'm also with Jim. I thought this thread would devolve somewhat, but it's cool to see that level heads have prevailed. I wish I could have put it as succinctly as Jimfist. Nice job.

 

[Downunderwonder]

I'm with Jim too, when he buys my local soundguys a IR rig for me to plug into.

 

[s0c9]

I'm with Jim too, when he buys my local soundguys a IR rig for me to plug into.

Methinks he might make you fly to NE US area to get it.. LOL

 

[jimfist]

I'm with Jim too, when he buys my local soundguys a IR rig for me to plug into.

Methinks he might make you fly to NE US area to get it.. LOL

LOL! A mic is still a cheaper and more practical way for most who like the mic'd cabinet sound. Lots of benefits to custom IRs and such, but still a bit on the pricey side. Atomic Amplifire, which has IRs and does custom IR loading and power amp modeling, is around $600 US. Near the same for 2 Notes C.A.B. I fully appreciate that this is probably too much coin to get into something new and different, especially if you're 100% happy with plopping a mic in front of a speaker.

But...IR tech does afford you the "possibility" of doing a lot of things that aren't possible live with mics, so that might interest players who enjoy exploring. It's only money and time, right? LOL

 

[Mark Reccord]

plan to not ever touch the volume or tone controls of your amp after sound check.

if it sounds good it is good.

Hope your stage rig's head or speaker cabinet never fails, or develops some sort of weird distortion or noise.

if channels permit, have a DI feed handy in case something does go astray with your rig.

otherwise, it's all good.

If you have a dedicated sound person I don't see any of these things as being that big a deal. Every band plays louder in a show than they do in soundcheck, whether that's because they're just digging in more or actually turning their stage amps up. The room always sounds different at showtime (assuming some people show up, of course ) and these things need to be compensated for anyway. Sure, a radical change in stage volume between soundcheck and show (guitarists are a bit famous for this) is a bit of a nuisance but most changes are pretty subtle.

Same could be said of the mic cable, provided DI, snake channel, mixer channel, etc. All of these things have the potential to go down during a show and I have experienced all of them multiple times. If that happens, you just troubleshoot it like you would any other issue. That's part of the reason people hire technicians. I do strongly agree with patching a couple of extra lines and quickly line checking them if you have the means to do that as it makes swapping lines if something goes down a lot faster. No one questions just sticking a mic on a guitarist's cabinet so I'm not sure why there is such reluctance to do it for bass. I actually quite like using both a mic and a DI on bass, it gives you lots of options if you have enough channels. Cabinets like the NV610 or Ampeg 810 work really well with a mic because they definitely impart an effect on the sound and they are sealed cabinets with no horn so it's easy to capture the whole vibe of the cab with a mic. That said, I've had good success miking single cone drivers in ported cabinet with horns as well. And good success with various forms of going direct.

I would be distrustful of any sound person who believes close miking a bass cabinet with a directional mic will have any significant effect on the system's gain before feedback or any significant bleed unless the amp in question was very quiet in an otherwise very loud environment. It's a total non-issue in most cases. Bleed into vocal mics? Huge issue.

 

[jimfist]

@Mark Reccord, I generally agree with what you're saying, and we could quibble over some of the fine points of discussion, but I don't think that it would matter that much in the end.

What makes some of this more challenging at this point in time, is that it is much more common now to see bands - and some very good bands that work a lot - self-mixing from the stage without a dedicated, qualified sound mixer/tech. The advent of good quality, small footprint, lightweight sound reinforcement, as well as full-featured, inexpensive digital mixers with wireless remote control, gives musicians a lot more capability to own and control the SR aspects of their performances. Add to this the notion that many acts are going with IEM monitoring systems, which means that even small changes to a mic'ed bass volume or tone may upset the apple cart in a number of discrete IEM mixes, all of which would then need to be addressed individually. For those situations, literally, once sounds and tones are set, the expectation is that they do not change unless there is break time to check the changes, or unless some sort of technical catastrophe deems the changes necessary during a performance.

Much of these two issues goes away when you're using traditional stage wedge speakers for monitors, and you have a sound tech staff working with you. I'd go so far to say that a good sound mixer/engineer is far more valuable to guaranteeing a good bass sound/mix than any specific method employed. A good mixer just knows how to extract good sounds from most any situation.

As for close-mic'ing a bass cabinet, IMO, the discussion becomes this: how much of the "essence" of a speaker cabinet does a mic at less than 1" distance from an individual speaker capture? If "your tone" is deemed to be that which you hear from a distance of "x" feet from the cabinet, then how different is this, tonally, from a close mic'ed tone? For many, this distinction doesn't represent an appreciable, practical difference, which is fine. I'm good with practical. Just want to point out, though, that a single close mic'ed speaker sounds different - when monitored in a critical listening environment - than a multiple near/far field and/or stereo mic'ing of that same cabinet. Again, for most live work, the possible difference between mic'ed tones is less important than the difference between pure DI tone vs. a mic'ed tone. For those who care enough about those differences in tone, it is worth exploring, recognizing that this matters to about 1% of gigging bassists out there, and likely matters more to those involved in engineering/mixing, especially in recording.