• 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 Recording: To DI or not to DI

Pat Harris

Pat Harris

Nov 17, 2006
834
867
Detroit, MI
www.gpatharris.com
#1
The Rodby thread got me thinking about this.

Does anybody other than myself *like* to use a pickup in a recording situation? I've had wonderful (and very natural sounding) results mixing in a DI signal with mics. Often times, I'll monitor with one headphone off my ears and only the DI signal getting sent through the monitor mix in the headphones.

I've even done a live recording with a DI straight out of my AI head into the board and I really enjoy the sound. This could be because I play with an amp about 99.9% of the time, and I associate the "amped-up" sound as being "my" sound. I'm all about the DI on a recording (in addition to some nice mics). I think it provides more options.
 
#3
Do whatever you need to in order to get the sound you hear in your head. Period. Recording is where you can (and should) get closest to your ideal sound.

Personally I like one large diaphragm condenser about 6" in front of the bridge. I like that very open sound. That just me.
 
#4
When I was coming up (mid 80's), I remember hearing records where I loved the bassist's sound, but when I went to see jazz live, the bass always sounded completely different, not at all the sound that inspired me to take up acoustic jazz bass. It was I while before I figured out that live, bassists were using pickups and in the studio, microphones.

Because of this experience, I think that if you use a pickup live, you should use one in the studio as well. If you don't, I think you're misrepresenting your sound. If anyone feels that their pickup sound doesn't sound good enough on recordings, why are you using it live? For nearly all players, your live sound is YOUR SOUND. That's what you should be recording. When I would go see these bass players whose recordings I had heard, I felt their recorded sound was a lie.

My solution was to use a microphone on a stand in front of the bass, in all situations, no matter what effort it takes. And to learn to play in such a way that my sound could be heard through that mic live. That means some sacrifices, but it's what I want. If you're a guy who wants to play with really low action and just tickle the strings, and get a sound with your pickup and amp, that's totally fine with me. But that's your sound. If that sound is acceptable for you to represent yourself with every time you play in front of an audience, why are you not recording that way?

For me, a statement like "Recording is where you can (and should) get closest to your ideal sound." just makes me shake my head. *Every time you pick up the bass* is where you can (and should) get closest to your ideal sound.

Of course, I know there are different takes on this, and there are lots of recorded sounds outside of jazz that can't be reproduced live at all. But most jazz recordings I think are intended to be a representation of what you might hear from the band live. If your live sound isn't good enough to be recorded, maybe there's a bigger problem to be dealt with.

Anyway, that was my experience as a fan, and why I think the way I do about it. Pat, I think you're on the right track, you have a sound you can identify as yours, and want to have that sound whether recording or live. I can dig it!

Brent
 
#6
I play most gigs acoustic. I never even bring a pick up to the studio. On live recordings I have let them take a DI out of my amp or mic the amp but that is it. There are a couple Weasel Walter free jazz albums I play on where I used the pick up because I wanted that aweful '70s/'80s DI sound, but otherwise I don't bring amp or pick up to a studio.
If it is a pro studio and you have a sound they can handle it.
 
#9
We have always recorded with getting both a DI signal and miking an amp. Sometimes we even have a second mic picking up the room, then it is about mixing them all to get the right sound for the song. I don't think you can get a definite either/or answer. But, I do agree with Damon. You should not have to cater your sound for the engineer to record it. It is the engineer's job to figure out how to capture what you are doing. I think you hear this alot of Dave Fridmann produced record, not necessarily with bass, but definitely drums.
 
#10
Brent Nussey said:
Because of this experience, I think that if you use a pickup live, you should use one in the studio as well... If anyone feels that their pickup sound doesn't sound good enough on recordings, why are you using it live?
Click to expand...

Interesting take... I hear you and agree in principle. Still, I think it's a matter of practicality, difficulty, etc. Recording simply allows one to get closer to the sound one might get if listening to all instruments live in a controlled environment. I'm almost always disappointed in the live sound of artists I go to hear when they're in anything but an intimate venue.
 
#11
As I write this I'm listening to a recording made at my gig last night. I always record my gigs on a Zoom H2, normally placing the device several feet in front of me and the amp. It's: german flatback, FC, HPF Pre, GK 150. Now I understand that the H2 picked up some of the acoustic sound from my bass, but I think most of what it got was from the amp.
I try to EQ my amp to get a tone as close to my acoustic tone as possible while still working in the room, etc. The sound coming out of my amp IS an acoustic waveform.
An engineer taking a direct feed will need to get some of that acoustic waveform and EQ back somehow. Also, is the guy doing the mix going for a 'Ron Carter' or a 'Paul Chambers' sound. People have very different ideas about what these instruments should sound like.
I think a microphone gives a better chance of getting 'your' sound.
My $.02, YMMV
 
#12
Brent. You know full well that almost no gig environment is as controlled as the studio. Of course we should always strive for a great sound but making a comparison between the studio with iso booths and all and a live situation with a drummer bashing away 2 feet to your left and the blender going at the bar is the whole apples and oranges thing.

As far as the whole 'misrepresentation' thing. An intertesting concept but thinking of the shows I have gone to I have never felt cheated by a ****** bass tone. Great playing is great playing.
 
#13
clink said:
I think a microphone gives a better chance of getting 'your' sound.
Click to expand...

+1. Nothing beats a good mic, IMO. Nothing.

fingers said:
...Of course we should always strive for a great sound but making a comparison between the studio with iso booths and all and a live situation with a drummer bashing away 2 feet to your left and the blender going at the bar is the whole apples and oranges thing.
Click to expand...

Precisely. That's the "practicality" and "difficulty" aspect I was thinking about. ;)
 
#14
fingers said:
Brent. You know full well that almost no gig environment is as controlled as the studio. Of course we should always strive for a great sound but making a comparison between the studio with iso booths and all and a live situation with a drummer bashing away 2 feet to your left and the blender going at the bar is the whole apples and oranges thing.

As far as the whole 'misrepresentation' thing. An intertesting concept but thinking of the shows I have gone to I have never felt cheated by a ****** bass tone. Great playing is great playing.
Click to expand...

Hey Marc. My quoting you probably came across more personal that it should have. Also, I could swear there were 2 other posts between yours and mine that my comments were also responding to, but that have disappeared. Anyway, it's just my opinion based on my formative experiences.

Think about when guitar players got pickups - they started recording by mic-ing their amps, acknowledging even the amp's importance to their sound. I think if a guitarist of were to play live amplified, but insist on only mic-ing his guitar to record, because it was his chance to "get closest to (his) ideal sound," I would have to think he was seriously deluding himself about who he is as a player and what he really sounds like (to the public). Certainly his sound would at the very least be confusing to anyone who heard him on record and then went to see him live. Not just because of "tone," because the pickup changes the nature of the way you play the instrument. I found myself hearing this kind of difference early on with bassists, and so this is how I think about it. I tried to acknowledge in my post that there are other ideas about it.

If you've never gone to a gig and been disappointed that a player who's recorded playing you liked had a terrible sound that seemed unrelated to how they sounded on record, that's great. I wish I could say the same.

Brent
 
#15
Guitar players DO use their amps to help create their sound--bassists for the most part use an amp simply to be heard. Same with the pickup. Do any bassists really like their pickups?? I think we basically use the one that sucks the least. I strive to get the closest I can to a studio (mic-ed) sound in live situations but I know what I get is a compromise (and I use a mic mixed with a p/u).

bob
 
#16
drurb said:
+1. Nothing beats a good mic, IMO. Nothing.
Click to expand...



+1

When I got my first real pickup, an Underwood, I certianly liked the convenience, the sound was passible, but it didn't sound like my bass. IMHO what's missing with a piezo, is the true attack of the instrument, and it's actual timbre. Pickups have sustain for days, but their decay is way to long IMHO. Fortunately, I already had a Walter Woods amplifier and since it had a 1 meg ohm load the sound was better coming from that amp.
When the Fishman Bass Blender it became very apparent to me that the sound I was going for came from that little Crown GLM condenser, and not the pickup it was blended with, an Underwood. The Realist was more like a microphone so I dropped the Bass Blender.
Now that I have a DPA 4099 I realize once agian it's the mic and not the Realist it's blended with it that's the closest sound to my bass. I think that perhaps one more step in technological innovation and we probably won't need pickups anymore. But I am looking at the Ehrlund.

Ric
 
#17
Brent Nussey said:
because the pickup changes the nature of the way you play the instrument.
Click to expand...


This is the key point IMHO. Also one that brings in to question how amplification is used live. This is why I think is it imperative that you still try to dig in the same way you would acoustically and just let the amp support you. Your tone changes when we start to let up on the bass and let the amp do the work. So I agree with Brent. If you 'play the amp' live then do the same in the studio. It has become part of your sound.
 
#19
Use both. What's the big deal? Often with just a mic, the sound can get lost. With all the jingles and other commercial stuff, I wind up using the pickup because it has punch to hang with all the excessive pounding in today's music.

I wouldn't let purist attitudes distract you and drain your focus. The AI has a great D.I. out. (one of the best on basstasters.com) I use the REDDI.

Add a mic and do your thing. I've had good luck with a mic about a ft. in front of the bridge and to the treble side. It's mostly for a little air but if your pickup is happening, don't hesitate to lean into it.

It's really all about phase and impedance. A great engineer should be aware of that.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back