• 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.

So why do people mic a cab, vs. just using a line out?

#21
For me, the amp produces a sound/tone (plus air, and whatever else you feel like adding) - especially in terms of low end - which so far hasn't been duplicated by any DI I've ever heard. I guess you could make the same argument that the reverse might also be true; that no amp sounds like a DI.

However, since I spend 99% of my time outside the studio or stage playing through an amp, by comparison the DI alone tends to sound a bit sterile (IME - for lack of a better word). Plus, I've had the opportunity to tweak the settings on my amp quite a bit (if not to death) in a variety of different sized/shaped rooms. I personally don't get to do this when it's a DI into someone else's board.
 
#22
What does anyone think of this setup for recording:

Bass ---> Roland V Bass (Amp and Cab modeling turned on as well as effects) ---> Morley ABY -----> Roland 1680 Digital Studio Workstation.

I use the ABY to also go to a Peavey 100 Watt combo that I use as a monitor in the studio as the Studio monitors don't replicate my sound well enough.

Would it be better to put the ABY before the Roland V Bass and then DI from the V Bass to the Roland 1680? That way the V Bass amp and cab modeling wouldn't come through my Peavey combo. The sound is good coming through the V Bass and my Peavey and I don't think I am over loading it.
 
#23
I just posted an article to WikiMusician.org called:

How to Mic a Bass Speaker Cabinet
http://www.wikimusician.org/How_to_Mic_a_Bass_Speaker_Cabinet

It includes diagrams, photos and a matrix of 25 sound files that demonstrate variables such as mic type (dynamic vs. condenser), mic placement on the speaker cab, and distance from the cab.

The site is a wiki so anyone is free to add comments/advice there. Enjoy.
 
#24
If the sound get ever lets me, I'll do both, and probably ask him to set it so 70% of my sound is the mic...

I bet most venues don't care about bass enough to do that though.

I have a question though, if you have say, a 410, would it sound fuller to mic the center of it (which would incidently be where the tweeter is) or in the middle of one of the speaker? I guess when there is a tweeter and woofers involved it becomes a little more complex.
 
#25
I have not tested this information, but conventional wisdom is to close-mic one of the speakers in a multi-speaker cabinet. Theoretically, if you place the mic between speakers, there might be a phasing issue that could mess with the sound. Unless that's the recorded sound you are trying to achieve. If the mic is several feet from the speaker, you are automatically micing all of them.
 
#26
I think engineers started DI'ing bass because the amps weren't very good for a long time! People like grunty old tube amps now for bass, but we were trying to get a clean signal most of the time, unless you were Jack Bruce... :)

I've done it both ways... I've mic'd amps when I liked their tone, like my old Ampeg B-15, and I once recorded with a very convoluted signal chain because I liked the tone I was getting from my amp... From my bass I went to an old MXR AC Limiter, then to my GK-800RB. From the effects loop to a Peavey chorus that had a built in cross over that split the signal, and chorused the highs only. It had an output for highs and lows. I ran the highs to a TubeWorks BlueTube, and the lows to an old Electro Harmonix Micro Synthesizer, mostly for octave dividing. The outputs of the high and low signals went to a two channel mixer I built, and then back to the effects return on the GK. I took the XLR out to the board.

Lately I like the tone of the bass straight into the board. After I record it I can process it with distortion or amp sims if I want that sound.

There's no right or wrong here, just find a tone you like, no matter how you get it!
 
#27
My philosophy is you've gotta move some air to get that punch. Percieved 'bassiness' comes mostly from the extra frequencys that are excited when a speaker does its stuff, and you can't get that straight electronically.

There are very expensive plugins designed solely to add these extra frequencys into a low end recording (waves maxxbass, for example), and it works, but why miss out on the character of a cab?
 
#28
Inflin said:
My philosophy is you've gotta move some air to get that punch. Percieved 'bassiness' comes mostly from the extra frequencys that are excited when a speaker does its stuff, and you can't get that straight electronically.
Click to expand...

OK, but think about this.... no air is being moved when you record. It's not until you get to a playback device, and then you are moving air. That playback device is not your bass amp, but the sound system you are playing the track on.

Percieved "bassiness" is the lack of high frequencies. People find that sounds "warmer", which is why so many like passive basses. Speakers and cabs roll off high end, as well as low end. Most speaker emulators are just low pass filters with a bit of resonance.

Recording an amp is just capturing the tone of that amp/speaker. You can't capture that moving air without a microphone. Now you have one more level of detachment between your bass and the recording. And then there's tone of the microphone and mic phase/room distortions. And then most of the time you have to compress or limit the bass.

The playback device is expected to be fairly accurate, or else we perceive it as a cheap sounding stereo system. So it should reproduce what was recorded.

You will never capture the real tone you hear of an amp in the room, so you are just adding a level of abstraction to the tone. The tone is now less direct, and more colored. Which could be exactly what you want.

I think unless you just want that tone from the amp, you can get a nice punchy tone direct. Listening to the many DI'd bass recordings over the years, like all the Jamerson/Motown recordings (no amp was used) proves this as fact. No amp was used and they are nice and punchy.

In fact if you go to the Motown bass thread and watch the Marvin Gaye video someone posted, you can hear that Jamerson's tone is less punchy and more flabby through an amp than on the original recording.
 
#29
I used to be a "you have to mic my cabinet or else" kind of guy, especially since I've mostly used more vintage tube stuff (like my '67 B-15N). In a live situation, you realize that you have virtually no control over your sound since Mr. Knob Twiddler will futz with it anyway. Having a head that can do line out (XLR or 1/4" into a DI box) gives you your sound minus the cab.

What the cab gives you to me is the "air" for lack of a better term, but for me, the magic is before it hits the speaker.

For example, I've been in the studio all weekend recording for a project. I've taken a slightly different approach than the last few times. This is a rock project (not a my jazz one where my setup would be slightly different). I experimented and it paid off. I used a Morley A-B-Y box to feed both my Ampeg SVP-CL as well as my old Ampeg B-25B hooked up to a 16 Ohm HotPlate (the blue one) to create a dummy load.

I then took the line level signal of both the SVP-CL (has XLR on the back) and B-25B through the HotPlate and mixed them. What I've found lacking about the SVP-CL - and it gets close to my old AMpeg sound - is the "grit" you get from old all-tube amps. The combo of the B-25B and the SVP-CL gives it a bit of punch (that's the SVP-CL) and that classic warm Ampeg sound all at the same time (as well as full isolation with no bleed).

Don't get me wrong - I love the sound of my stuff through speakers, but I've come around to the viewpoint that DI isn't evil and I can still get my sound.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back