MDBass
Supporting Member
- Nov 7, 2012
- 8,590
- 14,890
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: Dingwall-Fender-Bergantino-Dunlop-Tech 21-Darkglass-Nordstrand
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Using more than one Bass on a Record
- Thread starter chaak
- Start date
It sounds like the keyboard player (who I guess is the musical director?) is looking for the band to have a signature identifiable sound........nothing wrong with that and plenty of bands, famous and not so, have done it like that for decades...if it was me and I had this as the understanding, I would be fine with it providing the band isnt crossing too many genres and trying to nail each genre ver batim.........
His reasoning could be that he wants to have a basic idea of what your input gain structure is on the board and kinda have a ballpark reference to how to set you up each time you record to expedite time instead of spending a lot of time fiddling with gear to set levels...that also makes sense
His reasoning could be that he wants to have a basic idea of what your input gain structure is on the board and kinda have a ballpark reference to how to set you up each time you record to expedite time instead of spending a lot of time fiddling with gear to set levels...that also makes sense
Last edited:
if the guy who is doing all the tracking and mixing himself free of charge asks that of you, I can understand why, but that kinda sucks if you want to use other gear.
Maybe ask him if there is anything you can do to make it easier for him but still use whatever you want to use?
as the guy who sometimes does this for my own bands, it does take more time to track and mix when people are changing stuff around, but isn't that part of the fun ? I think it should be doable as long as someone is taking notes as to who used what gear on which track for each part. Maybe offer to be that guy so you can use what you want ?
Heck on my last record I used 4 different basses, they all sound different but the record itself sounds as a whole.
Maybe ask him if there is anything you can do to make it easier for him but still use whatever you want to use?
as the guy who sometimes does this for my own bands, it does take more time to track and mix when people are changing stuff around, but isn't that part of the fun ? I think it should be doable as long as someone is taking notes as to who used what gear on which track for each part. Maybe offer to be that guy so you can use what you want ?
Heck on my last record I used 4 different basses, they all sound different but the record itself sounds as a whole.
Great answer. I do a lot of session work on guitar and bass, and I have had the standard swing hard in both directions. Some folks in charge of "the sound" or the product want consistency through and through. Some won't mind switching up song by song or even mid-song. There is no right or wrong except that outlined by whoever is in charge and paying the bills.
That is absolute nonsense. Whilst some element of cohesion and consistency is good to have on a record, using the same instruments throughout is just bizarre and a cop-out from the engineer/producer.
My preference when recording is to use one bass for the entire project. Makes overdubs/punches easier, for starters.
Everyone who’s ever hired me to record always insists I bring a couple, so I do. They’re paying for it. And we always end up using just one.
Kinda get where keyboard guy is coming from here. Last session I did, I bought my bass and a cable. The guitar player bought a minivan worth of gear and expected to use it all. Ridiculous.
Everyone who’s ever hired me to record always insists I bring a couple, so I do. They’re paying for it. And we always end up using just one.
Kinda get where keyboard guy is coming from here. Last session I did, I bought my bass and a cable. The guitar player bought a minivan worth of gear and expected to use it all. Ridiculous.
I barely go through the 1st page. Wow!
While I agree the keyboardist's guidance seems to be extremely limiting, there are also valid reasons behind this approach.
Whenever I have gone into a studio, they didn't just throw out DIs and mics and hit record. They spent considerable time dialing in each instrument to get the sound just right before any tracks were cut. Half a day was set aside to the tune the drums and experiment with different mics and mic positions. Another half day was set aside to dial in bass, keys, and guitar. If you switch instruments or amps, all of this prep work is out the window, and you have to do the work over. That's fine if you have an infinite amount of studio time, but not if your time is limited.
Then when you do the mix down, you have to consider how you will deal with masking and frequency slotting. If you change one instrument, the engineer may need to adjust the EQ and compression on the other instruments to get everything to lay just right in the mix. This can be difficult, frustrating, and time consuming.
Because the studio time was very limited, I have only been able to use one bass on pretty much every project I remember doing. The other players were also significantly limited from switching instruments.
That's not to say that it's not better if you have the time and resources to play whatever instrument you want to play...or even to play multiple instruments on each song. From creative stand point that kind of artistic freedom would obviously be ideal. But you also have to consider the project from the production side of the equation. I.E. how much work is necessary and how difficult is it to achieve consistent quality when everyone is free to switch instruments anytime they feel like.
IMHO that sort of freedom is probably unrealistic, so perhaps a compromise can be made, and some sort of plan can be drawn up so material can be recorded in a certain order that facilitates as many of the desired instrument switches as possible. This may depend somewhat on how the recording will be made. For example if the goal is for everyone to record their part during the same take, you have less flexibility. For more flexibility the person who wants to change instruments can lay down a second track at a later time. In other words do the whole project with one set of instruments. Then after all songs are recorded, as time allows, spend time to get a good sound with the second instrument and record a second track for the songs where the instrument is desired. You never know, you might wind up actually preferring the original track, or you might wind up using both tracks.
Whether this sort of approach is possible depends on how much time and effort people are willing to put in...and possibly how much studio time is available.
While I agree the keyboardist's guidance seems to be extremely limiting, there are also valid reasons behind this approach.
Whenever I have gone into a studio, they didn't just throw out DIs and mics and hit record. They spent considerable time dialing in each instrument to get the sound just right before any tracks were cut. Half a day was set aside to the tune the drums and experiment with different mics and mic positions. Another half day was set aside to dial in bass, keys, and guitar. If you switch instruments or amps, all of this prep work is out the window, and you have to do the work over. That's fine if you have an infinite amount of studio time, but not if your time is limited.
Then when you do the mix down, you have to consider how you will deal with masking and frequency slotting. If you change one instrument, the engineer may need to adjust the EQ and compression on the other instruments to get everything to lay just right in the mix. This can be difficult, frustrating, and time consuming.
Because the studio time was very limited, I have only been able to use one bass on pretty much every project I remember doing. The other players were also significantly limited from switching instruments.
That's not to say that it's not better if you have the time and resources to play whatever instrument you want to play...or even to play multiple instruments on each song. From creative stand point that kind of artistic freedom would obviously be ideal. But you also have to consider the project from the production side of the equation. I.E. how much work is necessary and how difficult is it to achieve consistent quality when everyone is free to switch instruments anytime they feel like.
IMHO that sort of freedom is probably unrealistic, so perhaps a compromise can be made, and some sort of plan can be drawn up so material can be recorded in a certain order that facilitates as many of the desired instrument switches as possible. This may depend somewhat on how the recording will be made. For example if the goal is for everyone to record their part during the same take, you have less flexibility. For more flexibility the person who wants to change instruments can lay down a second track at a later time. In other words do the whole project with one set of instruments. Then after all songs are recorded, as time allows, spend time to get a good sound with the second instrument and record a second track for the songs where the instrument is desired. You never know, you might wind up actually preferring the original track, or you might wind up using both tracks.
Whether this sort of approach is possible depends on how much time and effort people are willing to put in...and possibly how much studio time is available.
Did you ask the keyboardist how in the world he came up with that idea? Is he only going to use one keyboard using only one setting on all of his tracks?
Other questions:
Who owns the project? Who is paying for it? Are you getting any credits for a trying other than playing bass? Is it published/copyrighted? Do you have a performance contract? Do you have a binding legal contract that guarantees your payment of residuals?
If you do not own the project, paid for the studio time, and no contracts in place, you are SOL. Either you comply, or move on.
It's very important that every track also be in the same key, have the same tempo, and the same lyrics. You must never deviate.
Limitations can be good sometimes (one bass worked for Jamerson) and if your Spector suits all the songs, there is no reason to change basses just for the sake of it.
As with all things, it depends on what you are trying to accomplish. There is A LOT to be said for crafting a (consistent) signature bass/drum sound. Pixies is great example. Easier said than done, mind you. That said, there are talking Heads songs that have something like 11 layered bass tracks. I would suggest your band sit down and listen to a few albums and come to some kind of artistic consensus. These are important decisions!
People here who are dismissing your keyboard player entirely are just flaunting their internet ego. I would take their advice with a grain of salt, at best. At the end of the day it's art and there are no rules. Its up to you and your band to decide. Good luck and have fun! May the muse be with you.
People here who are dismissing your keyboard player entirely are just flaunting their internet ego. I would take their advice with a grain of salt, at best. At the end of the day it's art and there are no rules. Its up to you and your band to decide. Good luck and have fun! May the muse be with you.
