• 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.

Where would you put the compressor in your signal chain?

P

pmano

Aug 26, 2009
85
4
Long Island, NY
#1
I don't really use any effects on my bass. Just a pair of Tech 21 RBI and RPMs going thru a Stewart World 2.0 Power Amp. I just started using the Stewart and while I love the overall sound I'm getting I did notice it can sometimes be a little uneven. That gave me an excuse to purchase an ART Pro VLA II Compressor ;). I always wanted to try their stuff heard great things about them. I haven't set it up yet but was wondering for my application where it should go in the signal chain. Since the SansAmp is mostly providing overdrive and Eq'ing i was considering running the SansAmps chained into the Art Compressor then the Art into the Stewart. Also when I play live I let the Sansamp go direct into the PA while also running a wet signal into the Stewart to power my stage rig. I'm guessing the Sansamp would go into the Comressor, the compressor sending one out direct to the PA and the other into my power amp for my stage rig? Or Compressor 1st and then run it the way I always did with the sansamp sending one out to the PA and the other to my stage rig? :hyper:Any advice?
 
#2
I never put effects anywhere but between the bass and the amp input. I hate amp loops. And especially for a compressor, it always went first in the chain when I used one.
 
#4
Yes but if the compressor is first in line, and you are using a passive bass, make sure there is a high impedance input (1MOhm) on the ART. Otherwise, you will load down your pickups, and it won't sound so great. Many rack compressors do not have the HiZ inputs and only line level inputs.
 
#6
slaphappychappy said:
i always assumed it went at the end of the line of effects. ill give it a go first up n see what happens too.
Click to expand...
Yeah, well typically in a recording situation, any compression on a bass would be after everything else. Maybe some EQ afterwards.
I just have to wonder what the OP means by "uneven"? Could be other issues to consider trying to remedy in the rig (including the bass) first before trying to wrangle it with compression.
 
#8
pbass2 said:
Yeah, well typically in a recording situation, any compression on a bass would be after everything else. Maybe some EQ afterwards.
I just have to wonder what the OP means by "uneven"? Could be other issues to consider trying to remedy in the rig (including the bass) first before trying to wrangle it with compression.
Click to expand...

it also hides the bad bass playing at 4am and no sleep.
 
#9
slaphappychappy said:
it also hides the bad bass playing at 4am and no sleep.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and sucks all those "bad" dynamics out too;)

I'm biased, I've just never seen the point of compression in a live bass rig (I've certainly tried it many times though). If the bass and amp, etc. are all dialed in and setup well, one should be controlling the dynamics with ones hands. Then leave compression to the FOH to suit the mix live, and in the studio I sure as heck don't want to commit to any significant compression when tracking, before the track and mix is nearing it's final shape. Sure, maybe just a touch when tracking but not enough to render it unmalleable in the home stretch.
I would be very wary of trying to use a compressor to "fix" some kind of sonic problem, without getting to the root of the problem first . . .
 
#10
pbass2 said:
Yeah, well typically in a recording situation, any compression on a bass would be after everything else. Maybe some EQ afterwards.
Click to expand...
I think there's logic behind that, like if you want to slam an envelope filter or octave pedal and then tame down the peaks a little so they don't clip. Never used them a whole lot until recently, though, so maybe I'd do it differently if I used compression at all these days, which I'm not and don't have much interest. Especially live, but even recording I'm not using it often at all, and I think my mixes are the better for it.

I just have to wonder what the OP means by "uneven"? Could be other issues to consider trying to remedy in the rig (including the bass) first before trying to wrangle it with compression.
Click to expand...
Not to be a wet blanket here, but if it's unevenness in the playing, by all means DON'T get a compressor to fix it. I believe compression is good and useful sometimes, but not to fix technique problems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ireidt
#11
To clear up the "uneven" comment I regrettably made, I should preface 2 things:
1) I've only had the Stewart 2.1 for a short time. I noticed that several times playing (once live) that the amp is very quick and can produce some volume variances that I did not feel were "attack" or "technique" driven. In hindsight they probably are/were my playing- this is just something I did not notice on other amps.
2) I have played with compression in the past and I like it. If you look at the context of my opening statement, I was "looking for an excuse" to buy it. I am not getting the compressor to "fix" a technique problem. The spikes were not that pronounced, I am probably the only one who noticed them. The compression will help but it's probably something I would naturally work out either way.

lastly if you read up or have experience with the Stew, this is not uncommon. Your style will adapt to the amps responsiveness. Here is what I read in a review on the Stewart World 2.1:

"So, on Mark Wright from Accugrooves suggestion, I took the Stew. I'll be the first to admit that power amps are the last thing I feel that effects your tone. The stewart is clear, loud and punchy, like the QSC's and any others I have heard. But the Stewart does produce the low bass frequencies a bit more full, but most important, the biggest thing about the stewart is its dynamics. When I started playing through it, I was like, this just sounds different than before, what is it??? then I realized that I wasn't actually playing my lines very balanced and some of the notes were coming out a lot louder and more forceful than I had heard before. After playing for a while, I began to play my lines more balanced. It actually kinda helped me play better. So, with the stew, you get what you put in dynamics wise. You want loud hit hard, you want soft, play light, it really allows you to create some nice aural effects, and moods in your playing. I highly recommend it."
 
#12
I think there is often really a lot of confusion about compression, because compression is a broad term. There are a lot of different types of compression and a lot of different ways of setting up a compressor. The type of compression we would want in our rig is not the sort of compression that would best be applied to a FOH signal, and vice versa. Threshold, attack and release, and ratios would be different in each case, to say nothing of how a side chain EQ would be applied in each case.

I think compression in a bass rig works best at the front of a signal chain, so that the compressor "sees" the original dynamics of the unadulterated signal from the bass. This allows one to best set the output of the bass (and leave it there) and then adjust the compressor according to taste. If the compressor is behind one or more effect boxes, then every time you tweak a knob on one of them, the signal being "seen" by the compressor is changed, and the compression changes.

With the SansAmp RBI or RPM the drive or distortion effect does add compression as an essential part of its tube emulation. Having the compressor come after this effect means the compressor "sees' a signal that is already compressed to some degree, and it cannot be used to its fullest and best potential this way, IMO.

But one must realize that a lot of rack compressors and some stomp box compressors do not have a high impedance input (around 1 MOhm or greater) that is needed with a passive bass, such as our common P and J Basses. With these units, it is best to place some sort of a HiZ (high impedance) buffer in front of the compressor.

I'm no engineer. But I do own a Stewart World 2.1, a SansAmp RBI, and a Rane and a dbx rack compressor in my accumulated gear, and I have tried all the combinations possible in chaining these together. This is just my opinion based on my experience.

well_that_s_just_like_your_opinion_.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: PawleeP and Barbaric.Eric
#13
It seems that the ART has balanced inputs only and as such it is designed to be placed after your preamp using the balanced output, not the effects loop. If you aren't happy with the results and want to try compression before your pre you should look into some stomp box compressors out there.

Lot's of great info at Bongomania's Compression FAQ if you haven't seen it already.
 
#14
i have heard that too, the placement of the compressor depends on the type of effects used. i used the MarkBass Compressore in front of my sansamp and it just added to the tube crunch to where i sounded like an SVT on steriods (in a good way). The mark bass is also a tube compressor and from what i heard about as good as you can get from a stompbox compressor. I got away from it cause I don't like stomp boxes and it seems fragile having that tube on the floor getting stomped on. Now with the ART rack unit my inclination is to have it after the sans amp pre amps but I'm going to try both. Some good advice bassists, thanks!
 
#16
Boot Soul said:
But one must realize that a lot of rack compressors and some stomp box compressors do not have a high impedance input (around 1 MOhm or greater) that is needed with a passive bass, such as our common P and J Basses. With these units, it is best to place some sort of a HiZ (high impedance) buffer in front of the compressor.
Click to expand...

The EBS multicomp has 700 khom input. Should i use a buffer? If so..what kind of buffer would you recomend?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back