Who SHOULD decide how your bass sounds live?

[Zbysek]

The cabling is just a bit not straightforward. I rigged the SLO at the end of the signal chain and then took that Out to the JDI for the board send. Of course, the SLO has an XLR Send as well; but I was just being careful to protect it via the JDI. Hope that makes sense. I know it looks slightly non-intuitive.

Please note that the way you have it cabled, you don't send the impulse responses from SLO to the board. The IRs are applied only to XLR out and Phones out...not to the main Output-which you are using.

I guess you have known it. I just want to point out that you already posses technology which might help you achieve your goal...but you are not using it.

 

[Zbysek]

One thing that I have thought about mentioning but never did. You can not judge how you sound in the house from the stage. Keep in mind that low frequencies are omni-directional so you will hear a lot of sub-bass coming back from the subwoofer. Higher frequencies tend to shoot straight out instead of wrapping around the cab like lows. So if you hear the mids and highs, it will be after they have bounced off the back wall and come back at the stage. Due the distance the sound sound must travel, there will be a time delay and SPL decreases 6dB with each doubling of distance, so the balance between sub-bass and the higher frequencies will be off.

Yes!

I think this is the reason why some players might assume that their bass signal is sent to subs only. Thank you for pointing that out. I wanted to do the same several times..but never took the time to do it.

 

[Zbysek]

First, my $0.019 opinion about what sets IEM gigs apart from backlined gigs in terms of the sound engineers is that when we had backlines, the sound folks could quickly hear what was going on on stage, and then do their best to translate what needed or didn’t need to be reinforced to make the FOH synergistic. Most of the time it worked pretty seamlessly. As you’ve correctly pointed out, there is a fair bit of knowledge required, and what goes out the FOH isn’t what the cats on stage are doing. No complaints there.

This is a valid point. IMO, using ampless systems requires a little more "homework" done
before the gig.

FF to ampless, where my rig is a preamp/DI, and the sound engineer is starting from scratch.

He doesn't need to start from scratch, IMHO. You can send the tech the band's recording the day before gig. You can send him signal with IR of your choosing. You can talk to the sound tech if there is a time before the gig.​

Regarding the trend towards putting the bass entirely in the subs: .

Honestly, I doubt that any sound tech would put the bass to subs ONLY. IMHO, chances are that what you experience is the effect of highs/mids being directional versus bass frequencies being omnidirectional...as pointed out elloquently by Wasnex in his post No. 165.

However, I understand that you are bothered by the amount of low frequencies applied to your sound. There is a simple cure to it: you can use high pass filter. This way, some players have been fighting young tech's sound preferencies since pedal high pass filters became available.

This is one of the most common (and cheapest) high pass filters:

https://www.broughtonaudio.com/product-page/always-on-high-pass-filter

Good luck!​

 

[Zbysek]

The cabling is just a bit not straightforward. I rigged the SLO at the end of the signal chain and then took that Out to the JDI for the board send. Of course, the SLO has an XLR Send as well; but I was just being careful to protect it via the JDI. Hope that makes sense. I know it looks slightly non-intuitive.

Is the EQ setting (all knobs at noon) on the picture of your SLO your preferred setting? If yes, you are boosting lows and highs, cutting mids-see posts Nos. 1405, 1407 and 1409 in the following thread:

Shift Line - Olympic MkIII Tube Bass Preamp

 

[jamro217]

In a perfect world (not the one we currently reside in), the best bass tones you have should be able to be to be reproduced in a live setting. Everything from the clanky old 4001 to the beefy EB-3 would replicate its unique personality to an audience. We know that never happens. Be thankful if you get a halfway decent balance between an AM radio and Swamp Creature. Just not getting stepped on in the mix is okay. Maybe I set the bar too high (Careful, don't trip over it.), but after decades of less than stellar results it's easier to concentrate on being a good entertainer and pleasing the crowd (thereby giving them their money's worth, like any other good service provider). If the venue is small enough and the volume wars are at an armistice you can get a pretty handle on it, but generally speaking: the lower the register, the worse the tone. EQ is your friend, and a frowning graph is a happy one.

 

[Steadfast]

So my mega church restarted last night. They used to have a fender 100T and a Hartke 4x10 mic’d. It was ditched and they went direct. To my surprise when I listened to the replay on YouTube the bass was loud and clear. So the sound man did a good job. Tone was appropriate.

 

[bucephylus]

Is the EQ setting (all knobs at noon) on the picture of your SLO your preferred setting? If yes, you are boosting lows and highs, cutting mids-see posts Nos. 1405, 1407 and 1409 in the following thread:

Shift Line - Olympic MkIII Tube Bass Preamp

Thanks for your comments. But, I think we are now getting slightly off topic and further into tonal prefs. Yes, I’m sure you will tell me that: no, the physics of good house mixing demand the mids. And, I recognize that reflects current P Bass thought about the bass in current mixes.

First, to your question: no, the knob positions shown are not “my” sound. I move them around, depending on what kind of tone I am intending to project. Yes, I realize that the SLO is pretty much the Fender Showman stack, and pretty similar to my Alembic F1-X.

I guess it may be appropriate, if we are going to get into personal prefs to have some kind of references. Here is a large venue show with a mix that I admire very much. OK, it’s 26 years old. That shouldn’t take away from what was going on. You’ve got two guitars, bass and drums. Pretty standard. I suppose Mr. Rzab is using a somewhat “smiley face” tone setting, which is the abhorrent “bedroom tone” of the moment; yet, somehow, it all seems to work out. None of the musicians are burying any of the others. That’s a pretty solid FOH mix for my prefs. Then again, I admit that I’m old.



Hope you enjoy the vid, even if it’s not your thing. My main point is that the lines between physics of FOH mixing and tonal preferences can easily get pretty blurred. The latter change with the times, the former are absolutes. I think we need to be careful to keep those aspects separate.

 

[Zbysek]

Hope you enjoy the vid, even if it’s not your thing.

I love it!

Thanks for your comments. But, I think we are now getting slightly off topic and further into tonal prefs.

I was just thinking about the issue with subs you speak of...so I wanted to make sure that you are aware of the specifics of the EQ knobs on SLO...

abhorrent “bedroom tone”

I have to admit I have to use online translator to understand some of the words you use..."abhorrent" was one of them. I am learning every day..

My main point is that the lines between physics of FOH mixing and tonal preferences can easily get pretty blurred. The latter change with the times, the former are absolutes. I think we need to be careful to keep those aspects separate.

I am not sure I understand the main point.​

 

[two fingers]

I think you are heading in the right direction with your little fly rig . Hopefully you get to work with some audio tech who have time and interest for a short conversation, so you can explain you sound concept. If you work with the same person regularly you might also provide and talk over some recordings, but make sure the recordings actually represent something consistent. A lot of times people provide examples of what they like and each example is significantly different from the other, so it's hard to understand exactly what they are trying to communicate.

Ultimately I think you should try to communicate, but in the end you have to just go with the flow unless you have the power necessary to call the shots. So don't stress over it too much.

If you are super concerned about what you hear in your IEMs, build some sort of personal monitor rig that gives you more control over you personal mix. A rolls PM351 may do the job, or you may need to get a small mixer and a mic splitter like a Radial JS3 if you sing. The mic splitter does the same thing for your mic as a DI does for you bass. The idea is you signals goes to 2 locations: 1. FOH, 2. your small mixer.

With a small mixer, a DI, and a mic splitter, you can take a stereo IEM feed from the main mixing console, and you have local control over your signals (bass and vocal).

As you probably know, some of the digital consoles can be setup so you can control you IEM mix wirelessly with phone or iPad.

One thing that I have thought about mentioning but never did. You can not judge how you sound in the house from the stage. Keep in mind that low frequencies are omni-directional so you will hear a lot of sub-bass coming back from the subwoofer. Higher frequencies tend to shoot straight out instead of wrapping around the cab like lows. So if you hear the mids and highs, it will be after they have bounced off the back wall and come back at the stage. Due the distance the sound sound must travel, there will be a time delay and SPL decreases 6dB with each doubling of distance, so the balance between sub-bass and the higher frequencies will be off.

Last paragraph is an excellent point.

 

[bucephylus]

I love it!

I was just thinking about the issue with subs you speak of...so I wanted to make sure that you are aware of the specifics of the EQ knobs on SLO...



I have to admit I have to use online translator to understand some of the words you use..."abhorrent" was one of them. I am learning every day..



I am not sure I understand the main point.​

Glad you enjoyed the vid!

My point was generally that current posts from experienced sound engineers here on TB often state that “smiley face” EQ doesn’t work well for the bass. So, that kind of EQ has become associated with players who only play in their bedrooms. But, as you can hear in the vid I referenced, that kind of tone can definitely work in a live mix; but, it mainly depends on what the musicians are playing, and how the sound engineers decide to reinforce what the musicians are doing.

More modern mainstream shows, like One Republic etc etc, which I also like BTW, have MUCH denser mixes; and thus sound engineers have decided that boosting mids on the bass is essential. Which is true for that particular kind of mix. The tone settings for the bass are relative to the particular kind of mix that is being projected; which was the other part of my “point.” Thus, the way the bass should be set and projected are primarily relative to the style of the music, and secondarily to the physics of the venue.

A sound engineer could have decided in the Buddy Guy performance to shove the bass mainly into the subs, amplify the kick drum up to the level of the vocals, and try to make it “modern” (just a thought experiment); but, that would have ruined that particular performance. Or at least made it less faithful to the musicians’ intent.

So, what constitutes good sound is relative to the particular music, and for FOH projection needs to be reinforced, depending on the characteristics of the venue. At least, that’s how I see things.

BTW, your language skills are outstanding.

 

[Willie5String]

You are a solo artist-you
You are in a band-BL, you, sound engineer
You are a hired gun-BL, sound engineer

Lighten up Francis...lol

 

[Zbysek]

Glad you enjoyed the vid!

My point was generally that current posts from experienced sound engineers here on TB often state that “smiley face” EQ doesn’t work well for the bass. So, that kind of EQ has become associated with players who only play in their bedrooms. But, as you can hear in the vid I referenced, that kind of tone can definitely work in a live mix; but, it mainly depends on what the musicians are playing, and how the sound engineers decide to reinforce what the musicians are doing.

More modern mainstream shows, like One Republic etc etc, which I also like BTW, have MUCH denser mixes; and thus sound engineers have decided that boosting mids on the bass is essential. Which is true for that particular kind of mix. The tone settings for the bass are relative to the particular kind of mix that is being projected; which was the other part of my “point.” Thus, the way the bass should be set and projected are primarily relative to the style of the music, and secondarily to the physics of the venue.

A sound engineer could have decided in the Buddy Guy performance to shove the bass mainly into the subs, amplify the kick drum up to the level of the vocals, and try to make it “modern” (just a thought experiment); but, that would have ruined that particular performance. Or at least made it less faithful to the musicians’ intent.

So, what constitutes good sound is relative to the particular music, and for FOH projection needs to be reinforced, depending on the characteristics of the venue. At least, that’s how I see things.

BTW, your language skills are outstanding.

I completely agree. I can sign any of your (general) statements.

What confuses me is the relationship between the issues you speak of, on one side, and your preferences, on the other side.

You described an issue that sound tech puts your bass into subs only. My natural reaction to such an issue would be to cut lows and boost mids...

But you seem to be advocating quite the opposite: smiley face (boosting lows, cutting mids). I am lost, honestly.

 

[bucephylus]

I completely agree. I can sign any of your (general) statements.

What confuses me is the relationship between the issues you speak of, on one side, and your preferences, on the other side.

You described an issue that sound tech puts your bass into subs only. My natural reaction to such an issue would be to cut lows and boost mids...

But you seem to be advocating quite the opposite: smiley face (boosting lows, cutting mids). I am lost, honestly.

This may seem confusing; but, my only preference is to be able to use whatever tone I feel serves the music best. From a musical perspective. In other words, if I want more cutting tone, like Mr Rzab is using, then that should be as valid an option as if I were going for a Larry Taylor P Bass tone; in which case, yes I pump the upper mids. The so-called smiley face thing is actually made much more effective by pumping some lower mids to make the tone carry. In any case, I don’t use just one one tone; so, I don’t have any one specific “my prefs.” I want access to a wide variety, so I can fit to the tune and / or gig.

As far as sound engineers putting the bass in the subs on my gigs, that has only happened a couple of times. The first time it happened, I was unaware, being on the IEM’s, until reviewing a house recording, after which I took corrective action. But, I have also, as previously posted, heard top bill acts get the same treatment. In general, it shouldn’t happen without the musicians being part of the decision; but, it does.

When the bass does get sent entirely to the subs, no amount of tone shaping can save it; because the only content coming out of FOH is below whatever the crossover setting is, usually 60 Hz to 90Hz. That doesn’t leave the bass player with anything to work with. At least, IME.

Hope that makes sense.

 

[fokof]

Strange OP question......

The soundman's job is to work with the sources (whatever they are) and the equipment/acoustics.
The bass player , the arranger , the producer , the composer , maybe the label would have something to say about a bass sound but not the soundman.

This is assuming you have the same bass sound Live as you would have on studio.

 

[bucephylus]

Strange OP question......

The soundman's job is to work with the sources (whatever they are) and the equipment/acoustics.
The bass player , the arranger , the producer , the composer , maybe the label would have something to say about a bass sound but not the soundman.

This is assuming you have the same bass sound Live as you would have on studio.

Yes, agreed. Was there a question?

 

[fokof]

Yes, agreed. Was there a question?

"Who SHOULD decide how your bass sounds live?"

is the title of the thread , the question mark makes me think it's a question

 

[bucephylus]

"Who SHOULD decide how your bass sounds live?"

is the title of the thread , the question mark makes me think it's a question

Thanks for the clarification. I thought you were indicating that you had a question about the OP. You just think I’m nuts. No problem.

 

[juggahnaught]

First, before the sound engineering folks jump in and tell me that the sound engineer has to deal with the whole mix and room acoustics etc etc, I already get all that. I’ve been gigging for 50 years now in all types of ensembles and venues; and believe me, I get it that the sound engineer has a lot of important concerns going on. This post / thread is NOT denigrating either that job or the folks who do it.

OTOH, as a practical matter, there is often insufficient time in various gigs to have the one on one time required for a mutual tonal product between the sound engineer and the individual musicians. So, irrespective of whatever bass signal is being sent to the board, what comes out of FOH is often the product of what the sound engineer thinks the bass should sound like. It just happens.

And while it is certainly true that there are venue / mix issues that factor in, it is equally true that there are individual tonal aspects that become convoluted. The worst kinds of cases for me as a bass player happen when the sound engineer thinks the bass should be completely sent to the subs. And believe me, it has happened to me. There are other aspects like compression etc, which may or may not be imposed based on any actual listening.

So, is it just me, or is there something missing from where the technology is going? Should the sound engineer have total decision in how the bass instrument should sound? I mean, if so, I guess all we really need is any old bass and a DI, and hope for the best. Or is there a middle ground, where we are just missing something that would simplify the communication of the instrument prefs to the sound engineer? I’d like to think that is a possibility. Because literally a lot of my ampless gigs are in the chuck it and chance it category.

Hey, man. I read some of your posts in this thread - I didn't go through the whole thing, so it's possible that I'm repeating what someone has already said.

I get where you're coming from, but I think we already have this technology.

I use an amp modeler. I dial in my ideal sound on a FRFR speaker (or something close enough, my QSC K12.2) and that serves as the bass into the amp with effects; more importantly, it also emulates a miced cab. That part of the signal is under my control as the bassist, and it's my responsibility to make sure that it sounds good and it's also my responsilibity to make sure that it works well with the band's mix. (By this, I mean that in a general sense I can make sure that I'm not stepping on anyone's frequency range with my presets, and that the band sounds decent together if I record into a DAW with the other members. Good arrangements also help.)

On the FOH side - you're advocating that they have some type of impulse response to simplify bass setup. While I don't think something like that is necessary (as I think that amp modeling should be handled by the instrumentalist and I don't think that room impulse responses would really be necessary), some bands already do something similar to what you're talking about; they will save some type of mixer project file with mix presets and give that to a sound engineer. It can serve as the starting point that you're talking about. This is common with the Behringer X32 and some other mixer types.

It's my personal thought that the technology exists. I think it's the job of the instrumentalist to shape tone, and the job of the FOH to EQ that tone if necessary and provide a good room mix. With my amp modeler, it's not complicated to try to get a decent mix just from the tone and amp settings alone, along with some EQ to taste. I also think that these days, if you're just using a DI with no tone shaping, it shouldn't be the job of the FOH to try to control how your instrument sounds. Sure, they will try to give you a decent mix, and often a DI'ed bass can sound good, but I think we have better tech these days on both sides that can simplify the task for everyone involved. (When I gig, I tell the sound person that I have an amp modeler, that I only need a single channel XLR, and that if they need anything from me, they can ask. It's simple on me, and it's simple on them, and I try to ensure that if they ran my signal dry and unprocessed through their PA that it would still sound decent in the band mix - ideally, it should sound like an isolated album track.)

So to your postulation about where the tech is going....I think we're already there. Instrumentalists have amp modelers to determine their sound. FOH has digital mixers and bands can provide an X32 project file to give the FOH engineer a starting point for a general mix in terms of instrument levels and presence. I'm just personally not convinced that another intermediate step between these two is going to solve any issue of communication between an instrumentalist and a sound engineer. All of that said....I do think that if you're just going with a basic DI, yes, you are at the mercy of a FOH engineer because to a certain extent they have to do your work for you.

I don't think there's a technology shortcut here. There's a lot that we can do that we're already doing, but in the end it comes down to human communication between two entities, and that's something that no amount of technology will solve unless it gets rid of one of the entities in the equation.

Hope this made sense and answered your question.

 

[Zbysek]

Hey, man. I read some of your posts in this thread - I didn't go through the whole thing, so it's possible that I'm repeating what someone has already said.

I get where you're coming from, but I think we already have this technology.

I use an amp modeler. I dial in my ideal sound on a FRFR speaker (or something close enough, my QSC K12.2) and that serves as the bass into the amp with effects; more importantly, it also emulates a miced cab. That part of the signal is under my control as the bassist, and it's my responsibility to make sure that it sounds good and it's also my responsilibity to make sure that it works well with the band's mix. (By this, I mean that in a general sense I can make sure that I'm not stepping on anyone's frequency range with my presets, and that the band sounds decent together if I record into a DAW with the other members. Good arrangements also help.)

On the FOH side - you're advocating that they have some type of impulse response to simplify bass setup. While I don't think something like that is necessary (as I think that amp modeling should be handled by the instrumentalist and I don't think that room impulse responses would really be necessary), some bands already do something similar to what you're talking about; they will save some type of mixer project file with mix presets and give that to a sound engineer. It can serve as the starting point that you're talking about. This is common with the Behringer X32 and some other mixer types.

It's my personal thought that the technology exists. I think it's the job of the instrumentalist to shape tone, and the job of the FOH to EQ that tone if necessary and provide a good room mix. With my amp modeler, it's not complicated to try to get a decent mix just from the tone and amp settings alone, along with some EQ to taste. I also think that these days, if you're just using a DI with no tone shaping, it shouldn't be the job of the FOH to try to control how your instrument sounds. Sure, they will try to give you a decent mix, and often a DI'ed bass can sound good, but I think we have better tech these days on both sides that can simplify the task for everyone involved. (When I gig, I tell the sound person that I have an amp modeler, that I only need a single channel XLR, and that if they need anything from me, they can ask. It's simple on me, and it's simple on them, and I try to ensure that if they ran my signal dry and unprocessed through their PA that it would still sound decent in the band mix - ideally, it should sound like an isolated album track.)

So to your postulation about where the tech is going....I think we're already there. Instrumentalists have amp modelers to determine their sound. FOH has digital mixers and bands can provide an X32 project file to give the FOH engineer a starting point for a general mix in terms of instrument levels and presence. I'm just personally not convinced that another intermediate step between these two is going to solve any issue of communication between an instrumentalist and a sound engineer. All of that said....I do think that if you're just going with a basic DI, yes, you are at the mercy of a FOH engineer because to a certain extent they have to do your work for you.

I don't think there's a technology shortcut here. There's a lot that we can do that we're already doing, but in the end it comes down to human communication between two entities, and that's something that no amount of technology will solve unless it gets rid of one of the entities in the equation.

Hope this made sense and answered your question.

+1

 

[Zbysek]

This may seem confusing; but, my only preference is to be able to use whatever tone I feel serves the music best. From a musical perspective. In other words, if I want more cutting tone, like Mr Rzab is using, then that should be as valid an option as if I were going for a Larry Taylor P Bass tone; in which case, yes I pump the upper mids. The so-called smiley face thing is actually made much more effective by pumping some lower mids to make the tone carry. In any case, I don’t use just one one tone; so, I don’t have any one specific “my prefs.” I want access to a wide variety, so I can fit to the tune and / or gig.

As far as sound engineers putting the bass in the subs on my gigs, that has only happened a couple of times. The first time it happened, I was unaware, being on the IEM’s, until reviewing a house recording, after which I took corrective action. But, I have also, as previously posted, heard top bill acts get the same treatment. In general, it shouldn’t happen without the musicians being part of the decision; but, it does.

When the bass does get sent entirely to the subs, no amount of tone shaping can save it; because the only content coming out of FOH is below whatever the crossover setting is, usually 60 Hz to 90Hz. That doesn’t leave the bass player with anything to work with. At least, IME.

Hope that makes sense.

I get what you are saying...

My experience after 20+ years of gigging taught me not to make significant EQ changes during a gig. When I tried to make those changes, it rarely worked well...unless we had a dedicated sound guy travelling with us who knew the repertoir and who was present at the rehearsal where all those sound profiles were tested and finalised. Still, We made sure to check all the sound profiles at the soundcheck before every gig.

Nowadays, I usually use one EQ setting for entire gig. I might change pickup, hand position, switch on a pedal or two, but I usually don’t change the EQ. It pays off, IME.

YMMV