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.
Who SHOULD decide how your bass sounds live?
- Thread starter bucephylus
- Start date
If the bass is in the PA for the house, then whoever is running the PA should make the decision, but that goes as far as the engineer's qualifications. If an engineer that works metal gigs is thrust into doing reggae sound, I'm inclined to trust the musicians more. But generally, whoever is in charge of house audio makes the call.
D
I use to do sound in clubs and such. I would run both FOH and monitors. Back then, id set monitors to not feed back and focus on the house mix. What i found interesting on nights that multiple bands would play, was the response from those bands as the night went on.
Half would love the stage mix and half would hate it. The audience heard the house mix, not the band. Usually a friend of the band would tell the band members how it sounded.... that’s totally subjective to that person.
In my lampy days, pro bands were the same, usually the significant other of singer would be the one giving the band feedback if the mix( and lighting).
Again, subjective to that person.
A good sound engineer will reproduce the bands sound.
In clubs and such, they usually get things working then start drinking
Half would love the stage mix and half would hate it. The audience heard the house mix, not the band. Usually a friend of the band would tell the band members how it sounded.... that’s totally subjective to that person.
In my lampy days, pro bands were the same, usually the significant other of singer would be the one giving the band feedback if the mix( and lighting).
Again, subjective to that person.
A good sound engineer will reproduce the bands sound.
In clubs and such, they usually get things working then start drinking
But, but, but, I in no way intended the discussion to go to the broader tribal topic that actually developed, and took some pains in my OP to ask that we NOT go there. So, when many posts, yours included, did go there; then, yes, I became understandably frustrated.
To TRY to summarize, yet again...I always did gigs with backlines until about 4 years ago. There was a soundstage for the musicians, which we all could hear and at least provided some example to the sound engineer as to what was the basis for reinforcement in the FOH. I NEVER had any issues with that arrangement. Like many, I am grateful for the efforts of my sound engineers.
Then, the ampless thing came along. I did my last gig with this:
That was my rig. And, my IEM’s.
That’s fine and has some advantages; but, the sound engineer at the venue, which was new to the band, had nothing to go on to set any kind of sound. He was a good kid, and I’m sure everything sounded fine. But, that’s not an optimal situation for either the sound engineer or us.
So, my original post was hoping to spark discussion about ideas like I later posted in:
Who SHOULD decide how your bass sounds live?
But, it just seems that the majority want a rage tribal takedown rather than an intelligent discussion as to how we might improve things. I do find it frustrating that many posting have seemingly misread my OP and/or ignored my later posts. I’m too old to get involved in that kind of back and forth. In any case, I am far from offended. Too old for that too.
Also again, the two areas where I have noticed issues have been a) younger sound engineers putting the bass entirely in the subwoofers, and b) inexperienced sound engineers of all ages not having the slightest clue how to mix sound, but doing it because their brother is the singer and he bought a Behringer board.
Regarding a): I recognize that music changes with the times. But, shouldn’t we all be respectful of each others’ musical styles? Perfectly fine with me if some death metal or whatever band has the bass entirely in the bins. God Bless them. But, why should I have that approach forced on me, when I’m just playing covers and hoping to allow the audience to recognize the parts?
Regarding b): The proliferation of the digital boards into the club scene is a real thing. For those gigs, we don’t get knowledgeable sound engineers. It is a simple fact.
So, again, I’m NOT dissing the sound engineers. I was simply hoping to provoke some ideas as to how we can create win-win situations using the technology. I guess my hope is that we can discuss those ideas. But, if tribal takedown is the preferred order of the day, I will respectfully bow out. I don’t do that.
Granted, most of my gigs involve no PA, so my experience is mainly as a member of the audience. I've been to performances with great sound. One sound company in my locale handles some very challenging situations, such as an outdoor classical orchestra performance for a few thousand people. A good rule of thumb is, if they own one or more semi trucks, they can probably hire some good audio engineers. 
At smaller venues, the PA is usually the weakest link in the performance. I've been to jazz performances that were over-amplified to the point of being painful for the audience. Granted, I get it that running PA is a hard job. The tech might not have had complete control over what equipment was chosen. There's the acoustics of the room to contend with. And they are often dealing with an already over-amplified band. And crochety bassists.
When I do play a gig with PA support, I just ask the tech for a direct box, and they hand me one on the end of a cable. If not, I've got one in my bag. I tend to play with a generic tone that's pretty foolproof, so I'm easy to please.
At smaller venues, the PA is usually the weakest link in the performance. I've been to jazz performances that were over-amplified to the point of being painful for the audience. Granted, I get it that running PA is a hard job. The tech might not have had complete control over what equipment was chosen. There's the acoustics of the room to contend with. And they are often dealing with an already over-amplified band. And crochety bassists.
When I do play a gig with PA support, I just ask the tech for a direct box, and they hand me one on the end of a cable. If not, I've got one in my bag. I tend to play with a generic tone that's pretty foolproof, so I'm easy to please.
Last edited:
Ok, I've held off on this thread but as a part time FOH engineer I've got an opinion on it:
The FOH engineer's main goal SHOULD be to reproduce the sound of the band while doing as little damage to it as possible as they solve the problems inherent in every venue, PA rig, etc. encountered. Period.
So who SHOULD determine the sound? Ideally the band has an additional member that is the dedicated sound engineer. He/she knows how the band wants to sound, including the individual instruments, and is dedicated to producing the best performance possible. He/she is on the band's side, basically, but also has the necessary technical knowledge to make the performance sound as close to the band's vision as possible given the acoustic constraints and problems encountered in each venue. That's how the "big boys" do it and how they get their performances in the big concert venues.
That's the ideal. If the engineer is provided by the venue, as many/most are, then frequently the ideal is not realized, only because the engineer may lack the training, artistic dedication, etc. to do so. But that's not really the topic as I understand it.
The FOH engineer's main goal SHOULD be to reproduce the sound of the band while doing as little damage to it as possible as they solve the problems inherent in every venue, PA rig, etc. encountered. Period.
So who SHOULD determine the sound? Ideally the band has an additional member that is the dedicated sound engineer. He/she knows how the band wants to sound, including the individual instruments, and is dedicated to producing the best performance possible. He/she is on the band's side, basically, but also has the necessary technical knowledge to make the performance sound as close to the band's vision as possible given the acoustic constraints and problems encountered in each venue. That's how the "big boys" do it and how they get their performances in the big concert venues.
That's the ideal. If the engineer is provided by the venue, as many/most are, then frequently the ideal is not realized, only because the engineer may lack the training, artistic dedication, etc. to do so. But that's not really the topic as I understand it.
OP: perhaps a potential solution (at least until somebody develops the hardware/software solution you're describing, and which I'm far too dumb to conceptualize or discuss intelligently) as far as offering the sound person a starting point in mixing FOH sound would be to try to get in contact with that person prior to the gig (if at all practicable) and send him/her a sound file or two of your band, however brief, and say "Hey, we're amp-less, but generally speaking this is the sound we're going for and would like produced FOH"? I'm assuming this day and age any given sound person should have email/computer/audio access and be able to spend at least a few minutes of their time giving you some consideration. Alternatively, maybe bringing a portable device with those sound files (smart phone, whatever) and asking them to plug in a set of ear phones and give it a listen to get an idea of the FOH sound you'd like your band to present given the amp-less situation could work. I don't think it would be too invasive of the sound person's time or role, but maybe I'm being optimistic.
Thank you for taking the time to try to clarify and explain. I will try to do the same.
None of my comments were meant as "tribal takedown". When I stated that "Sound tech has control, period" I was merely stating the fact...as if I would be stating "Driver has control over where the car is going". IMHO, there was nothing tribal about most of the comments in this thread. Therefore, your frustration is not understandable.
Nice pedalboard, btw.
This has never happened to me.
Shouldn't the covers be recognized by their melody...rather than bass (line/tone)...?
First, this sounds "tribal" as you put it. Second, no technology will save your/our tone from being ruined by incompetent tech. Others have already pointed that out.
I don't see it that way. Some have explained that they don't see issues where you see them. Some have pointed out that the role of the sound tech is to have control over all the instruments in FOH. And some just don't share the general approach that to "improve things" is always equal to "get my sound to FOH" (that would be my view).
Yeah, lets discuss it. IMHO, we already have sufficient technology.
You have a preamp on your board which is IR capable. I don't own SLO but I understand that you can upload any IR to it. Thus, you can apply any IR profile of your choosing to your signal and send it to FOH. Why is this not sufficient? That's what I don't understand...
I really don't think that disagreeing is a rage tribal takedown. I understand a lot of the limitations with live sound and I'm not going to demand a 30 minute soundcheck to tweak my tone and then when the full band is playing, all of those tonal nuance are lost in the mix. I trust the sound engineer to find a balance between the bass tone and the band tone that works.
Absolutely. Disagreement is the basis for constructive exchange.
I’m quite literally trying to steer the conversation in a positive forward looking direction. As I’ve stated, I have no issues with sound techs having ownership of sound when they have a reference to work with. I’m just hoping to get some ideas flowing for how we might make the ampless soundstage better for everyone.
Simple.... Player gets the stage, sound engineer the FOH
What sounds good on stage doesn´t necessarily translate through a PA system. Sometimes its very hard to grasp that the expensive pedal setup has its place in the bass to amp chain, while the bass to mixer chain requires other means. By all means, set your tone from stage and enjoy your sound, but let others enjoy the music too...
Nothing worse than when the bassist kicks in his fuzz and the bass dropping out of the PA. I say, put the bass through a DI and use that! (learned that the hard way as a stagehand)
What sounds good on stage doesn´t necessarily translate through a PA system. Sometimes its very hard to grasp that the expensive pedal setup has its place in the bass to amp chain, while the bass to mixer chain requires other means. By all means, set your tone from stage and enjoy your sound, but let others enjoy the music too...
Nothing worse than when the bassist kicks in his fuzz and the bass dropping out of the PA. I say, put the bass through a DI and use that! (learned that the hard way as a stagehand)
Thanks for your thoughtful response. (I had to a switch out of “Dark” mode to read it, BTW)
First, are you doing Behringer board ampless gigs in your local clubs? Just curious whether or not we are talking from the same page here or not.
Second, as many others have noted in this thread, what happens at the board pretty much can reduce the character of whatever is sent to it to be a non-factor. Indeed, the board rules all. The way I have dealt with this in my own Behringer board gig has been to put the time in comparing my actual rig to what is coming out of the mains, and do my best with crossover points, EQ, compression (generally none), and whatnot to get close. Then save those settings on a flash drive; because inevitably, they get wiped (often inadvertently) but others doing other things on the board. Many of the changes happen because there are multiple fingers in the pie, not all of whom completely understand what they are doing. Yeah, I know about incompetent sound techs. But, sometimes that’s the gig. The flash drive helps. All I’m saying is we could probably do better. Just tossing in the towel isn’t part of my DNA.
The biggest room in the world and all that....
It has worked for me in the past. Professional sound people seem to appreciate things like a setlist with notes.
mid-sized venues in the U.S. have some good people. In Europe even the smaller venues have professional sound & lighting with very friendly folks.
like others have said here, advance with a input list and stage plot will get you ahead because they will know what to expect and already have an idea that this is an act that has their stuff together.
I even have a setlist with lighting cues for venues that have dedicated light techs.
it pays off when you hit the stage and your band stands out from others that night with better sound & lighting.
How about the venue you saw the show at? Does it always sound fabulous? Do you have any idea how loud bass was in the monitors for the rest of the band. In my experience, the problem is frequently not the bass amp, it's how much bass is put in the monitors. This is not a problem with the audio tech, because he/she is just giving the musicians what they ask for.
You can assure me all you want and it won't change my mind. I was both a professional bassist and a professional audio tech so I know exactly how hard it is to deliver a good bass sound to the audience.
As a bass player I set up my rig so my stage sound is as low as possible. The idea is so my amp does not fight with the PA and the PA can do a better job delivering my sound to the audience. My rig only serves as my personal stage monitor when a full PA is provided.
As an audio tech I try to negotiate with the band for a reasonable compromise. But frequently there is so much stage volume that I have absolutely no control over the bass sound in the house. When this happens sometimes the best solution is the push the fader on the channel strip all the way down. In my experience this happens a lot.
I do agree that an audio tech can totally jack up the sound. But I also feel very strongly that audio techs are automatically blamed for lot's of problems that are way outside of their control because the musicians refuse to make reasonable compromises on stage volume. Everyone wants to hear themselves perfectly, and unfortunately in a small space that is simply impossible unless you can rewrite the rules of physics.
I try to go into situations with an open mind. That way there is at least a chance that I can get people to work with me on necessary compromises. If you start off with the assumption that people are going to do the wrong thing, then you are setting up a self-fulfilling prophecy that is very likely to occur. If you consistently have bad experiences, perhaps you should consider your attitude and expectations, and how your behavior contributes to the bad outcome.
Club owners are most concerned about volume IMHO. The impression I get is many bands are louder than the club rep wants them to be. I have often been in bands that are asked to turn down. It's very rare to be asked to turn up.
The overall volume of the mix has a huge impact on how much control the audio tech has over the bass. If the overall SPL of the house mix goes down, the audio tech has less control over how the bass sounds in the house because the stage sound begins to dominate. A lot of bassists assume this is great, but often the sound coming off the stage is awful.
The engineer was a butcher. The loudest thing in the house mix was the hi-hat, to give you some perspective. In my experience, there are people doing their jobs that are world-class, there are also people that should not be involved in professional situations. A hack can make Rocco Prestia and Tower of Power sound awful. That is not easy to do. He did it. No expectation, just truth. Thanks for your insights.
How come the bass is plugged into the DI?
What is the boost pedal for?
Aren't you a bit old for showcases?
If they do it right does it sound like what you hear through your IEM?
Do you get any soundcheck?
The bands I toured with usually had audio techs. Either that or I did it myself. On the occasions where an unfamiliar tech would be mixing our show, we always advanced the event. This allowed us to discuss our setup, equipment, and expectations. During setup I almost always had a few minutes with the audio tech to discuss sound concept and describe the basic tone of my bass and how it should lay in the mix. You can also provide recordings as examples. Of course this will not work if their are several bands on the bill.
As an audio tech I normally prefer the bass player plugs into a clean flat DI. My least preferred option is to take a Post EQ DI off the back of an amp as they tend to be noisy and do not provide a good representation of the sound coming out of the bass players speakers most of the time (despite what a lot of people think). Often the sound is very bright and harsh. If the player relies on his rig for a certain signature sound, I generally prefer to mic the cab.
When the bassist is running ampless I do see the need for a compromise. This where your preamp or modeler comes in. The idea is you need some basic tone control ability at your finger tips so you can dial in a sound in your IEMs or wedge. But you need to understand that this is not a guarantee that the sound will translate well to the house. Also as a player you may prefer and need a brighter sound for monitoring purposes than you would choose for the mix.
My philosophy is your sound should be tailored for where and how it is used. There are two locations, stage and house. There are two ways the sound is used, for monitoring and for the main mix. So optimally you need at least two separate signals that are tailored specifically for location and application.
Running two signals for the bass to allow a custom EQ for the IEMs is not as uncommon as you think. In fact I have run Yamaha LS9s that duplicated all inputs across the A and B layers. In other words channels 1-32 where duplicated on channels 33-64. The A layer was used for FOH and the B layer was used for IEM mixes.
This sort of setup is a bit confusing and requires a lot of extra time and effort. It's really only suitable if the band and audio tech work together regularly. It takes an extended time to dial in, so the musicians need to learn that they can't be messing with levels at their end. Once the system is dialed in, setup and sound check tend to go very quickly.
If resources are available, an audio tech could take a unprocessed DI on one channel that is used for the house mix. You might even work with the audio tech to apply some sort of speaker emulation. A second channel could be taken from a Pre/DI that is used for monitor mixes. The Pre/DI would have tone controls so the bass player can dial in a sound in the IEMs. Then the audio tech would then be free to use either or both channels for the house mix.
Listen, I’m a bit old for dirt, let alone showcases. LOL. But, like Duke Ellington said when they asked him what he was going to do in retirement, he replied “Retire? To what?”How come the bass is plugged into the DI?
What is the boost pedal for?
Aren't you a bit old for showcases?
If they do it right does it sound like what you hear through your IEM?
Do you get any soundcheck?
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.
I use the Spark boost pedal to set a second higher volume for bass breaks. So, I make sure at sound check to test the boosted level so as to not overdrive the board. I use the boost for the breaks in Hey Ya, Brown Eyed Girl, etc.
This recent COVID gig was with the venue’s mains, but our board. I didn’t get a chance to walk out front. At the time AZ was anti mask, and I took no chances. But, in general the IEM’s sound far more pristine than any mains possible. Almost like listening to a studio feed. In fact, it’s almost like being physically on stage, but in a studio isolation booth at the same time. There are all sorts of issues + and - with that way of gigging; but, that’s a whole other (controversial) thread. I think I’ve opened Pandora’s box wide enough with this one. LOL.
