Who SHOULD decide how your bass sounds live?

[Wasnex]

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.

I totally agree, but how is the audio tech to know exactly how an unfamiliar band is supposed to sound? So it may not be that the tech lacks training, artistic dedication, etc; rather the tech may simply lack the proper context to understand the band's sound.

Here's a thought experiment. If you were to record a band then allow every member of the band to create a mix, do you think they would all sound the same? I suspect there would be a lot of disagreement.

Ask a bunch of drunks in a bar what they think and they will all tell you something different. Let's keep that in mind when bands get bent out of shape because their buddies, spouses, or dates tell them the mix sucked.

Also sound is generally not uniform in a club. It might sound great in one location and crappy somewhere else. So maybe all the drunks are right.

AFAIK "the big boys" generally bring in their own techs.

 

[bucephylus]

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.

Amen. This is exactly why the singer in the one band bought the board and forced the whole band to live with it. Also why I expect the ampless thing to proliferate into the clubbing circuit. Also partly why I brought the thread up.

As I’ve stated earlier, I’ve had zero issues with sound engineers at any of the big stages using traditional backlines. I’m finding the ampless setup at the clubbing level to have a bunch of practical issues that beg for solutions.

 

[thabassmon]

I think the player should decide how the bass sounds, but I think the soundperson does.

When it's a smaller gig you have more control, which is what I prefer.

 

[bucephylus]

I do think his critique of "bedroom tone" is a decent point though. The only people who use bedroom tone are those that are brand new to music or have never been out of the bedroom let alone played in a group. Heck a smiley face EQ-shape (big smile-shaped EQ) sounds good in a bedroom at low levels, but nowhere else and especially not at gig levels. I think the rest of your posts make sense but that "bedroom tone" does come across as demeaning and referring to someone who hasn't a clue what sounds good in a group. And I'm sure you've run across folks like that too.

Personally, I have a wireless and during the sound check I like to walk around the room to see how the balance comes across at the dance floor, the start and back of the tables, and on the sides. Then I make adjustments or suggest adjustments as needed. Usually the adjustments are just volume balance. My sound is pretty straightforward though. I'm not using any effects and run a very flat EQ with just a little boost at either 250Hz (using my amp) or 500Hz (using my WTDI). So my signal chain is pretty easy to deal with.

I prefer the sound of my cab mic'd and at the music festivals where I've performed they always seem to do that. Occasionally one will mic it and take a DI feed too. When I see a sound team do that, I usually smile because it almost always sounds great.

Many thanks for your post. I’ve been participating on TB for nearly two decades now; and referring to a player having “bedroom tone” has long been dog whistle for implying a lack of gig experience.

 

[Wasnex]

Amen. This is exactly why the singer in the one band bought the board and forced the whole band to live with it. Also why I expect the ampless thing to proliferate into the clubbing circuit. Also partly why I brought the thread up.

As I’ve stated earlier, I’ve had zero issues with sound engineers at any of the big stages using traditional backlines. I’m finding the ampless setup at the clubbing level to have a bunch of practical issues that beg for solutions.

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.

 

[bucephylus]

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.

Thanks and +1.

Big sigh about the IEM’s. Mine sound stellar. Seductively so. Zero technical deficiency. My problem with them is that when each player is living in their own little studio isolation universe on stage, I find the IEM’s just tend to a) cause players to pay less attention to band dynamics, and b) be somewhat less interactive. But, let’s please not get off on that topic. it’s a big and complicated discussion, which merits it’s own thread.

 

[Wasnex]

Many thanks for your post. I’ve been participating on TB for nearly two decades now; and referring to a player having “bedroom tone” has long been dog whistle for implying a lack of gig experience.

I think we all use bedroom tone, but people who lack experience assume it will work on the bandstand.

It's only a dog whistle if you make it one. Then we have to work really hard to talk about a very basic idea.

The idea of bedroom tone relates pretty well to some of the problems associated with IEM use that we have been discussing. Unless effects are added to create the perception of an acoustic space, IEM mixes are very dry, so bedroom tone has a much better chance of working and producing pleasing results.

The important point is the tone you like in the IEMs may not work well for the house mix in a venue that has acoustic problems. The idea that you can dial in a sound without any reference to the acoustic environment that the sound will be used has little to no efficacy in my opinion. You can get an amp to sound a certain way up close, but that sound may not translate well in the distance when poor acoustics are taken into account. A lot of people gig with this approach and it works fine for them, but let's keep in mind the audio tech is free to tailor their sound a bit for the room.

Let's keep in mind that different types of music sound best in different types of acoustic environments. For example organ music and smaller string ensembles may sound great in a hall with lot's of long reverb. Usually these types of space don't work well with amplified pop groups.

 

[Downunderwonder]

There are bands that mix themselves from the IEM stage. It's a bit of a nuclear option but needs must?

Or send keys and bass together. Just be sure keys aren't stomping on bass.

 

[Wasnex]

I find the IEM’s just tend to a) cause players to pay less attention to band dynamics, and b) be somewhat less interactive.

Some people feel playing through a PA does this as well. Unfortunately it seems many musicians need to be reminded to interact and play with dynamics, otherwise they tend to withdraw into their own little worlds.

Anyway it seems a large amount of my posts are not what you are looking for, so have a nice day and good luck.

 

[bucephylus]

Some people feel playing through a PA does this as well. Unfortunately it seems many musicians need to be reminded to interact and play with dynamics, otherwise they tend to withdraw into their own little worlds.

Anyway it seems a large amount of my posts are not what you are looking for, so have a nice day and good luck.

I’m just looking for constructive, respectful exchange; which you have always provided. I very much appreciate your input, even if we disagree from time to time. I certainly never intended to criticize any of your input, and hope that hasn’t happened.

 

[two fingers]

Amen. This is exactly why the singer in the one band bought the board and forced the whole band to live with it. Also why I expect the ampless thing to proliferate into the clubbing circuit. Also partly why I brought the thread up.

As I’ve stated earlier, I’ve had zero issues with sound engineers at any of the big stages using traditional backlines. I’m finding the ampless setup at the clubbing level to have a bunch of practical issues that beg for solutions.

I'm still confused as to why there are problems specific to going ampless.

The "problem" (more like a "challenge") is two different physics equations.

Traditionally, the two physics equations were stage sound and sound for the whole room (heretofore referred to as "FOH" meaning Front of House).

These days the two physics equations are IEMs and FOH.

But, honestly, it's not that different of a challenge. Bass players rarely understand that there even IS a challenge.

The kind of signal, and the kind if tone, needed to make the tiny drivers your In Ears sound amazing in a fraction of a cubic inch of space are very different from the kind of signal/tone that it takes to cover massive cubic footage using huge drivers And tons of power. The physics were ever-so-slightly more similar when it was stage rigs filling stages, but not as much as you might think.

PA speakers are tuned differently from both bass amp speakers and IEMs. They serve different purposes.

So, no, we do NOT need a "solution" that insures exactly what you are hearing in your ears is what it sounds like out front. What you're hearing in your ears won't work out front.

The flat DI is not a great solution. I admit that. It's a copout in many cases. But that copout came from years of experience dealing with bass player who don't want to budge from "their sound".

And "their sound" didn't work any better or worse when it was amps rather than IEMs. It's no better or worse now. It's exactly the same challenge. ONE SIGNAL that works equally as well for monitors (of ANY kind) as it does for the FOH isn't impossible. But it's improbable. And it takes give and take from both the bass player and the sound guy.

I can send my post EQ signal to the board every time. Wanna know how I manage to do that with no pushback from sound guys? I start playing at soundcheck. While I'm playing I say out loud "Hey bud. Lemme know if you need more or less of anything."

Works every time. I get my colored tone from my amps/pedals. He gets his EQ (to some extent). Everybody is happy. It's very rare that a sound guy will want something drastically different from what I'm sending him.

One more point. All if us bar band musicians are somewhat dinosaurs. Times have passed us by. LISTENING habits and preferences have changes. Unless you are playing to a crowd of people wearing sensible shoes and asking for senior discounts on beer, people want to FEEL bass. (I hate it too. And I don't mix that way....which is why I don't mix as much as I used to.) So, you're also competing with what the AUDIENCE wants. It sucks. But it is what it is.

In short, you're not looking for one solution to one problem. You're looking for one solution to half a dozen problems thousands before you have grappled with. Good luck with that.

 

[bucephylus]

I'm still confused as to why there are problems specific to going ampless.

The "problem" (more like a "challenge") is two different physics equations.

Traditionally, the two physics equations were stage sound and sound for the whole room (heretofore referred to as "FOH" meaning Front of House).

These days the two physics equations are IEMs and FOH.

But, honestly, it's not that different of a challenge. Bass players rarely understand that there even IS a challenge.

The kind of signal, and the kind if tone, needed to make the tiny drivers your In Ears sound amazing in a fraction of a cubic inch of space are very different from the kind of signal/tone that it takes to cover massive cubic footage using huge drivers And tons of power. The physics were ever-so-slightly more similar when it was stage rigs filling stages, but not as much as you might think.

PA speakers are tuned differently from both bass amp speakers and IEMs. They serve different purposes.

So, no, we do NOT need a "solution" that insures exactly what you are hearing in your ears is what it sounds like out front. What you're hearing in your ears won't work out front.

The flat DI is not a great solution. I admit that. It's a copout in many cases. But that copout came from years of experience dealing with bass player who don't want to budge from "their sound".

And "their sound" didn't work any better or worse when it was amps rather than IEMs. It's no better or worse now. It's exactly the same challenge. ONE SIGNAL that works equally as well for monitors (of ANY kind) as it does for the FOH isn't impossible. But it's improbable. And it takes give and take from both the bass player and the sound guy.

I can send my post EQ signal to the board every time. Wanna know how I manage to do that with no pushback from sound guys? I start playing at soundcheck. While I'm playing I say out loud "Hey bud. Lemme know if you need more or less of anything."

Works every time. I get my colored tone from my amps/pedals. He gets his EQ (to some extent). Everybody is happy. It's very rare that a sound guy will want something drastically different from what I'm sending him.

One more point. All if us bar band musicians are somewhat dinosaurs. Times have passed us by. LISTENING habits and preferences have changes. Unless you are playing to a crowd of people wearing sensible shoes and asking for senior discounts on beer, people want to FEEL bass. (I hate it too. And I don't mix that way....which is why I don't mix as much as I used to.) So, you're also competing with what the AUDIENCE wants. It sucks. But it is what it is.

In short, you're not looking for one solution to one problem. You're looking for one solution to half a dozen problems thousands before you have grappled with. Good luck with that.

Thanks. That’s a really great post, and raises a few clear issues about the general situation.

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.

FF to ampless, where my rig is a preamp/DI, and the sound engineer is starting from scratch. Experienced sound engineers, such as yourself, won’t struggle with that. I get it. Inexperienced sound engineers, and by that I mean often entirely untrained sound engineers mainly in name only, are just completely lost; and require substantially more back and forth to get things straightened out. And, then there are the situations in the middle. So, having some kind of approximate starting points readily accessible doesn’t seem like such a bad idea to me. I am curious why you find that idea either irrelevant or objectionable?

Regarding the trend towards putting the bass entirely in the subs: I’ve now heard some fairly top bill acts where that has happened. I heard a Trombone Shorty concert a year and a half ago or so, where that kind of soundstage was used. It blew my mind, because that’s basically high energy R&B music, in which, the notes actually matter. Couldn’t hear anything in the rhythm section except the kick drum on the 1 and 3; which is a stone cold groove killer in R&B music. I literally walked out halfway through.

And, I have had some of our lowly “sound engineers” try the same stunt with our board; which I can head off. Still I recognize there is a trend there; but, that doesn’t mean it is one size fits all. A previous post described a TOP concert that was mixed the same way such that Rocco’s lines were inaudible. If younger audiences want to turn the bass instrument into an earthquake machine, that’s their prerogative. But, that doesn’t mean I have to subjected to that treatment.

My view is that our Blues/R&B based genres came out of regular club gigs, where the instruments were amplified and the vocals went through a PA. The sounds and tonal characteristics are based on those decades of art. Obviously when you go to a bigger venue, you have to do things differently. But, my preference is to honor the traditions while going forward. Others are certainly welcome to their own interpretations. It’s art.

I did also recently attended (don’t laugh, I was a guest) a Frankie Valli concert in a large venue. They did have a Fender backline, but the FOH sounded like what I expect a club act to sound like. So, it can be done. As I’m sure you know.

Anyhow, I’m pretty receptive to new musical forms; but, I suppose I’m showing my age in that playing earthquake effects through subs is not what I signed up for. Some other cat can have those gigs.

 

[thumbknuckle]

The kind of signal, and the kind if tone, needed to make the tiny drivers your In Ears sound amazing in a fraction of a cubic inch of space are very different from the kind of signal/tone that it takes to cover massive cubic footage using huge drivers And tons of power. The physics were ever-so-slightly more similar when it was stage rigs filling stages, but not as much as you might think.

This gets said a lot around here and I don't buy it.

I can grab a copy of Powerage and it sounds like a really good, balanced P-Bass/SVT kind of sound that works great in the context of the ensemble. It sounds really good on quality headphones, it sounds really good through my KRK V8/V12 system in my project studio. It sounds really good through my small Presonus ULT12 / EV subs rig. It sounds really good through my EVF1152 tops on my JTR subs. It sounds really good through my big VQNET system.

Same with a Shellac record, or a James Brown record, or a Chic record, or whatever recording of a 'good' sounding bass you want.

If the PA is properly configured and up to the task, and the sound you are providing (not the sound you might think you are providing, the actual signal going down the XLR to the console) is good it will sound, at least to a first approximation, as good in the PA as it does in your ears.

 

[two fingers]

This gets said a lot around here and I don't buy it.

I can grab a copy of Powerage and it sounds like a really good, balanced P-Bass/SVT kind of sound that works great in the context of the ensemble. It sounds really good on quality headphones, it sounds really good through my KRK V8/V12 system in my project studio. It sounds really good through my small Presonus ULT12 / EV subs rig. It sounds really good through my EVF1152 tops on my JTR subs. It sounds really good through my big VQNET system.

Same with a Shellac record, or a James Brown record, or a Chic record, or whatever recording of a 'good' sounding bass you want.

If the PA is properly configured and up to the task, and the sound you are providing (not the sound you might think you are providing, the actual signal going down the XLR to the console) is good it will sound, at least to a first approximation, as good in the PA as it does in your ears.

I'm not sure comparing a mixed and mastered recording to a live band is apples to apples.

 

[Downunderwonder]

If the PA is properly configured

that's the problem. When they configure the PA for megathump music it sounds wimpy with 'real' music.

My jazz band had a festival gig. Way more PA than we needed indoors. At sound check I can hardly hear myself for the piano and kickdrum whomping away. The MD had them turn the subs off.

 

[Downunderwonder]

I'm not sure comparing a mixed and mastered recording to a live band is apples to apples.

So what? The hyped low end scooped out to the max bass tone is not what we want and not what the audience is expecting to hear. If a recording is a candied apple on a stick the live band is the apple but these young punk soundguys serve up candyfloss.

 

[two fingers]

So what? The hyped low end scooped out to the max bass tone is not what we want and not what the audience is expecting to hear. If a recording is a candied apple on a stick the live band is the apple but these young punk soundguys serve up candyfloss.

I feel like you're trying to tell me something. But, for the life of me, I can't figure out what it is.

 

[Downunderwonder]

I feel like you're trying to tell me something. But, for the life of me, I can't figure out what it is.

 

[Zbysek]

Here's a thought experiment. If you were to record a band then allow every member of the band to create a mix, do you think they would all sound the same? I suspect there would be a lot of disagreement.

Ask a bunch of drunks in a bar what they think and they will all tell you something different. Let's keep that in mind when bands get bent out of shape because their buddies, spouses, or dates tell them the mix sucked.

Also sound is generally not uniform in a club. It might sound great in one location and crappy somewhere else. So maybe all the drunks are right.

AFAIK "the big boys" generally bring in their own techs.

Amen!

 

[Zbysek]

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.

I m doing all sorts of gigs. Two of my bands have digital boards-one is Soundcraft, one is Behringer.

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.

Agreed. It doesn't mean that we should not care about what we send to the board, IMO. Changes at the board made by the tech may ruin both what you feed to the board through the XLR and what you upload to the board as a profile via flash drive (or by any other means).

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.

This is interesting. Though, I still feel that creating/choosing your preferred IR and applying it to the signal which you send to the board is much easier...and the probability that your sound will (will not) be "ruined" (changed) by the tech at the board is almost the same...unless you have the power to ban the tech to touch your channel...which you usually don't have...and you probably shouldn't have. IMHO.​