The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Whats your Plugin Bass Chain??
Old 1st February 2007
  #1
Gear Addict
 

Whats your Plugin Bass Chain??

Hey whats everybody's plugin bass chain? What I'm doing now is using a URS N series eq to sculpt the lows. Then I compress it with the Waves Ren Compressor to about 10 db of gain reduction. From what I see people doing, you don't want dynamics in the bass guitar for rock. Does anyone use something like an L1 or L2 on bass? Or any of the bass enhancers?
Junk
Old 1st February 2007
  #2
Gear Addict
 

Ik multimedia Ampeg SVX...
Sometimes URS A and URS 1970.
Old 1st February 2007
  #3
Lives for gear
 
kudzu's Avatar
 

Ik multimedia Ampeg SVX... ITS SOOOOO GOOD .... B15 is the bomb
Old 1st February 2007
  #4
Gear Nut
 
20100db's Avatar
 

The L1 & L2 destroy the Lo freq....
Old 1st February 2007
  #5
Lives for gear
 
taturana's Avatar
i love the waves ssl e channel on bass... and the urs fulltec... i also track a lot with the bass pod xt on crossover mode, so i record three tracks of bass... direct , basspod crossover lo,basspod crossover hi
Old 1st February 2007
  #6
Here for the gear
 

Generally, I like to get it sounding right coming in. But if I do need to tweak it afterward, I usually reach for the Waves SSL channel or the Waves Vintage plugs.
Old 1st February 2007
  #7
Gear Addict
 
Ravian's Avatar
 

Cool

Fulltec and the urs N. sonaliksis comp's urs 1995.
but the comp before the eq other wise you loose the mid's and th highs when you compress the bass.heh
Old 1st February 2007
  #8
Lives for gear
 
T_R_S's Avatar
Ampeg SVX is THE MUST HAVE bass plug-in!thumbsup
Old 1st February 2007
  #9
Gear Head
 
thisisntglen's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravian View Post
Fulltec and the urs N. sonaliksis comp's urs 1995.
but the comp before the eq other wise you loose the mid's and th highs when you compress the bass.heh
Agreed, always comp > EQ on bass tracks. Another great option if you are low on gear or space (or both) is Guitar Rig 2, also a very good Ampeg simulation. I generally like to DI in as well for more flexibility.

Plugin wise, if it doesn't sound good going in (which it should) I, too, head on over to Waves-SSL land.
Old 1st February 2007
  #10
Gear Addict
 

Ampeg SVX doth rule. It's true what they say.

As far as compression goes... I've been having trouble NOT using the Massey CT4 these days.

Using a high quality DI will make life a lot easier.

Having used both GR2 and SVX, i have to say that the Ampeg SVX is WAY better than the GR2 Ampeg sim. No contest. But that isn't to say GR2 sounds bad! It sounds good, and does the job if you don't have SVX. I used GR2 for this application before I tried SVX... Using SVX really seems to make the bass easier to mix, as opposed to GR2, or DI-only. It makes me smile.

No turning back now!
Old 1st February 2007
  #11
Lives for gear
 

I always stick an eq before the compressor and slam 60Hz. Then I wack that to make the sub low HUMMM, it makes that ****ing bass massive. Then I'll stick another eq after the comp and tame little bells if the kick isn't poking, but the bass can hit 50Hz and 150Hz and the kick and hit everything in between and the two can live pretty happily once you apply the mix compressor.

example
http://www.yellowmatterrecords.com/s...heMasterMS.wav
Old 1st February 2007
  #12
Lives for gear
 
XHipHop's Avatar
I always liked blockfish on bass. I miss having it on my intelmac.
Old 1st February 2007
  #13
Gear Addict
 
Ravian's Avatar
 

Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bang View Post
I always stick an eq before the compressor and slam 60Hz. Then I wack that to make the sub low HUMMM, it makes that ****ing bass massive. Then I'll stick another eq after the comp and tame little bells if the kick isn't poking, but the bass can hit 50Hz and 150Hz and the kick and hit everything in between and the two can live pretty happily once you apply the mix compressor.

example
http://www.yellowmatterrecords.com/s...heMasterMS.wav
how do you maintain your mids and highs on the bass ?
because you boost 60hz pre comp.
so 60 hz is the dominant freq. and the comp looses the freq. on both sides of 60hz
when you hit the bass hard.
there is then almost notting below 60hz and above.
Old 1st February 2007
  #14
Lives for gear
 

who said it loses it? My comp sure doesn't. It all depends on the source bass. Sometimes it has a lot of bite on the upper mids already and the compressor will bring that out as well. There are no rules to this game, only sounds.
Old 1st February 2007
  #15
Gear Head
 
thisisntglen's Avatar
 

What Ravian is referring to is how compressors act. If a portion of the audio signal is much hotter than any other region, that will determine the overall amount of compression and level, i.e. the surrounding frequencies will disappear to an extent. It's not a rule, per se, but we are still tied to the way gear operates. It should be remembered, as well, that each compressor reacts entirely differently to incoming signal, so one person with one comp. may have far better luck with pre-eq'ing than another.
Old 1st February 2007
  #16
500 series nutjob
 
pan60's Avatar
 

a G&L
a ampeg B-15
a re-20
then if i want serious low end thump send it out to a A-designs EM-PE-Q!!!!!!!!!!
i love this eq.
Old 2nd February 2007
  #17
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thisisntglen View Post
What Ravian is referring to is how compressors act. If a portion of the audio signal is much hotter than any other region, that will determine the overall amount of compression and level, i.e. the surrounding frequencies will disappear to an extent. It's not a rule, per se, but we are still tied to the way gear operates. It should be remembered, as well, that each compressor reacts entirely differently to incoming signal, so one person with one comp. may have far better luck with pre-eq'ing than another.

I'm pretty keen on the logistics of compression and again, you are forgeting about the source. If a bass track already has a spike at 3khz, which many a bass players playing SVTs have, then that will get carried out along with your 50Hz boost. If you need more midrange, you can spike that a bit and let the compressor carry that out as well. But to get the lows really full, I'd suggest doing what I said earlier, spike some sub and whack it.
Old 2nd February 2007
  #18
Lives for gear
 
JonCraig's Avatar
 

i usually track bass w/ 2 tracks, 1 clean DI, the other blown to hell with a sansamp. usually the player is compressing on his end, so i only do it on mine if i need more. same with eq--only if i need it. when i do compress, it's usually renncomp, or renn axe. when i do eq, it's usually waves q10 or renneq. i've never had to use one of those harmonic plugs (maxxbass, etc.) on a session player, but have on "local band's bass player" type people.

as for eq before or after comp, in general i put eq before the comp, unless i'm doing something drastic, then i'll ususally try it both ways.

--jon
Old 2nd February 2007
  #19
Gear Head
 
thisisntglen's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bang View Post
I'm pretty keen on the logistics of compression and again, you are forgeting about the source. If a bass track already has a spike at 3khz, which many a bass players playing SVTs have, then that will get carried out along with your 50Hz boost. If you need more midrange, you can spike that a bit and let the compressor carry that out as well. But to get the lows really full, I'd suggest doing what I said earlier, spike some sub and whack it.
Sorry man I didn't mean to come off as condescending.

The source is very important, and does affect the compression. However, by pre-eq'ing, you are essentially "altering" the source. The compressor sees what you have eq'ed in as part of the signal. The other thing that I wonder about with your method is dynamics. I suppose if you are recording kicking rock bass...I guess, as personal preference, I prefer to compress then EQ, to let the compressor impart it's natural tone, and if the signal needs to be slammed, hit it (or another compressor) again. I think this gives you the most control and, as your goal should always be, you want your sound coming in to be as good as possible sans processing.
Old 2nd February 2007
  #20
Gear Addict
 
Ravian's Avatar
 

Cool

i want 2 add 2 the post of thisisntglen.
how are you controling the freq. because if you boost 62hz you are boosting the note B1.so every time the bass play's B1 it jumps out of the pocket.
just asking.
(i know it depends on the source)
Old 2nd February 2007
  #21
Lives for gear
 
Sirocco's Avatar
 

i will never tell my secrets
Old 2nd February 2007
  #22
Lives for gear
 
jsvalmont's Avatar
I've got to agree with many of those who posted here about the Ampeg SVX plug-in. I haven't gotten a chance to use it extensively, but what I have used of it sounded amazing!

It was something that was desperately needed in the plugin world that has finally come to fruition. I just can't believe it took so long.
Old 2nd February 2007
  #23
Lives for gear
 

In reality, its pretty far fetched to assume that eqing a bass at the B1 of 60Hz will make it fall out of the pocket each time a B is played. You would have to have a very ringing narrow bell for this.

Altering the source is sometimes what is needed. To get a really whopping sub low on your record, eqing after the compression will not yield as big a result as doing the opposite. If your midrange fails, spike that before the comp. Basically the comp will take whatever you eq, and sail away with it. We are in agreement on that one. I just think that this fact is a GOOD thing and use it to my advantage. I think the answer lies in the fact that 90% of the stuff I do is aggressive music. Here are a few samples:

http://www.yellowmatterrecords.com/s...yMasterCUT.mp3

http://www.yellowmatterrecords.com/s...heMasterMS.mp3

http://www.yellowmatterrecords.com/s...osiaNewMix.wav
Old 2nd February 2007
  #24
Jax
Lives for gear
 

Massey Tapehead. Massey THC if grit is needed. Massey vt3 for midrange growl. RenAxe to even it out. 7 Band Digi EQ3 to deal with all the above. heh

Not in that order.
Old 2nd February 2007
  #25
Lives for gear
 
Absolute's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thisisntglen View Post
The source is very important, and does affect the compression. However, by pre-eq'ing, you are essentially "altering" the source. The compressor sees what you have eq'ed in as part of the signal. .


I dont think your looking at this correctly. There is absolutely no difference to the compression if your original signal has a big hump at 60 or if you add a 60 that wasnt there. Its the same meal the compressor will eat.

The compressor doesnt "know" whether something has a 60hz hump because it was recorded that way--or if it was added by an eq. If my recorded marshall has a hump at 1k should I call that pre-eq'd at 1K?

What Steve is talking about is altering the signal before its compressed. You could just as easily have recorded it that way--but with the eq you have a certain kind of control of that band that you might not have, in the way you want at least, on the amp.
Old 2nd February 2007
  #26
Lives for gear
 
luctellier's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bang View Post
I'm pretty keen on the logistics of compression and again, you are forgeting about the source. If a bass track already has a spike at 3khz, which many a bass players playing SVTs have, then that will get carried out along with your 50Hz boost. If you need more midrange, you can spike that a bit and let the compressor carry that out as well. But to get the lows really full, I'd suggest doing what I said earlier, spike some sub and whack it.
Steve, I use that trick also and it works for me...
Old 2nd February 2007
  #27
Gear Head
 
thisisntglen's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Absolute View Post
I dont think your looking at this correctly. There is absolutely no difference to the compression if your original signal has a big hump at 60 or if you add a 60 that wasnt there. Its the same meal the compressor will eat.

The compressor doesnt "know" whether something has a 60hz hump because it was recorded that way--or if it was added by an eq. If my recorded marshall has a hump at 1k should I call that pre-eq'd at 1K?

What Steve is talking about is altering the signal before its compressed. You could just as easily have recorded it that way--but with the eq you have a certain kind of control of that band that you might not have, in the way you want at least, on the amp.
That's what I'm saying, you are altering the source signal that the compressor sees. The thing of it is, let's say that there is a huge boost in, say, 150 Hz and the rest of the signal (for our purposes) is entirely flat. The compressor, upon being fed that signal, will obviously be compressing more of that frequency area than the other portions of the signal. So, your 150 will sound enormous, but some of the area around it will be affected and lessened below the flat areas, which will stay essentially unchanged, except for being louder.

This is not a "bad" technique. Just not one that I prefer. I choose my compressors based on their tone and characteristics, and usually try to get the cleanest signal into it first, so that I can alter an already "evened" signal. If I want more balls, I simply compress again, my inbound compression is never extremely heavy, except on a distorted bass channel or something.

That being said, the last metal album I worked on, I used this technique. Because it was huge. And the bass, at least in their music, needed to be...well, BASS. And it gets tucked away with the kick to make that wall, and suddenly hammers are flying. But, as a rule, I don't because it seems to me that there is more control involved alternate ways, as well as my affinity for multiple pieces of gear in a chain.
Old 2nd February 2007
  #28
Gear Head
 
thisisntglen's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bang View Post
In reality, its pretty far fetched to assume that eqing a bass at the B1 of 60Hz will make it fall out of the pocket each time a B is played. You would have to have a very ringing narrow bell for this.


http://www.yellowmatterrecords.com/s...yMasterCUT.mp3

http://www.yellowmatterrecords.com/s...heMasterMS.mp3

http://www.yellowmatterrecords.com/s...osiaNewMix.wav
I know this thread is about bass but...damn, these are some great rock drums. Your cymbal imaging is fantastic. Mics?
Old 2nd February 2007
  #29
Gear Addict
 
Ravian's Avatar
 

Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by Absolute View Post
I dont think your looking at this correctly. There is absolutely no difference to the compression if your original signal has a big hump at 60 or if you add a 60 that wasnt there. Its the same meal the compressor will eat.

The compressor doesnt "know" whether something has a 60hz hump because it was recorded that way--or if it was added by an eq. If my recorded marshall has a hump at 1k should I call that pre-eq'd at 1K?

What Steve is talking about is altering the signal before its compressed. You could just as easily have recorded it that way--but with the eq you have a certain kind of control of that band that you might not have, in the way you want at least, on the amp.
a compressor emphasizes where there is more energie.
mix a track put a limiter over the mixbus.
than lift the bass a couple db's
you may getway with only 4,5 db's of limiting until it sounds bad.
because the bass is dominating.
Than if you have the mix without the bass. you can limit the mix mutch more.
bass has more energie than the high end of the spectrum.

the recorded marshall ,if it has a hump at 1k .yes thas a form of eqing.
mic the marshall but with the mic 45 degrees of the speaker.
its a more melow sound. eqing with the mic.


like with when you are micing a acoustic gitaar.
you have 2 look were the best mic placement is.
where the sound sound it best.
so you are eqing.
micing the sound hole =more bass
micing the neck =more high string sound

but from where i'm standing you fix the instuments sound so the best sounds for that mix go to tape/daw. might it be eq, mic placement etc. etc.
Old 2nd February 2007
  #30
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thisisntglen View Post
I know this thread is about bass but...damn, these are some great rock drums. Your cymbal imaging is fantastic. Mics?
MXL. Best mics at any price.. Try the V6 is great for overheads and for room mics. I should admit that I am endorsed by them but for good reasons, because I use their mics every day. Once things slow down here I'm going to post a big comparison thread so people can really hear these great mics. Back to topic.....
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump