Honestly, it’s not hard to record good bass tracks; the tools — a good DI box, good mic preamps (to plug the DI into), and good compressors are readily available. But getting great bass tracks requires a little more work from the engineer.
The role of the DI is two-fold; it shifts the high-impedance signal from the bass to a low-impedance signal that can travel farther without loss, and it converts that signal from unbalanced (hot and ground) to balanced (hot, neutral, and ground, with the neutral carrying the same signal as the hot, but 180 degrees out of phase)
1. Use A Better DI
DI boxes can be active or passive — the simplest passive DIs are little more than an impedance-matching transformer with a balanced output, with the biggest difference between inexpensive passive DIs and expensive ones being the quality of the transformer used. And lest you think that active DIs are always a better choice, remember that all of the classic Motown bass tracks were recorded with a passive DI. Of course, the UTC A-10 transformers used for the DIs at Motown were wonderful. In any case, active DIs typically use circuitry to handle either (or both) signal conversion tasks, though the more expensive will have balancing transformers at the output, since transformers can provide better electrical isolation than balancing circuits. But active DIs can do more — they can have tone-shaping circuitry and include amplification. So one way to improve the sound of the bass track is to add an amplifier circuit, and companies have run with this idea. In fact a number of the current DIs have enough gain that there’s no need to use a microphone preamp; the DI output is line level and can be plugged directly into your DAW converters.
A big step in upgrading your bass sound may be to use one of these active DIs. A Class A, solid-state DI, such as Avalon’s U5, can make a huge difference in the recorded track — and for those who prefer the sound of tubes, A Design’s REDDI or Radial’s Firefly may be just the ticket. If you want to have more control over the sound, you could always check out Ampeg’s SCR-DI, which sounds like a classic Ampeg amplifier, down to the tone controls.
2. Record the Amp
Some folks prefer the sound of a bass played through an amp — not only when the track needs to rock, but for all styles of music. Crank the amp for distortion or dial in a warm, clean sound. You can place the mic away from the speaker for more of a roomy sound or up against the grille cloth for more clarity. Dynamic mics, condenser mics, even ribbon microphones will work great on a bass amp; experiment with what you have to see what works best in your situation.
In the studio, it’s most common to see classic amps, such as Ampeg’s B15, but don’t let a lack of tubes stop you from setting up a bass amp. While the amp’s circuitry plays a role in the sound of the recorded track, the speaker and microphone are a large part of the equation as well.
3. Combine the Amp and DI Signals
That’s right — the Direct vs. Miked Amp question is not an either/or choice; using both signals is quite common. If you have a clean DI sound and a distorted amped sound, you can easily blend the two to find the perfect sound for the track. If the amplified sound is clean, you can still blend the two to suit your needs as the two signals will sound quite different.
One caveat: be sure, when combining two (or more) tracks, that the phase relationship between them is correct. The easy way to do this is to zoom in (within your workstation) to see the waveforms. If both tracks show the waveform going up when the note begins (and that the two waveforms are more or less aligned with each other) you won’t end up with phase cancellation when both tracks are turned up. If one track goes up and the other goes down at the same point in time, you’ll have issues. There are two fixes for this — the first, should you notice the phase problem before cutting the track — is to reverse the phase of one of the signals coming into the DAW. This can generally be accomplished by reversing the phase on the mic preamp or (if the DI has a phase-reverse switch) on the DI itself. Otherwise, it’s a relatively simple task to select the phase-reversed track and invert it in your DAW.
4. Parallel Processing
Sure, compressors are generally used to control the dynamic range of a track — but why not experiment and see what parallel compression does to the bass? Here’s how it works: Duplicate the bass track; one of these tracks can remain uncompressed. That will be the primary bass sound in the mix. But on the other track, add a compressor that will absolutely squash the track; fast attack, medium release, a low threshold so that you’ll be getting lots of gain reduction, and compression ratio greater than 10:1 (remember that the only difference between compressing and limiting is that ratio; less than 10:1, it’s compression, while ratios greater than 10:1 are limiting). You’ll probably need to use a lot of gain makeup to compensate for the gain reduction. Finally tuck the squashed track up under the uncompressed track. The combination of the two tracks will maintain the punch and definition while sounding bigger and fuller.
If you already have two bass tracks because you have both a DI track and an amp track, experiment with parallel squashing the amp track. Then experiment with parallel squashing the direct track. The resulting sounds will be different, so figure out which of the two approaches best suits the song.
5. How About Doubling?
There was a time in the late 1950s and early 1960s when “bass” meant an upright bass. Producers weren’t too sure about those new-fangled “electric” basses, and neither were the guys who ran the musicians’ union. Leo Fender’s products were so prevalent at the time that album credits (and the union) referred to any electric bass as “Fender Bass,” and there would often be both upright bass and Fender Bass on the records, playing the same part. As time went on, the session musicians in Nashville found a variant of that sound that suited the music they played; the upright bass part was doubled on a 6-string bass that was tuned an octave lower than a guitar. Nashville musicians referred to it as a “tic-tac bass.” It was generally recorded with the low end rolled completely off of the amp so that only the “tic” of the notes was audible. If you’re wondering what ancient recording history has to do with getting a great bass track, it’s that the concept of two instruments playing the bass part can still be very cool. It’s context and song specific, of course, but something to keep in mind. When it works, it’ll work great. When it doesn’t work, you’ll know right away.
When it seems like it might be a good idea to make certain sections of the song bigger, think about doubling the bass part with another bass, in a different octave. You can go an octave lower (if the original part allows it) or an octave higher. If lower, the new part will lay better if it’s darker and less pronounced than the original track (think of the second track as “sub-bass”). If higher, think about making the double brighter, with less low end — more like a guitar part, though if you’re playing it on a bass, the timbre of the note will be different enough from the guitar’s to act as “ear candy.”
Know The Techniques, Play The Odds
A few of these ideas work all the time, some will work most of the time, most will work some of the time, and the last almost never works — but on those rare occasions when it does, it’s perfect!
Reply With Quote
![[url=https://www.facebook.com/kellysgutiars]](image.php?s=2226940ad4c9953417b8007321ef46cd&u=1285&type=sigpic&dateline=1444110346)
Originally Posted by robin
