ShergoldSnickers

[quote name='Simon' post='50618' date='Aug 25 2007, 05:21 PM']I hear ya. But Pro Tools really is that much better than everything else imo. To be honest, I don't think the top studios and the top recording engineers would use it if it wasn't the best.[/quote] Time to do some research methinks. It's just about the only 'pro' recording software I haven't used in any depth on the Mac. This will have to be put right.

As for headphones, Grado make some stunningly revealing ones at relatively sensible money*. I use a pair of SR125s as a final check on instrument character and fine tuning. I'd hesitate to use them solely for mixdown, but I think I could still get some fantastic results. * the most expensive pair are £900+ though Nearer the bottom of the range, the SR80s are about £80. I've heard dozens of headphones and Grados beat the lot. They are an open design, so the sound leakage may be a problem when also using them for monitoring in a quiet recording situation.

[quote name='Simon' post='50515' date='Aug 25 2007, 10:37 AM']Yes. I don't believe you will find a professional studio without it. If there's one piece of audio software to learn, make it Pro Tools imho.[/quote] I can see your point, but the world is littered with software that is 'standard' and really shouldn't be. Microsoft Office, AutoCAD, DreamWeaver, Windows even! These standards are often adopted out of fear of being different, not because they are necessarily any good. Having said that, I've only limited experience of ProTools, so I wouldn't like to cast aspersions at it. I just automatically question anything that is a 'standard'. It can be a revelation to discover something else that isn't a standard and yet does the job far more efficiently. Examples:- Windows -> MacOS DreamWeaver -> Freeway AutoCad -> VectorWorks It would make a nice change to have ProTools as one standard that actually deserved the name. Of course there is a personal element to this, what suits me doesn't always suit others.

[quote name='metalmaniac' post='50319' date='Aug 24 2007, 05:53 PM']I havent got round to getting a USB or whatever input yet.. Ive heard some have latency issues etc..[/quote] Latency shouldn't be a problem with any device that enables you to monitor the input signal before it's digitised. I usually mix some of this in with some of the processed signal, so I get a firm idea of both the timing and the sound. I have a Tascam US-122 (USB) that's more than adequate for feeding Garageband, but when it's replaced I'll go for a FireWire box, something like a Focusrite Saffire. If you've got a fretless bass, try the Garageband 'Tight Acoustic Bass' treatment on it, rolling some of the low bass end off. If I could get that in a pedal... :wub:

On their own, wattage values are almost meaningless. It depends which speakers the amp is driving. It also depends on the resistive load. Are we driving 4 ohms or 8? However, if enough gigs were watched in pubs to see what worked, there will be an average band of power outputs that will give a rough and ready guide though, and I'd say that I'd prefer something between 200 and 300 watts. [b]Very[/b] rough and ready though. Given that reproducing bass frequencies means large movements of cones to move sufficient air about, an amplifier with the clout to do this is a good idea. One that has a beefy power supply with oodles of power on tap is the ideal, but it's not all about raw power alone. Imagine running a domestic tap attached to a large balloon full of water. You aren't going to get much force from the water springing forth from the tap. Now bung that tap on the bottom of the Hoover dam. That's what a bass amp needs, plenty of reserve and headroom. Then there is the question of how efficiently the speakers convert the amp output into sound. This is probably a bit of a neglected area. Most look at the amp first and the speakers second. But, buy some really efficient speakers and you can then afford to look at a less powerful amp. You'll get the same sound power level (SWL) with fewer watts, lighter weight and less cost. So, whilst getting efficient speakers can effectively double the SWL with every 3dB increase in speaker efficiency, the power output stage of a bass amp should still be built to provide quick bursts of extra power when needed. Of course the efficient speaker may not be more efficient in the frequency range where you need it! It's all about getting a compromise that works.

This has made me realise (again) how lucky I am. I have a fantastic mother in law - how lucky is that for starters. The missus and I have a great working relationship. If we accumulate a chunk of our own money, we ask the other if there was anything they were thinking of getting first. We'll mull it over and then decide the priorities. Basic stuff like house repairs, car maintenance and beer always come first. Er... - did I just put beer in there? The less important stuff almost sorts itself out because we talk about it. If I was gigging and earning then tools of the trade would become one of the priorities. I've been on a bit of a roll recently because I've been looking after the missus over the last very difficult year - she's well on the mend now though - and have earned a de-luxe shedful of shiny brownie points. It would work the other way if the positions were reversed. And in your very best old codger voice please - "We've been married for nearly twenty years and have yet to have a stand-up argument." 'Tis true. Alright, alright, which one of you lot whispered "smug git"?

Melodic riff based, with walking bass lines that feature as many weird intervals as I can get away with. Highly jazz influenced. The guitarist I do the music with (music? ) knows my playing inside out and is very good at anticipating where I'm going to go next, just as well, as a lot of it is improvisational. Hah-ha, a guitarist that follows a bass player. Just as it should be. He's the one with all the theory and perfect pitch etc, but I'm getting better at following him. When I want to. Someone once compared me to Eberhard Weber. I wish. Self-assessment? Understated, subtle but could learn quicker. Should practice more. Old git. 50. Been playing on and off since I was 17. Fingers only, but the use of finger nails to pluck and scrape the stings is chucked in sometimes. I sometimes tap the strings, not to sound notes on the fingerboard, but instead of plucking, rather like piano hammers. If you pick the right places you get some lovely overtones creeping in. 4 string Shergold Marathon fretless. It's become part of me.

[quote name='crez5150' post='45959' date='Aug 15 2007, 05:52 PM']its not necessarily how good they are but its about what engineers are used too and can reference the sound from.... its a bit like using an SM58..... by todays standards its a crap sounding mic.... but its still 'the industry standard' so to speak as the FOH engineer knows exactly how its gonna sound.... same with the NS10.... not particularly good studio speakers but most studio's had them as they knew they could get a decent mix for most applications...[/quote] I just can't be doing with this conservative attitude to standards in general. When I see a standard, my first instinct is to challenge it. I'm a habitual 'tinkerer' and learn by taking things apart, so this is a natural instinct on my part. It just annoys me that mediocre stuff becomes a standard. It sets the bar too low. I used to engineer in a smallish studio, and never once used an SM58 for recording. To me it would be like trying to create a masterpiece with Asda decorating brushes and kids powder paints. You'll only get so far. Whether my recordings were any good is debatable (a short negative one probably ), but they would have been even worse if I'd used the standard gear of the time. I tried to trust my own ears and used the clearest, most balanced speakers I could find. None of the usual 'monitors' did it. I guess it's just having the courage of your convictions, but being prepared to question and doubt what you are doing and look at it again.

[quote name='Nate' post='45910' date='Aug 15 2007, 04:33 PM']I have a pair of the Samsons.... They work for me![/quote] If I was left with the Samsons to work with I still wouldn't complain. They were still very impressive, but overall we preferred the Yamahas. Not by a wide margin though.

[quote name='Crazykiwi' post='45614' date='Aug 15 2007, 09:34 AM']I have a pair of the Yamaha's, they're excellent.[/quote] I'll admit to being surprised at how good they were. It's a long time since I looked at nearfield stuff, and when I did previously they all sounded pretty ropey, making it difficult to take them seriously. Everyone used to rave about the Yamaha NS10s for example. Awful. Not so these ones. Kudos to Yamaha. Anyone remember Videotone Minimax speakers? They sounded truly dire but bizarrely still had something pleasant about their general character.

[quote name='Sibob' post='45708' date='Aug 15 2007, 12:13 PM']Aren't the iMacs the completly un-upgradable sealed affairs??? surely a G5 would be a better bet for recording? Our guitarist uses Logic 7.1, tis great from what i've seen! Si[/quote] I think the days of large boxes that require stuffing with extra drives, cards etc are numbered on the consumer front. Want a bigger drive? Hang a FireWire 800 one off the back. When you sell the Mac you can keep the drive for backups. Same with digital audio input/output boxes. Stick to FireWire and keep it when the Mac goes for a better one. The new iMacs are very powerful, much more so than the older G5 powered generation, and will be more than adequate for any home recording setup I could devise. On my iMac, which is a previous G5 type, the internal hard drive and RAM are user upgradeable, but I can't remember the last time I bothered swapping a hard drive out. 2001 possibly. I just hang bigger ones off the back and keep the internal for running the system. A large proportion of computer sales - or Mac ones at any rate - are now in the laptop arena, and no-one seems to bother about getting inside those. I can however see why one of the more traditional Mac towers might be an idea for a big professional studio set-up. A quad or eight core Xeon Mac Pro tower would be very nice. .

A drummer mate of mine had whittled down the choice of nearfield monitors to two models, on a combination of review, recommendation, and auditioning. The Yamaha HS50Ms and the Samson Rubicon R6as. He'd managed to cadge both pairs for a trial and then invited me round as a second pair of ears. [b]First impressions[/b] - The Yamahas. Very detailed, clear, good dynamics, good quality bass, although with any cabinet this size, extension and quantity were a bit lacking. The top end was a tad too much at times, and I reckoned they could get fatiguing to listen to for long periods. The Samsons - easier on the ears overall, but more coloured. The bottom mid area was indistinct compared with the Yamahas, noticeable on piano, upright bass and drums, but the treble was a smooth as silk and very natural. Bass was fairly well extended, but was not as distinct as I would have liked. The mid/bass presentation just wasn't up to the treble driver. Despite the weaknesses of the Samsons, it was felt that they would be clear enough, and that they would be easier on the ears for long periods of listening. [b]Round two - let's tinker a bit[/b]. Both speakers come with the facility to tailor the sound. We knocked some of the treble response off the Yamahas, and this helped a lot. There's a switch on the back for either cutting or adding 2dB. The overall sound gelled more, and cymbals still had all the detail and attack of before. We tried siting the Samsons a bit more carefully. They were initially sitting on top of the Yamahas to raise then to ear level, and the positions reversed when listening to the Yamahas. We decoupled the Samsons by sticking big blobs of blutac under them. This helped to stop some of the cabinet vibration going through the Yamahas and reaching the table they were both sitting on. The table could be felt to be vibrating less after we did this. It helped clear some of the low mid/upper bass muddiness. Ideally both speakers should have been placed on rigid stands. The point of a speaker diaphragm is to move air, not the cabinet. Unless the cabinet is placed on stands that are effectively coupled to the floor, which is in turn 'coupled' (nailed usually, if floorboards) to the rest of the house/studio, you will lose some energy that should be making sound. I'd normally use stands with spikes top and bottom. They dig into the floorboards, and the bottom of the cabinets (not an option in this case!), so that the cabinets are much more rigidly sited. The drivers are now pushing against the mass of your house/studio, and Newtons third law of motion means that the only thing that moves is effectively the driver diaphragm. The cabinets stay put. This usually tightens up bass presentation no end. Must try this on my bass combo some time. So, things were still not clear cut. We loved the treble of the Samsons with its ribbon driver, had tidied up the lower mid/upper bass colouration a bit, but still preferred the bass/mid of the Yamahas. We needed a combination of the two. [b]Conclusion[/b] - After a further battering from music we knew inside out, it was decided that the Yamahas were overall better balanced than the Samsons. The Samsons sounded like the bass and treble drivers were not properly matched, the quality of one showing the other up badly. I'm sure there was something slightly weird going on at the crossover frequency too. A shame as the treble was outstanding. The Yamahas sounded like a coherent unit, with an even quality right through the frequency range. Highly revealing in the bass and mid, and whilst not quite up to the treble standards of the Samsons, were still excellent. The Yammies it is then.

Are you absolutely sure you've hit the buffers with Logic Express? I'm still using GarageBand, and find it more than adequate for my needs - your needs might differ of course - it sounds as though in your case you've gone way past GarageBand. I've tried Logic Express, but found the extra facilities just got in the way of the creative process. The tyranny of choice syndrome left me trying all sorts of things out, but actually playing very little. Only when I've really hit the limitations of GarageBand will I move on. It taught me to concentrate on the things that are important, such as mic placement, properly warming up, learning the parts etc, trying different arrangements, rather than endlessly tinkering with effects, and it's immediacy is very compelling. The difference between Logic Express and Logic Pro would only exacerbate the problem with me. Logic Express is undoubtedly a great application, and I'd be tempted to stick with it unless you know of a compelling reason not to. If there is, then get it. It's easy to fool yourself into thinking the next acquisition will solve everything. Been there - guilty m'lud. I'm now much more in favour of stripping unnecessary things away rather than adding, but that process will not suit everyone, and could be a disaster for some musical genres. Good luck whichever way you go, and let us know how you get on.

Bought an Aphex Punch Factory from him, and the following was all noted: Prompt replies Dead easy to deal with Goods exactly as described To cap it all he chucked in a couple of patch cords with the pedal. I'd offered to pay but he chucked them in for free. A gentleman.

It would now appear to be later, so here's the upshot. Anyone remember the Python sketch with 'tinny' and 'woody' words? Well, my bass now uses only woody words. There was a thin brittle brightness to the DiMarzio that previously occupied the slot, this has been replaced by a hint of lovely 'quackiness' that suits the character of a fretless bass. There's more meat on the bones, but none of the definition has been lost - it's clearer than ever but with bags more character. Highly recommended - once again.

Just taken delivery of an 84 J. Replaces an old DiMarzio. Got it fitted, but I'm having to go out before I can solder it in - I'll now have to wait several hours before I can try it. Torture. If it's anything like the transformation I got when Andy rewound the stock Shergold pup, I'm in for a treat. . Will report back later...

A bass version.... one low note played too hard and you'd have a packing foam explosion to tidy up as the box bursts it seams. Unless you put a further box outside the original for that hi-tech double walled construction. There'd be arguments about which direction for the corrugation sounds best, or which paper mill gives the best tone cardboard.

[quote name='wildman' post='40978' date='Aug 3 2007, 04:28 PM']Luke have you checked out www.garywillis.com. Theres a whole section on set up from the man himself.[/quote] Thanks for the heads up wildman. The set-up regime on the garywillis site is staggeringly well explained. You just can't go wrong following the procedure there. Excellent.

[quote name='Muse_Cubed' post='39518' date='Jul 31 2007, 01:58 PM']Well...I'm looking for one (or possibly two) last effects.[/quote] Same here, except they'll be my first. Aphex BassXciter and Punch Factory. Then there's the second replacement pick-up from Wizard Pickups, after being so impressed with the first one. That'll be ordered tonight. J-type 84 for the bridge position. The first one has such a healthy output that the old white DiMarzio J can't keep up. Then there's a Nemesis 2x10 extension cab for the NC115. After that, the next step would be an EUB. Then a serious look at a 5/6 string fretless. Then we'd possibly be looking at upgrading the amplification. It's like painting the bleedin' Forth Bridge this lark.

[quote name='bw_user_name' post='38632' date='Jul 29 2007, 09:21 PM']I used H||H heads for a good few years, they sounded great. This combo on ebay looks a winner [url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/HH-Electronics-Bass-Amp-Combo-100-Watt-Ltd-Edition_W0QQitemZ300134951289QQihZ020QQcategoryZ58719QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmViewItem"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/HH-Electronics-Bass-...1QQcmdZViewItem[/url][/quote] I used to have one of those, but found I couldn't get any real fundamental bass from it. It was quite 'middy' in character. Check the lifting handles for cracks where they are screwed to the carcass of the cabinet. They can crack badly, and it's not funny if a handle suddenly gives way when you are carrying it. Pretty bulky compared with recent combos, and you won't lift it on your own.

[quote name='dood' post='38400' date='Jul 29 2007, 11:33 AM']In another thread Ped was asking about microphones for miking up his gear. I have heard some really good results from the T-Bone Condenser microphones. Especially for vocals. I think Shure gear has always been artificially higher in price. I don't think it is because they are actually better than everything else either - I guess there's the perception that if something is higher in price it must be. nooo-h'waaaaay![/quote] Agreed. I've never found Shure SM58 or SM57 mics to be anything special. Slightly peaky, coloured sound and indifferent handling of transients. The one thing they do have is the rough handling capability for live work, but I'm sure they aren't alone in this. For studio, and particularly bass work (I've seen it) - pop 'em in storage or flog 'em and get something that properly reflects what you are recording.