Ramirez

Ooh, I think I may be of some use here! As alluded to in the other thread, the choice of microphone itself is of FAR less importance than the microphone placement, performance, the instrument, crucially, and the room acoustics. I remember when I first bought my DB - I had/have been spoiled by working in nice recording studio for years, with a great selection of mics and a wonderfully controlled live room. In that room, I've come to expect that I can put a microphone up and that whatever's in front of it will sound OK... ...but this was far from the case when I set up a couple of nice mics in my living room to have a go at recording the DB. The results were very disappointing - granted it's not a great instrument, and I'm no great player, but the acoustics of my living room were making it almost impossible to get a decent result. Too close to the bass and it horrendously boomy, but slightly further out ir was horribly roomy, and there wasn't much useful in between! When I took it in to the studio it was night and day - pretty much any and all mics gave an acceptable rendering of the DB as it was when placed appropriately. I tend to go a few feet (perhaps a metre) in front of the bass, and then fine tune the position. I rarely use two mics on it, and I'm very happy with the results I'm getting on myself and on other people - the limiting factor is usually the instrument or the playing. Of course, positioning is highly dependent on what else is going on around the room - if it's a live ensemble and the bass is played a bit weak, then closer positioning might be of advantage, or blending with a pickup. Microphone polar patterns are crucial here too - a figure 8's deep side nulls can work wonders for rejection. In terms of accuracy and a full frequency response you're not going to get better than s mall-diaphragm omnidirectional mic. Simply due to their physics they go deeper than anything else, but of course, and omni will also pickup a lot of the room. Omnis also don't suffer from proximity effect, which can also play havoc with the positioning. Having said that, I find that anything that works well on vocals can work nice on double bass - I'm not sure why, but I feel that a voice and DB share a certain something in terms of expression. To that end I've often been using a nice large diaphragm condensor - and old Neumann U87, or more recently the United Studio Technologies Twin48 valve mic that I've just bought for the studio (if it's an overdub, I find that the omni patterns sounds a bit nicer). I also like the AEA R84 on DB, and I also find that the Beyerdynamic M160 ribbon is a great mics that can work well on most things. Other large diaphragm mics we have that have worked well are Austrian Audio 818, Sony C48, AKG 414, and in terms of small diaphragm, I've had very good results with Beyerdynamic MC930, Sennheiser MKH40 and the cheap Line Audio OM1 omnidirectional. Dynamics are also an option - I wouldn't be too upset if all I had to record a DB in a nice room was a Beyerdynamic M88 or M201! However these are just nice things to have - in the same room I'm sure I'd be almost as happy with the results from a £50 mic providing it wasn't broken. I'm sure what you have is capable of giving very good results - before you go spending any more I'd experiment with the room acoustics if at all possible. Even if it's just a matter of hanging some duvets around you and the mic when you're recording. After all, if the room sounds bad, all a better mic will give you is a more faithful rendition of that inherently bad sound!

Absolutely, and for a 'proper' recording I do it with one of the nice mics in the nice recording room. (Though I'd still argue that a DPA is a 'proper mic' ! ) But my day job is a recording engineer/producer - one who happens to dabble in double bass - and so fairly often bands would like to have an idea of what a double bass would do on their tracks, and a pickup just isn't going to give the right impression. 9/10 the guide track would be replaced, but it's nice to have something that has a chance of working if I fluke a great performance! The equivalent of plugging a bass guitar to a DI in the control room and working out a part with the band in the live room, as it were.

The quick recording aspect is about being able to pick up the bass in the control and play along with a band that's in the live room. Something that stays in position relative to the bass, doesn't require placing a mic stand in the middle of a busy control room, and is positioned close enough to the bass that it can handle spill from the studio monitors without too much trouble. In other words, something that requires minimal extra effort on top of my work as a recording engineer, but still gives decent results. Thanks for the comments all - the DPA fits the bill for now, since we already have them.

I've been playing and recording my double bass much more often lately, and would like a mic to accompany the Krivo magnetic pickup I have installed. There are two reasons for this really: 1. The Krivo works well, but doesn't sound particularly like a double bass. It would be nice to have a mic for the quieter gigs. I don't use an amp, and I'm usually always on IEMs when I play. Resistance to feedback isn't paramount, but it would be nice to have something that could be used alongside a quiet drum kit. 2. I work at a studio with a well-stocked microphone cupboard so the recording options are well covered, but sometimes it's useful to do a quick take on the DB in the control room when the band are in the live room. I'd like something quick and easy that sounds good enough to be a 'keeper' under the right circumstances. From what I can see, the main options are: *DPA 4099 - We have a couple of these at the studio and they're very useful. I've used it a few times on the DB and it pretty much does what I need. I don't want to constantly borrow the studio mics though so I'm looking to purchase something myself. It's also useful for other instruments which would give added value to me. *Neumann MCM 114 - Interesting and fairly recent addition to the Neumann line-up. Seems to be competing head-to-head with the DPA. *Remic D5400/D5400LB/D540 - I've heard a lot of good reports about these, but they seem quite hard to find in the UK right now. My plan is to hire the Neumann and a Remic and test them alongside the DPA we have, but would like to hear opinions/other options. Thanks Aled

Thanks for the kind words everyone. For those that have a suitable system, here's a version in 5.1. I don't think Youtube can do 5.1 in browsers, and is limited to the Youtube app on smart TVs etc. I've just checked it and it plays back in surround on the TV Youtube app here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tp0908ZpXo

Viva la difference! I loved Alanis’ set. Yes she has a distinctive voice, but it’s hers and she’s a made a career with it. She can’t change her voice. I can accept it’s a bit of a a marmite voice, but she has really good songs with a lot of unexpected chords, quirks and key changes. It’s clever, well worked stuff, and she delivered it great. I’ll admit it was a massive nostalgia trip for me as well, as I loved the JLP album when I was a young teenager! On an unrelated note, if Glastonbury ‘25 has proved anything to me, it’s that men around my age (ie early middle age) and above are the most intolerant of other people’s tastes in music. The amount of posts slagging off bands and artists I’ve seen on social media is astounding, and it’s almost always men above 35. It seems we really are a breed that like to tell other people what to do, how to do it, what they should like and for what reasons. It’s like we can’t accept that something we don’t like might hold emotional value to someone else. At least with music it’s reasonably benign, but when the same trait is applied elsewhere in life - politics for example - it’s exposed as being quite controlling and sinister. And unfortunately it’s all too common.

I thought the TV sound overall this year was phenomenal. Yes, Chic's bass could have been a tad louder, but it was definitely there and close enough. I'd say it was at a level where you'd get a studio mix back and feel the bass should slightly stronger - ie. quite remarkable for an real time live broadcast! In previous years it has been poor at times, but I thought there was a massive step up this year. It's a remarkably difficult job mixing live music for broadcast in a truck if you're close to the stage - I've done it myself, and the sheer amount of bass that comes from the stage can make proper bass judgement almost impossible. They've found a way this year it seems, and the results, to my ears, consistently ranged from good to superb. Of course, the problems are often compounded by people listening on TV/multimedia systems that are simply not set up properly. Many TVs come with a myriad of sound 'enhancements' turned on by default that can absolutely butcher a good mix, and the same goes for receivers/soundbars etc. A hi-fi might sound fine for music playback, but if the signal being fed to it has already been messed with by the TV then all bets are off! It's certainly not a live feed from the desk - it's all AoIP (Dante etc) nowadays, which makes it much easier to arrange multiple full channel splits to multiple destinations. There was a thread on a Facebook group by one of the broadcast engineers involved with Glastonbury, and he said there was much better collaboration between all concerned this year, as well as a good few technological advancements being trialled. To my ears, it all made a massive and worthwhile difference.

Thanks all! It was a special night for us. That's also the first time we ever played that song live - it's about the time in hospital following the stroke.

I've enjoyed a lot of acts this year - Four Tet, Alanis, Maribou State, Chic, Black Uhuru, Rod Stewart, Prodigy so far,a nd still a good few I want to catch up on. I have to say the broadcast mix and sound quality has been consistency unbelievably good. I've done it myself on a smaller scale and It's a very tough job, especially on the fly, and they've suffered in previous years, but this year has been quite spectacular!

Nearly a year ago my brother, and our singer, suffered a stroke live on stage at a festival. For a while we wondered if we'd ever get to play a gig again. Luckily, that chance came last friday! A filmmaker friend brought his camera along, and I arranged to record the set. We put together someof the footage and mixed a brand new song that we played. It was the hottest day ever, but in my 20 years of being in this band, it's the gig I'm most glad to have been able to do, and I know this video will be something to look back at and cherish as long as I live. Hope you enjoy!

First live performance done last friday! Here's a live track video (although most shots are non-synced and taken from other songs in the set). It's also a good example of the type/size of gig an Ampeg PF20T can handle 😉 It was a particularly poignant gig for us as my brother (the lead singer) had a stroke last year, so for a while we were wondering if we'd ever get to play another show together (the drummer is my other brother)

The Line Audios are indeed very good mics, and hold their own against much more more expensive mics. Be careful if trying the CM4 live though- in truth it’s slightly wider/more open than a true cardioid, and is approaching a hypocardioid pattern. I think the CM4 are closer to true cardioid than the CM3 they replaced though. There’s much more to small-diaphragm mics than ‘adding detail’. A true single diaphragm omni like the Line Audio OM1 will go down to lower frequencies than any other type of microphone, and does not suffer from any proximity effect. An omni pattern created by summing two back to back cardioid capsules like you get in a switchable-pattern large diaphragm mic doesn’t quite offer the same low frequency benefits, but can still sound great. To be honest I find large diaphragm mics to be of limited use apart from vocals- their main benefits are: *lower self-noise (which is rarely a problem with SDCs when close mic’ing anyway) *reduced proximity effect compared to small-diaphragm cardioids (this is due to the use of two diaphragms). This is why they work so well and have become a standard for close-up vocals. *They are less accurate than a small-diaphragm (larger diaphragm covers a larger area- the opposite of ‘pin-point accuracy!), but by the same token they have more character, so they often just sound ‘nice’ Personally I prefer to take the time to find the right position for a single mic rather than use two or three- and if you have a nice room, the ideal position might be a bit further out than you expect! Also keep an ear out for any phase issues if you do use multiple mics.

There shouldn't be noticeable latency as the Apollos are designed to host and run the UAD plugins in real time on the interface itself, just like any other digital effects unit. It can also host them as VSTs in a DAW when used as an interface, which is where latency might come in. But used standalone it should be good.

Old thread I know, but if going this route I wouldn't use anything but the Apollo. It can do all your signal processing, so no need for the Noble or pedals. It has a 2nd input that you can use for a mono monitor mix, and it can feed your signal to FOH as well as feed your IEMs (are the main outputs separate from the HP out?) Neat all in one rig!