EBS_freak

This is all down to choice of mic and mic technique (and gaining properly (and an insensitive mic helps too). A decent headset mic is a good call... but so is an overhead gooseneck with something like a Shure 56. An Audix OM5/6/7 are also a good call as offer very good rejection. The key thing is though, is the lips need to be right up to that grille. Another top tip is to use an optogate to open and close the mic... although that can sound very off-putting through inears due to the sudden change the sound can have when the gate opens. A lot of sound problems associated with drumkits, is largely down to the choice of drumkit. Drummers love big cymbals, big kits... but if you are using IEMs and got a handle on the processing of modern digital desks, your best move for the drummer is to have the smallest, quietest kits and then mic it and let the PA do the work. For example, in my band, the drummer uses a 16" kick. It sounds super tight, goes super deep... but without flab and flop that you normally get with larger drums. Of course, there's other tricks that you can do... like augment the kit with samples - so you may want to look into that also. Cymbals are the biggest issue... so get a drummer to buy darker cymbals. They arent as shrill... and not as loud... but again, through processing, you can get pretty much everything you'd ever need from them. Dont forget that a mix is a combination of the sum of it's parts. So if there is cymbal bleed from open vocal mics... don't go pinning the faders on overheads for example. With bleed, the game is being patient to find the sweet spots with all the active channels in operation. The more you play with it, the more you experiment, the quicker you will get at getting that perfect feed.

You should see the heat that Mackie are getting for their delay in Master Fader 5. It's always the same with software. I don't know why companies bother announcing release dates... as timescales, especially when it comes to software, inevitably slide!

Nobody tempted to do the P2/WL20 hack? I reckon that's the best way of getting a good full range, wireless mono feed!

Sad to hear this. 😕 RIP Gary.

It's a common misconception that rolling on bass is a good idea to make the bass punch through and sound fatter. Most of the stuff in the real lows is going to sound very muddy, very quickly, especially with subs if you start bumping those lower frequencies up. Look around 100Hz and up to get the definition you are looking for - you may find that your FoH will improve substantially by actually hpfing whats under 100Hz... even for bass... especially when running subs. If you think that the big thuddy bass drum you hear through subs is typically around 55-65Hz range, you can see why ploughing on a load of that on your bass is going to end up in a load of indecipherable mess and just rob a load of useful power from your poweramp.

1. Via the DI. Yes. 2. EQ bass cab for onstage monitoring 2b. EQ on XR18 for front of house sound. Send the bass from the head preDI as the tone shaping on the XR18 is more comprehensive than that of the Genz. Keep the monitor volume from your amp setup on stage as low as you can. Roll off the bass... when people add bass, you tend to add indecipherable mush. Add lower mids.

Yes - just tune all the receivers into the same channel and they'll all pick up the same signal. You can run two mono mixes from one transmitter but putting the receivers in mono mode and panning the mix hard l or hard r. You'll hear the same in both ears but only have to fork out for 1 transmitter. All depends upon budget to spend on gear and the amount of free auxes on your desk. If you are running stereo (each stereo mix requires 2 auxes), you'll start burning through monitor mixes pretty quickly... so to any guys reading looking at running lots of stereo in ears, make sure you have double the amount of auxes as band members!

Amazon prime would get it t Amazon prime would get it to you tomorrow.

Be careful with cheap radio - the reproduction of the audio can be really naff.... as the quality of the companders can be very poor. (Compander being the process of compressing the audio so it can be sent via radio - and then uncompressed the other end). This process can make the bass sound thing and the top end really shrill. For trying out where you could get with inears, wired is defo the way to go - and then save up for something like a ew300/psm300 setup if you decide that you absolutely need wireless. Unless you are already wireless on your bass, get obbm to make you up a combo cable for an all in one bass and IEM feed loom.

and it's diddy!

HazBeen pretty much summed it up. Bernie got them through to the UK when he was distributing for EBS. They were never sold to the consumer as such - but Bernie would supply them if people asked or when people came into his shop looking for something new in the EQ department. He tended to put them in the KSd basses that he was also distributing because the stock preamp in those was pretty naff in comparison. In the UK, if you find one in your bass, the chances is that it's come from Bernie... or you've bought one of my old basses 😛 I believe Chris Larkin (RIP) used to put these pres n his basses too. I think he got them direct from EBS, not via the Goodfellow route. They are treble and bass with a pan and volume and a switch for the mid bump/mid scoop Marcus thing. I've had a look at the manual posted above - and yup, that covers it off pretty comprehensively. Talking of Marcus, this pre in a jazz gives you Marcus in spades. It's a very active sounding pre, certainly not subtle! Great sounding pre though - I remember @stingrayPete1977's Squier J bass project bass sounding amazing once it's electronics had been gutted and replaced with one of these EBS pres and a set of original J bass pickups from Bartolini. Just out of interest @Dandelion, what bass is in the picture above? I may know the history of it. Looks a bit Statusy?

Good work! Get everybody on IEMs next!

Pow pow! Pew pew! I fear it's becoming a common occurrence...!

Just chucking in this one too...

Aw man!

Makes for interesting reading! - https://metro.co.uk/2019/06/18/new-breakthrough-pill-could-cure-tinnitus-10006638?ito=social

Anyway, how has this thread got this far without mentioning his signature JB-4?

Just had a look at the stats - thanks to all the people that have checked it out. Basschat seems to have sent a fair few viewers to Youtube! Much appreciated for listening (even in part!) to mine and Steve's ramblings. (Although to be honest, Steve is mostly there for visual entertainment value on this one! :p) More randomness soon when I get round to editing - I've got a fair few theory ones to do - and they take an absolute age!. Also - quite cool to see the top three threads in this area of the forum seem to be on IEMs right now!

There's the magic quad driver customs! Yup - they are super, super important... especially when it comes to bass! As for the haptic monitoring... yeah, working on that! 😛

And let me guess, you feel it out of phase? Or should I say, with a significant delay.

Nick describes one of the best "hacks" (for want of a better word) that you can do with a digital desk. That split on a single desk gives you a monitor world and foh desk in one (obviously you'll need enough channels on the desk to double up on stuff that you'll want to process differently for your inears). It's very rare that what you want to hear in your IEMs is the same as what you'll want foh. Some of the time, we just have to deal with it - eg, just come off the aux with only a master EQ and maybe a compressor over that aux bus. Lets face it, that's still pretty cool. As Nick states however, the ability to put a cab emulation in place, or different EQs per channel for example, is a powerful way of supercharing your IEM mix. Think about this - if you boost the bass for you IEMs, especially in the low end, to give you that big thumpy bass we all like, you are going to be killing people out front - especially if you are running subwoofers. You aren't going to be wanting that bass EQ to the vocal however, which is what you are limited to with just the final EQ over the aux bus output. Again, being able to run different processing in your ears, in terms of reverbs etc, is also really nice. A lot of the time you'll want mono out front, but things like tight stereo delays can really help thicken up that IEM mix. Digital desks are modellers are so good now, its a great way to simplify your setup, give you a better sound out front... and save your ears. I hate gigging without my IEM mix.

Ah cool - so are you doing a FOH/Monitor split? To be honest, unless you are doing anything particularly fancy with your tones, you should give a DI straight into the desk ago. If you have a separate desk, you can manipulate your bass EQ/comp etc for your ears til the cows come home... and then you have a clean DI feed for your FoH engineer.

Just realised I've never answered the OP question - I send everything to the PA and do a separate monitor mix for myself (I actually run a second desk just for IEMs for extra processing independent of FOH -- but that is overkill for most people) where I can set the volume and stereo position for every instrument on the stage. I also have another aux that feeds a haptic bass board that enables me to put in a blend of kick and my bass. (Some people like just bass, I like to feel the kick too). - I find this the most intuitive way of doing things... but what @Higgie describes is also a popular alternative, especially if you haven't got immediate control of your monitor mix - this is "the more me" setup.. however, you will then be running in mono unless you put another submixer in the setup. The only downside of this, is that if you are blending the bass signal with what is coming back from a (digital) mixer, you can introduce phasing issues, as the processing through A/D and D/A conversion will add latency, shifting the signals out of phase. In reality, most people won't even notice this.