![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
I played last Saturday night in a club and was the 3rd gig I used my old 1970s AKG Mic wrapped in foam in the bridge legs. Would one of these new thingys you guys are talking about be better in any way or are they just smaller? I am asking because I am a bit of an old schooler and have not tried anything new other than the Shadow Underwood copy which I also like. I use that usually but in a small club or recording with an expensive English or Italian Bass that the Bridge doesn't want to be altered I have just used the Mic where volume wasn't an issue.
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
To Bob B.'s:
Those instructions are why I had not previously tried to go beyond 12:00 on the master. In fact I can't really explain why I finally decided to push it and see what happened, just a sudden impulse I guess. The notch is definitely channel specific so it is applied to the pre-amp gain. The phase reversal function is what it is doing that is possibly the most important. I might call Rick Jones and see if he can explain the behavior. Anyway I'm kind of happy to discover that I can push it up a bit more. Responding to Ken: If we are getting better results from smaller mics, it is probably more because we are using them with AI amps. The notch filter and phase reversal features are critical feedback reduction measures that make a real difference. The only thing that is better about a smaller mic is that it can be mounted on the bass closer the wood, very close in fact. This gives the mic a stronger input and the large area of the bass in close proximity helps sheild the mic. Other than that, there is no reason I can think of that a smaller mic should or does work better. If you can get the big one right up on the bass, I would think it would be very similar with an AI amp. It still feeds back before the piezo!! ![]() |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
One difference with the AMT S25B mic is that it was designed and has a preamp that is designed just for doublebass, and it has a built-in shock mount for the mic head. That has to be one of the reasons it works well. The goose neck on the AMT mic allows me to have the mic just barely not touching the top, so as David said it gets more of the wood sound. As I mentioned in a previous post, I used mics wrapped in foam rubber and stuffed in the bridge years ago myself. However, anytime you do that, you have to be deadening the top and bridge vibrations a little (at least).
__________________
95% Retired Midwestern Luthier |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
By the way, doesn't the bass touch our body when we play? Are we deadening it as well? If that is true, I deaden it now more so that I did 30 years ago..lol The 3 Basses I have used the Mic on recently were as follows; The Gilkes with a Trio, the Loveri in the Studio and the Riccardi Storioni with a Duo. I don't think any tone loss was noticeable on those Basses as the have a bit of sound to spare.. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
![]()
__________________
95% Retired Midwestern Luthier |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I think that some Basses can be dampened more easily as they may have less sound to put out to begin with. On the other hand, many of the Basses I have are so powerful in comparison, I rarely hear the other Basses around me in the section. In that case, even if objects do dampen the Bass, it is no great loss to be noticed. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
I suppose it might be worth mentioning that since I have improved the amplification method for my double bass, I think the only use for something like a EUB at this point would be for airline travel. I suppose it may take a while to confirm that, perhaps a few more outdoor shows. I have another one coming up at the end of the month. And even the best amp and mic combination is a good deal less $$ than a Clevinger and I get to use the same DB.
I have to agree with Ken as far as a great deal of sound coming from the back of the bass. In a standing situation I can really feel the back of the bass reverberating rather strongly while I play. The effect I observed and described in another thread which involves "early room reflections" while playing with my back to a wall also suggests that the back of the bass contributes substantially to the sound. I have often thought that my body dampens the sound more than anything else could although probably not as much as Ken's. ![]() However, it is plausible that anything that dampens the bridge, the strings, or the afterlengths could have a greater effect because these precede the body vibrating and something that dampens these would decrease the energy flowing to the body of the bass, before it gets there. It would be interesting to put a mic on the back of the bass and see how much signal we might get and what the differences are. I know very careful mic'ing of drums in the studio often involves two mics to produce something closer to the live sound of the drum. It might be interesting to mic a bass from in front and in back. Hopefully there wouldn't be any phase cancellation. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
95% Retired Midwestern Luthier |
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 23 (0 members and 23 guests) | |
|
|