Best mini cardioid condenser for DB

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by David Powell

To Bob B.'s:

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.

I agree with some of this and have a different slant on the rest. I have the same AI Coda combo amp that David has. I think at least part of the reason that we get more mic volume before feedback is the down firing design of the AI combo amps. I only recently started using the notch filter and was still able to get plenty of volume (without the notch) in most situations without feedback.

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).

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Bob Branstetter

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).

Well Bob, anything that touches the Bass including a rag under the tailpiece, a bow quiver or any other mounted pickup can deaden something somehow. Every orchestra player that comes here to try out a Bass pulls out the rag I keep under the TP (for wiping the strings) as they claim it dampens the sound.

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..

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

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.
..

That's true to a certain extent, but it is the Top that generates most of sound. I don't touch the top when I'm playing - do you? I don't know if you are deaden it more today than you did 30 years ago, but it's pretty certain that your ears aren't as good as they were 30 years ago. I know mine aren't, so I can't afford to throw away any sound when there is a way to prevent it.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Bob Branstetter

That's true to a certain extent, but it is the Top that generates most of sound. I don't touch the top when I'm playing - do you? I don't know if you are deaden it more today than you did 30 years ago, but it's pretty certain that your ears aren't as good as they were 30 years ago. I know mine aren't, so I can't afford to throw away any sound when there is a way to prevent it.

I agree with you on the Top thing to a point but when listening to Basses I often hear more sound on some of them from the Back than from the Top standing close to the Bass.

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.

[David Powell]

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.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by David Powell

I have often thought that my body dampens the sound more than anything else could although probably not as much as Ken's.

Yo, it's all in the technique.

Originally Posted by David Powell

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. It might be interesting to mic a bass from in front and in back. Hopefully there wouldn't be any phase cancellation.

I think I have tried a Mic in the Back at one time and it was a boomier, less direct type of sound. I don't know if any phase cancellation would happen and/or why it would or would not. It would probably just be the same as if the Bass is just louder as far as any Wolfs or Note Cancellations.

[Eric Hochberg]

I was involved in a bass mikng technique class for live sound engineering students a few years ago as the demonstrator. I don't recall any real details about the mics used, but the instructor hung one of the mics from behind my bass, over the scroll, and got a wonderful, natural sound through the system. I had never seen that technique used before or since, but I imagine that unless you were playing solo, that mic would pick up every thing else on stage.

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

I agree with you on the Top thing to a point but when listening to Basses I often hear more sound on some of them from the Back than from the Top standing close to the Bass.

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.

Actually, I was thinking of the muting effect from the mass of the mic & foam rather than the amount of sound radiated by the instrument. However, measuring the relative amount of sound radiated from the back, sides and top is quite easy. A simple $30 Radio Shack ****og volume meter works quite nicely. That's what I use to determine the A0 frequency inside the bass. I bought it originally for setting up my home surround sound system.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Bob Branstetter

Actually, I was thinking of the muting effect from the mass of the mic & foam rather than the amount of sound radiated by the instrument. However, measuring the relative amount of sound radiated from the back, sides and top is quite easy. A simple $30 Radio Shack ****og volume meter works quite nicely. That's what I use to determine the A0 frequency inside the bass. I bought it originally for setting up my home surround sound system.

Bob, you can ABC my Basses anytime you like. I don't personally buy into that theory mainly because I am clueless about it. Changing strings for me has made more differences than just about any type of adjustments have.

Maybe it also depends on the grade of Bass too. You think?

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

Bob, you can ABC my Basses anytime you like. I don't personally buy into that theory mainly because I am clueless about it. Changing strings for me has made more differences than just about any type of adjustments have.

Maybe it also depends on the grade of Bass too. You think?

What theory? That a Radio Shack volume meter will allow you to determine the relative amount of sound coming from the back, front, ribs or any other part of your bass? The only thing I said was the I use it (the Radio Shack ****og volume meter) to determine the A0 frequency (by measuring the volume) inside the bass. No theory here either, just the fact that I find this inexpensive volume meter quite useful for lots of things. It's also a fact, not theory, that I used it to setup my home surround system, which I might add sounded quite good after making the adjustments to the individual spreaker channels.

I assume that you were jumping to a conclusion that this had something to do with A0-B0 matching. No, I gave up trying to convice you of the merits of that and other well documented proceedures that I use a long time ago.