# Any tips for EQing/Recording bass?



## Nik (Jul 28, 2006)

Alright, I have a question:

So in order to record guitars, it's best to use a thin-sounding tone without any bass that sounds thin by itself but sits very well in a mix. Do you have any similar tips for recording bass? 

Everytime I've tried recording my bassist, the mix comes out extremely muddy. Any tips on EQing the bass properly?

Thanks


----------



## Rodney (Jul 28, 2006)

It depends alot on the sound your going for. You should roll off more low end than you think as it just adds to the mush.

Start by getting your drums where you want them, then just play drums and bass. Eq the bass while listening to the 2 together. You'll get a better sense of where they step on each other eq-wise.

When you get them sounding clear and punchy together, add the guitars and finish eqing them. You should end up with good clear seperation.

Another rule of thumb is that you want to accent low-mid in a tight bass tone rather than just lows.


----------



## Nik (Jul 28, 2006)

Rodney said:


> It depends alot on the sound your going for. You should roll off more low end than you think as it just adds to the mush.
> Start by getting your drums where you want them, then just play drums and bass. Eq the bass while listening to the 2 together. You'll get a better sense of where they step on each other eq-wise.
> When you get them sounding clear and punchy together, add the guitars and finish eqing them. You should end up with good clear seperation.
> Another rule of thumb is that you want to accent low-mid in a tight bass tone rather than just lows.



Thanks! So to summarize, cut out all the lows and try to make the low-mids stand out. Drums are already recorded so I'm gonna have fun with this.

Has anyone tried recording bass through a guitar PodXT? Me and my bassist managed to get some good direct-recorded tones that didn't sit too well in a mix, though.


----------



## Rodney (Jul 28, 2006)

You don't want to kill all the lows, just the ones in the sub bass area. You tend to hear them less than feel them and they chew sonic space like mad.

The low mids are is the sweet spot though. Check this out, it'll help alot.

http://www.recordingwebsite.com/articles/eqprimer.php


I've do all my bass through PODs bass and guitar. Try having him play over the drums and listn for a pass or 2 and see if it still sounds good. 
Then add a little eq and maybe compression afterward.


----------



## DSS3 (Jul 28, 2006)

You're going to want less lows and more mids and gain than you think in a mix, it's definitely weird.

Also, it sounding muddy could be a tuning issue - make sure his bass is intonated and tuned correctly, and record the bass AFTER the guitars. Then, solo the bass DI track (blending a DI and a mic'd/modelled track is the key to great clarity, IMO) and 2 guitar tracks, and check to make sure everythings in tune.


----------



## Rodney (Jul 28, 2006)

Bass after guitars? Why?


----------



## DSS3 (Jul 28, 2006)

I just said - for tuning, to make sure the bass is in tune with the guitars.

This is _guitar_ driven music, not bass driven like funk. The guitars should be the focal point of the stringed instruments. IE: Dial the guitar tone in first, then the bass to fill it out and enhance, write the bass riffs to bring out the best in the guitar riffs and properly back them up, and record the guitars first (as you'd be getting the guitar tones first, if you followed this method), and make sure the bass is in tune with the guitars.


Also, I'd do bass after guitars for the sole reason that my guitars would be taking 4 tracks per riff, and bass only taking one. It takes MUCH less time to re-do a bass track.


----------



## 7slinger (Jul 28, 2006)

DSS3 said:


> I just said - for tuning, to make sure the bass is in tune with the guitars.
> This is _guitar_ driven music, not bass driven like funk. The guitars should be the focal point of the stringed instruments. IE: Dial the guitar tone in first, then the bass to fill it out and enhance, write the bass riffs to bring out the best in the guitar riffs and properly back them up, and record the guitars first (as you'd be getting the guitar tones first, if you followed this method), and make sure the bass is in tune with the guitars.
> Also, I'd do bass after guitars for the sole reason that my guitars would be taking 4 tracks per riff, and bass only taking one. It takes MUCH less time to re-do a bass track.




this makes sense, although there are many methods to arrive at your final product. if one way doesn't work, try another.


----------



## Rodney (Jul 28, 2006)

DSS3 said:


> I just said - for tuning, to make sure the bass is in tune with the guitars.
> This is _guitar_ driven music, not bass driven like funk. The guitars should be the focal point of the stringed instruments. IE: Dial the guitar tone in first, then the bass to fill it out and enhance, write the bass riffs to bring out the best in the guitar riffs and properly back them up, and record the guitars first (as you'd be getting the guitar tones first, if you followed this method), and make sure the bass is in tune with the guitars.
> Also, I'd do bass after guitars for the sole reason that my guitars would be taking 4 tracks per riff, and bass only taking one. It takes MUCH less time to re-do a bass track.



I'm well aware of what style of music were talking about. If your going to base your entire recording order around the fear that one instrument may be out of tune, then you have bigger worries than your mix.

I think having your instruments tuned before laying tracks is pretty much established as the most basic requisite of recording.

You can work what ever way does best for you, but in my and many others experience dialing in guitars tends to make people over do the eq not allowing any room for the bass and then have to completely re eq when the bass is added or just drown it in the mix.

Letting the bass do it's job and having the instruments compliment each other instead of competing will result in a tighter more balanced and clear tone.

Laying the bass first, eqing it against the drums then doing guitars allows you to-
1. Audition guitar tones as they will be heard in the final mix, not on they're own.
2. Keep you from having to completely re-eq 4 seperate guitar tracks to make room for the sonic area the bass lives in.

How a guitar sounds on it's own is radically different then how it wll sounds even against just drums. Allowing for that and building a mix from the bottom will really improve the clarity and quality.

Try it out. You may get some nice results.


----------



## Nik (Jul 29, 2006)

Thanks a lot guys, I really appreciate your help!

Recording bass after guitars is really inevitable since at this point, I write all the music and record my parts, then have all the other band members come in and record. I might try silencing the guitars to see how the bass sits against the drums, I'll try both ways. Thanks a lot, I don't feel lost about doing this anymore  

I'll post the result of these toils soon hopefully


----------



## DSS3 (Jul 29, 2006)

Rodney said:


> I'm well aware of what style of music were talking about. If your going to base your entire recording order around the fear that one instrument may be out of tune, then you have bigger worries than your mix.
> I think having your instruments tuned before laying tracks is pretty much established as the most basic requisite of recording.
> You can work what ever way does best for you, but in my and many others experience dialing in guitars tends to make people over do the eq not allowing any room for the bass and then have to completely re eq when the bass is added or just drown it in the mix.
> Letting the bass do it's job and having the instruments compliment each other instead of competing will result in a tighter more balanced and clear tone.
> ...



The reason the tuning is such a big deal is that getting intonation right (not on the bridge, the actual fretting and how hard you fret notes) is way harder on a bass.

They can be in perfect tune according to a Peterson for all I care - the players can do weird shit to it.

I've never had the problem of over-eqing my guitar tones, or leaving out room for the bass... usually, I'll compress a low-mid band to make room for the bass, but other than that, I know what kind of tone I'm looking for before the bass comes in, and if you record even as a weekend warrior, your ears should be trained enough after a few sessions to know what will work and what doesn't. Anyone who lets the player eq his own tone, though, unless the player has studio experience... I wouldn't let that douche near the knobs.

I still say that it's guitar driven music, and the focal point should be on the guitars.


----------



## Rodney (Jul 29, 2006)

I never said anything about not focusing on the guitar tone. Quite the contrary. There is an entire band to be dealt with though.

Since there are other things being played as well, they need to be adressed for the benefit of the music AND the guitar tone. Making all the pieces fit as they should only makes that all important guitar sound that much better.

If you can have good bass and drum tones that aren't smothered it might start to sound like a band.

If your method works for you great.


----------



## Drew (Aug 8, 2006)

DSS3 said:


> Anyone who lets the player eq his own tone, though, unless the player has studio experience... I wouldn't let that douche near the knobs.
> 
> I still say that it's guitar driven music, and the focal point should be on the guitars.



Um, not trying to be obnoxious or anything, but don't you think that's a little strong coming from a 15-year-old recording hobbyist? 

There's FAR more ways than just one to get a great mix for guitar-driven music, too - I think Tool/APC are the classic example of a band that arrives at a "guitar driven" sound by actually letting the guitar take a backseat to the bass. What you're suggesting is basically the Andy Sneap method of getting a mix - straightforward, direct, and effective, but certainly not the ONLY way to get a great mix. As in most things musical, the more experimentation you do and the less you take as bible truth, the better off you're likely to be in the long run. Even what _doesn't_ work is likely to teach you something.

Ditto on looking for tips to get a good bass tone in a mix - I've never been happy with my recorded bass sound. I go back and forth between recording direct (which I don't particularly care for), and using my J-Station on an Ampeg, I believe, bass model, which I dislike for the same reason as I stopped using even the better amp models on that - when you mix them in with actual mic'd tones, they sound indistinct and plastic-y. 

I should probably just buy a good bass amp, but frankly I'd rather not spend the cash (to say nothing od bedroom space - Boston's bloody expensive) on a rig I'll only rarely use.


----------



## Vince (Aug 8, 2006)

DSS3 said:


> I still say that it's guitar driven music, and the focal point should be on the guitars.



I disagree.

The bass is going to take up more space, sonically, than the guitar. The bass, in a good mix, should be very strong and powerful. Think about Metallica's black album or Dream Theater's Awake. Those albums had some of the best metal guitar tones I've ever heard. And you know what was accompanying them? A **HUGE** bass sound. Listen to those albums on a good sound system, and really pay attention to the difference between the bass guitar and the rhythm guitar.

A rhythm guitar should be tight and cutting, with a low-end peak at about 250 Hz and a strong cut underneath. The bass should be booming strong and tight with a peak at a range from 65-110 Hz, depending on tastes (I generally prefer boosting the bass drum at 55 Hz, and the bass guitar at either 70 Hz or 90 Hz). The bass guitar & bass drum should lock in tight, peaking at slightly different frequencies, and delivering the goods on the low end of the recording.

Every studio engineer I've ever worked with or picked the brain of has said the same thing... build from the bottom up, build from the inside out. Get your mix started with the low end, and the center channel. Begin with the bass drum, snare drum, & bass guitar, and once those sound good together, bring in the other instruments one at a time, moving from the inside channel out to the panned instruments, and from the bass instruments up through the midrange instruments & finally with the higher instruments (keys, cymbals, vocals, etc.).

It's like a building. You have to have a solid foundation before you can start adding floors.

IMO, if your bass sound isn't there, your record has no power, bottom line. Every instrument is important, but if your record doesn't thump, it probably needs some work.

Of course, that's just my approach. I've heard a lot of albums where the bass isn't a dominant instrument. Lamb of God CDs come to mind, as do Symphony X CDs. They're still good albums, but they don't have the power behind them IMO that some better mixed CDs have. Like Drew said, the new Tool album kicks hard. I love the sound on it.


----------



## Nik (Aug 8, 2006)

I've learned loads from this thread, thanks fellas  

And on the side, I think it's silly to classify anything as "guitar-driven" music. All the instruments are equally important and contribute to the sound equally (plus my bassist kicks ass and I want his playing heard.)


----------



## Rodney (Aug 8, 2006)

I listened to the stuff on myspace. Just a quick listen makes me think of the following suggestions-

1. It sounds like he's using a very round, jazzy tone. Is it a single bridge pickup bass? It doesn't sound like he's using much neck pickup, and if he is it's tone is really shallow. If he can, have it dialed in a bit more to get some more meat in the tone.

2. Instead of EQ, try using a multiband compressor plug in if you can. You can think of it as a kind of EQ, but it can enhance certain areas of the audio spectrum without changing the fundamental sound characteristic.

It'll help enhance the definition without making you have to reseat all the other tones around it.

Try enhancing / adding gain in the low mid area, it will give more growl and punch, then dial out the ultra low end. It should wind up tight and gurgly


----------



## Nik (Aug 8, 2006)

Rodney said:


> I listened to the stuff on myspace. Just a quick listen makes me think of the following suggestions-
> 1. It sounds like he's using a very round, jazzy tone. Is it a single bridge pickup bass? It doesn't sound like he's using much neck pickup, and if he is it's tone is really shallow. If he can, have it dialed in a bit more to get some more meat in the tone.
> 2. Instead of EQ, try using a multiband compressor plug in if you can. You can think of it as a kind of EQ, but it can enhance certain areas of the audio spectrum without changing the fundamental sound characteristic.
> It'll help enhance the definition without making you have to reseat all the other tones around it.
> Try enhancing / adding gain in the low mid area, it will give more growl and punch, then dial out the ultra low end. It should wind up tight and gurgly


Actually, everything on the myspace, except for the layer improv jam "Sahara Jam", features bass that I programmed. In fact, everything except for the guitars was programmed by me on all the songs except the "Sahara Jam." And as you can hear, the bass is mixed in pretty poorly on that tune. And since the programmed bass tracks are just placeholders till my bassist records them for real, I had to come here and ask for tips on how to get him recorded properly  

The bass and drums sound pretty damn realistic, though. The bass had waaay too many unnecessary frequencies. I ran it through a pretty hefty EQ, the paramaters of which I've attached at the bottom of this post. Oh, and he has active pick-ups, I don't know if that helps or not.

As for using a compressor, if I use my Pod to record him, I could bring up a compressor on that, though I'm not sure of the Pod compressor deals with bass frequencies... ?

Again, I can't say 'thank you' enough times man, I appreciate it! I've learned loads of useful stuff from this thread


----------



## Rodney (Aug 8, 2006)

No worries man, glad to help  
i guess the best way to do it is if you can post a clip. Making shots in the dark will only get us so far. If you can do that, I can be of alot more help.

Also let me know exactly what POD gear your using and software so i know your reference point.


----------



## Nik (Aug 8, 2006)

Rodney said:


> No worries man, glad to help
> i guess the best way to do it is if you can post a clip. Making shots in the dark will only get us so far. If you can do that, I can be of alot more help.
> Also let me know exactly what POD gear your using and software so i know your reference point.



Well dude, me and my bassist are quite busy at the moment, so I can't have him record something just for this.

However, you can hear (for better or worse) the bass tone he gets out of his big Harke amp here:

http://www.myspace.com/renegadenuns

^Half of those songs are bass only.

I can also post a high-quality clip of the "Sahara Jam" with the guitars lowered and the drums and bass dominating for reference, because that was recorded with my Pod. Oh, and I can post a snapshot of the PodXT amp model I'm using to record him, but I'll do that tomorrow cause it's getting late over here


----------



## DSS3 (Aug 9, 2006)

Drew said:


> Um, not trying to be obnoxious or anything, but don't you think that's a little strong coming from a 15-year-old recording hobbyist?
> There's FAR more ways than just one to get a great mix for guitar-driven music, too - I think Tool/APC are the classic example of a band that arrives at a "guitar driven" sound by actually letting the guitar take a backseat to the bass. What you're suggesting is basically the Andy Sneap method of getting a mix - straightforward, direct, and effective, but certainly not the ONLY way to get a great mix. As in most things musical, the more experimentation you do and the less you take as bible truth, the better off you're likely to be in the long run. Even what _doesn't_ work is likely to teach you something.



I have to say Drew - Age has nothing to do with it, aside from maybe my attitude. As far as experience or skill though, age is still just a number.

But yes, there are a ton of ways to get a great sounding mix. That said, I don't think the Tool/APC reference is really relevant, as I'd say the bass is just as, if not more, driving than the guitars, and vocals even moreso!

It may be the Andy Sneap way... but it's also the Dave Otero, James Murphy, Neil Kernon, and Colin Richardson way - so I'm fine with that.




desertdweller said:


> I disagree.
> The bass is going to take up more space, sonically, than the guitar. The bass, in a good mix, should be very strong and powerful. Think about Metallica's black album or Dream Theater's Awake. Those albums had some of the best metal guitar tones I've ever heard. And you know what was accompanying them? A **HUGE** bass sound. Listen to those albums on a good sound system, and really pay attention to the difference between the bass guitar and the rhythm guitar.
> A rhythm guitar should be tight and cutting, with a low-end peak at about 250 Hz and a strong cut underneath. The bass should be booming strong and tight with a peak at a range from 65-110 Hz, depending on tastes (I generally prefer boosting the bass drum at 55 Hz, and the bass guitar at either 70 Hz or 90 Hz). The bass guitar & bass drum should lock in tight, peaking at slightly different frequencies, and delivering the goods on the low end of the recording.
> Every studio engineer I've ever worked with or picked the brain of has said the same thing... build from the bottom up, build from the inside out. Get your mix started with the low end, and the center channel. Begin with the bass drum, snare drum, & bass guitar, and once those sound good together, bring in the other instruments one at a time, moving from the inside channel out to the panned instruments, and from the bass instruments up through the midrange instruments & finally with the higher instruments (keys, cymbals, vocals, etc.).
> ...



The bass is going to take up sonic space, yes, but it shouldn't take up more than the guitars. Based on the albums you're referencing and hearing your recordings, I have to say we're talking about two way different types of music and overall production results.

I personally think the Black Album's only great sounds were on the drums - the guitars do sound good, but they're way too low in the mix and don't take up enough sonic space to make that great of an impact. I'm not even going to comment on Dream Theater.

You can't cite specific frequencies like that. It just doesn't work.

If your bass sound isn't there, of course it's going to sound like ass. The bass tone I find is often the difference between a pro sounding mix and an amateur sounding mix.

I still stand by tweaking the bass tone to fit a guitar tone and fill it out, but the guitar tone should be picked post-drum recording, so you dont rape those frequencies.


----------



## Drew (Aug 9, 2006)

DSS3 said:


> I have to say Drew - Age has nothing to do with it, aside from maybe my attitude. As far as experience or skill though, age is still just a number.



You have to admit, though, it's a preposterous mental image: 

"You douche, don't touch that knob" 

*sound of DSS3 getting btich-slapped*

I think, for what it's worth, you'd probably be well-served by spending some time studying how guys other than Andy Sneap engineer and mix even if you do end up returning to the Sneap school of thought. If nothing else, the more tools you have at your disposal, the more options you'll have in a mix. As my advisor used to always say, "if the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, then everything's a nail." It's worth thinking about. 

Also for what it's worth, as a guitarist recording instrumental guitar music, I tend to squash the bass in favor of the guitar too - I'll usually do some low-pass stuff on the guitar just to clean up the low end and leave some space for the bass guitar, but then I'll cut the bass guitar pretty heavily while mixing. This probably also has something to do with my complete inability to get a recorded bass tone I'm really happy enough with to want to try to preserve, but whatever.

Again, though, I'm going for a VERY different sound than Andy Sneap does.


----------



## DSS3 (Aug 9, 2006)

Again - I'd say I'm just as influenced by the other 4 guys I mentioned, if not more.

Yeah, I'll admit my saying I wouldn't let them touch the knobs is a bit over the top - but I'm thinking about local musicians I'd be recording, guys playing Epiphone LP's and Marshall AVT's, "cuz Zakk plays 'em," or the hardcore kids with the Triple Rectifiers and no mids.


----------



## Drew (Aug 9, 2006)

DSS3 said:


> Yeah, I'll admit my saying I wouldn't let them touch the knobs is a bit over the top - but I'm thinking about local musicians I'd be recording, guys playing Epiphone LP's and Marshall AVT's, "cuz Zakk plays 'em," or the hardcore kids with the Triple Rectifiers and no mids.



Ok, that I'll buy.  Admittedly, there's probably a certain amount of convincing that needs to happen - if you've got the time/budget, allowing them to record a double-tracked Recto with the gain cranked and the mids scooped and then play it back to them and say, "ok, see how that sounds lost in the mix, behind the bass and cymbols? Now we're going to cut your gain down to seven and add back some mids, and see what happens." 

Of course, if they LIKE it, well... No accounting for personal taste.


----------



## DSS3 (Aug 9, 2006)

Well the other side of things is getting them to actually double track it, "cuz EVH didn't do it," which is the ultimate "I can't play the same riff twice" cover-up.


----------



## Drew (Aug 9, 2006)

You've actually heard that line?  The obvious rejoiner would be "Well, you're not EVH," of course, but... 

Of course, that does open a whole new can of worms. We both believe that a cleaner, double-tracked tone with a decent amount of midrange will sound heavier in a mix than a gain-ed out scooped tone, but at the same time, can you really bring a band into the studio, change their settings, and then expect to get great results? I mean, a professional, pro-caliber band, probably. But, palm-muting with the gain on 10 and palm-muting with the gain on 4 are two VERY different art-forms, and if you have no experience with the later your mutes are going to sound like shit. Likewise if you've never tried to double-track before; it was kind of an eye-opener for me the first time I tried to double a rhythm guitar part. I've since gotten rather a lot better at it, but even today it still takes me a couple takes to get two useable tracks. Not even perfect, album-caliber tracks, just two tracks good enough that I'm cool with using them for a demo (I've got some serious woodshedding ahead of me before I start tracking for my album, I think). 

Part of me wonders if, in a situation like that, the best bet for an amauter band looking to make a low-budget demo is just to leave the gain pretty high and throw a couple mics at the amp, one positioned to be a little brighter, one a little bassier, get 'em in phase, and pan them hard left and right to get a passably full, rich stereo track for your rhythm, and just accept the fact that it's not half as good as what a good rhythm player could do with a cleaner amp setting and 2-4 tracks of rhythm guitar. I mean, I'll take slightly over-saturated rhythm guitar over sloppy double-tracking or really bad palm-muting with less gain than the guitarist is comfortable with anyday.


----------



## Nik (Aug 9, 2006)

Cool thread, but TBH I was too lazy to read everything that Drew and DSS3 are arguing about  

So, here's a quick, sloppy clip from the "Sahara Jam, with the guitars lowered so you can hear the drums and bass better. It's all improv so please ignore the horrible playing and focus on tone instead 

http://home.comcast.net/~petsev/BASS.mp3

I know that this may make the above-posted clip irrelevant, but this was recorded with his old, crappy bass. He has since got a really nice 5-string with active pick-ups, though I don't know how that'd change the sound.

Now, I've attached at the bottom of the screen a snapshot of the PodXT model I used to record him. His bass sounds actually really crisp and nice without any other instruments when played through this amp model, but as you can hear, sounds absolutely horrible in a mix.

Also, I know many bass amps have stuff like "low-mids" knob, etc., but my PodXT doesn't, neither does his Harke amp so I'm guessing that this would make EQing his bass much more difficult.

Anyway, here's the amp model:


----------



## DSS3 (Aug 9, 2006)

Drew said:


> You've actually heard that line?  The obvious rejoiner would be "Well, you're not EVH," of course, but...
> Of course, that does open a whole new can of worms. We both believe that a cleaner, double-tracked tone with a decent amount of midrange will sound heavier in a mix than a gain-ed out scooped tone, but at the same time, can you really bring a band into the studio, change their settings, and then expect to get great results? I mean, a professional, pro-caliber band, probably. But, palm-muting with the gain on 10 and palm-muting with the gain on 4 are two VERY different art-forms, and if you have no experience with the later your mutes are going to sound like shit. Likewise if you've never tried to double-track before; it was kind of an eye-opener for me the first time I tried to double a rhythm guitar part. I've since gotten rather a lot better at it, but even today it still takes me a couple takes to get two useable tracks. Not even perfect, album-caliber tracks, just two tracks good enough that I'm cool with using them for a demo (I've got some serious woodshedding ahead of me before I start tracking for my album, I think).
> Part of me wonders if, in a situation like that, the best bet for an amauter band looking to make a low-budget demo is just to leave the gain pretty high and throw a couple mics at the amp, one positioned to be a little brighter, one a little bassier, get 'em in phase, and pan them hard left and right to get a passably full, rich stereo track for your rhythm, and just accept the fact that it's not half as good as what a good rhythm player could do with a cleaner amp setting and 2-4 tracks of rhythm guitar. I mean, I'll take slightly over-saturated rhythm guitar over sloppy double-tracking or really bad palm-muting with less gain than the guitarist is comfortable with anyday.




Yup, actually had that line quoted to me - I promptly asked why he didn't sound like EVH with one track, in that case.  Thank god I didn't have to complete that project - they're drummer quit while tracking scratch guitars.  

I wouldn't drastically change a bands settings, unless it sounded like complete ass. I have to say, though, with most of the equipment the guys around here have (MG's, ATV's, Crate's, B-52), I'd either have them track through my 5150, or reamp it later, and not tell them how I made their amp sound so good. 

I definitely know what you mean about first time doubletracking... I had to really focus on my rhythm chops or a looong time before I got things tight enough - now I quadtrack literally everything but bass.

The two mic technique would definitely be an option - I'd probably end up with 57's or i5's in the same place, just on different speakers, for consistency. Definitely something to think about.



Nik - I'll give your clip a listen when I get off work - looking forward to it!


----------



## Drew (Aug 9, 2006)

Yeah, I HATE using more than one mic at a time simply because worrying about phasing is such a pain in the ass, but at the same time if you're serious about wanting to record local bands then you have to be prepared for the inevitable situation where you'll have a guy in the studio who's just not capable of recording tight multitracked parts, yet you still want to mix his rhythm tracks in stereo (I dont even know what I'd do with a single distorted rhythm track these days - I should probably record some stuff this way just for the challenge). I'd do slightly different mic positions or at least different mics for better stereo seperation, but really it's not a huge deal, I guess. 

Ditto on listening to the clip when I get home - my work speakers dont like bass guitar.


----------



## Vince (Aug 9, 2006)

DSS3 said:


> I have to say Drew - Age has nothing to do with it, aside from maybe my attitude. As far as experience or skill though, age is still just a number.
> But yes, there are a ton of ways to get a great sounding mix. That said, I don't think the Tool/APC reference is really relevant, as I'd say the bass is just as, if not more, driving than the guitars, and vocals even moreso!
> It may be the Andy Sneap way... but it's also the Dave Otero, James Murphy, Neil Kernon, and Colin Richardson way - so I'm fine with that.
> The bass is going to take up sonic space, yes, but it shouldn't take up more than the guitars. Based on the albums you're referencing and hearing your recordings, I have to say we're talking about two way different types of music and overall production results.
> ...




ok dude, if you say so. I can't wait to hear your recordings then


----------



## YngwieReid (Aug 22, 2006)

Bass = ALWAYS DI

~AJ. Reid

DI = Direct In


----------

