Hello, all. Hope everyone is well. I'm finally getting back to work (for now) and wanted to pick your brains on this (and say hi).
 
So here's the deal... I finally set my little studio room up so I can actually use all my gear again. I had been just tracking my bass straight into the multi in on my Focusrite Scarlett 18i6 and then manipulating it with various effects within Sonar. I've been getting okay results with that but obviously it's not ideal and it's a LOT of fiddling and screwing around for just an "okay" sound.
 
So not having any other real gear for bass I hooked up my old Line6 Duoverb (which is a modelling amp head for guitar) via the two XLR outs on the back into the XLR multi ins on the front of the Scarlett. The Line6 allows for two amp models to run at once and I can send them out independently (which is what I have done). So after screwing around with some of the various sound I've got one kind of cleaner but fatter line/DI type signal and a crisp/picky type signal with a bit of grit/drive.
 
This sounds good to me through the headphones (much better than DI even after molding the sound in Sonar) but I am concerned that perhaps because the Duoverb is a guitar head it might be cutting out frequencies that might make it hard to mix into a full composition.
 
So the question to you hardened veterans is... when I am looking at these signals through a freq analyst (currently I am using the Quad Curve flyout) what should I be seeing? It looks to me at the moment that I am getting a good healthy signal in the 80hz range on both channels that starts sloping at around 60hz then tapers off from there beyond the 20hz range. Above the 80hz the two kind of vary but the high slope starts around 150hz and from there there are undulating peaks up to just above the 1khz range. The peaks are obviously higher nearer the meat of the tone (80hz) then descend in volume as they approach the 1khz+ range.
 
I know that's using numbers instead of my ears to try and decide on a sound but I figure you guys would know if the amp is cutting something out on input that might screw me up later. Really... it does sound good so far but what the hell do I know and this particular project is still just a work in progress. I've used the Duoverb for bass in the past (long time ago) but it never turned out right... however I was a COMPLETE hack when it comes to mixing back then. Now I'm only kind of a hack. lol
 
Anyway, nice to be back thinking about music. Hope to have more time to hang out on the forum again. Cheers and thanks for any thoughts on this.

Oh and if I'm missing some freq's my plan may be to run the XLR outs from the Duoverb to my mixer to see if the EQ strips can help me fill some things out. The high end seems to be more than adequate. I'm more worried about the bottom end. Cheers.
 
Update (without bumping): Was jamming around with this set up most of the afternoon and I definitely think this is gonna work out well. It almost sounds like a a nice Ampeg with the models I'm using. I was able to pull some cool Lemmy-esque tones out of some of the grittier models too. I think he actual uses Marshalls to get that sound. Little too grimey for most of my stuff but it's nice to know I could pull it off if I wanted... yanno... because Lemmy is God and all that. ;-)

Removed my thread.  Sorry, I thought this was about the sound of your bass - not just frequency.

Beeps will reply in depth to this later....just wanted to let you know I would comment when I can. Got some stuff to take care of but I'll be back tonight or tomorrow. :) Hope you're well brother.
 
-Danny

I know that when Danny jumps back in he will give you a lot of good info here but I figured I might be able to help some in the meantime.
 
  I have most often found that I seem to be able to warm up the sound if it needs more bottom relatively transparently.  But if I needed more top end on a bass guitar I have already captured to get it to cut through a mix it always sounds doctored up & weird.  You can cut the lows/boost highs, and add some gain to get a little grit on it, or use exciters to pull up some harmonics, I have had to do this but I am never "happy" with that sound.  So I tend to try to capture a good balanced sound at the source and make sure that I have plenty of top end on it from the start.  As for the frequencies, it can vary a bit based on the key of the song and which element is going to OWN the bottom end.  The bass?  or the Kick?   55-65hz is the region on the bass where you really "feel" it rumble, which adds that warm/rich vibe, 300-400 sounds like paper and I usually cut it back a bit somewhere in there.  I like to have a good strong signal from around 50hz up to 6-7K, granted it is obviously strongest in that 80-130 range and slopes back down into the high end.  There is not much going on for a bass up above that 7-8 k range other than pick noise and hiss.  I have had mixes where I lowpassed the bass at 2500 cycles to get rid of too much pick noise/twang, others I had it up at 8k.    
Aim for a nice capture, Compress, then EQ (if you compress after Eq the compressor just twists your Eq to hell anyway).   when tracking rock stuff I shoot for a punchy kinda sound.... think emmm  Longview from greenday or something along those lines.  I hope that helps some Beep.

Hey Beeps,
 
Sorry for showing up so late. Rough couple of days for me...
 
Anyway, bass is a hard instrument as you know. However, it's only hard when you:
 
1. Don't have the right monitors/sub
2. Don't have the right gear
3. Don't know how much bass should be in a bass for a particular situation.
 
Not knowing anything about this duoverb amp, I can't tell you whether or not it's cutting anything out. I would assume it probably is due to guitar amps being made for guitars...but you never know.
 
I'd not rely too much on any of the graphs you may be using. The reason being....sometimes the graphs look terrible but actually don't sound as bad as they look. I only look at a graph when something is wrong and I can't take it out on my own. I can usually sweep through and find something in an instant...but when I can't seem to hone in on a problem area, the graph can definitely help me out. Other than that, I never look at the things.
 
Typically, the best way to set up our bass sound is to make a decision on how your kick and bass relationship are going to be. Meaning, if you want a boomier kick drum, you'll be more successful if you have a bass with less low end in it with a bit more clack to it. When you want a kick with more beater click in it, then you can allow more low end in your bass guitar. This is a sure fire way to make sure your kick and bass never fight with each other. Then again it depends on what you're going for. The classic rock days pretty much had their kicks and basses closer together frequency wise. Both were boomy with little to no higher end transient attack.
 
You CAN still get that sound easy enough....the key is to not boost the same frequencies or you end up with frequency masking. But me personally, I usually like a low kick with a little beater attack where my bass will have a bit more of a percussive clack at around 1.5k-2.5k....or a kick with a bit more beater attack and less low end so the bass low end can be more dominant.
 
The trick here is....you have to decide what frequencies these instruments sound the best at. For example, in one tune, you may get lucky with the low end of a bass being roughly at about 80 Hz like you have now. High pass it until that stuff you are seeing at around 40 Hz is gone. You'll know if you pulled too much out. But experiment with your high passing allowing more low end. Then set it tighter NOT allowing more low end and try turning up the fader. One of the biggest mistakes people make is....they substitute just turning up the fader of a bass with less low end, with a bass with with a lower fader and louder sub lows. If you can feel your bass more than you can literally hear it, you have too much low end. Now in your monitor situation with cans...this may be difficult to hear correctly. But you want to always hear the bass more than you feel it unless you have a specific reason to rattle your bile ducts. LOL!
 
Now, if the bass is all tightened up and you're mostly hearing it in or around the 80 Hz range as you lowest point, you might want to get a kick drum that would sound good from the 55-70 Hz range. See, the problem most people have is...they just get a kick drum they like and try to push those frequencies....that's not how it works. You literally have to find a sound that sounds right pushing those types of lows or it's not going to sound right.
 
Now let's flip it around. You may decide you want a kick drum that kicks in the 75-90 Hz range which are good places too...but it depends on the kick you choose. This is where a Bonham kick would be. Say you find one like that....for your bass guitar you might want to try your low and push from 50 Hz to 65 Hz or so. You have to be careful with low end under 60 though....because if you over-do it, your mix will go south really fast due to the rumble. 60 to 80 can give you low end mud...you have to use it sparingly. Most of the basses *I* record...never need to be boosted in those areas. I take a Sonitus EQ or use the PC EQ and just high pass the frequency that will be my main low end freq, and let it in a little at a time until I have just enough low end body. As soon as I feel it, I'm using too much. Remember, bass in a recording has less low end in it than you think. Especially in the older metal stuff we listen to.
 
Try to dig up some cool recordings that you like and find spots where the bass is all alone. Though it's been mastered...you can still get a rough idea as to how little low end really is in a bass. In today's newer music, they are pushing the sub low envelope a little too much in my opinion. It's why most of the stuff sounds bad to me....plus, I absolutely despise any bass guitars pushing out lows that have distortion on them. There's nothing worse than the sound of a low end fart all through a song that I'm trying to enjoy. I just can't accept it no matter how hard I try. I'm mixing an album with the great Uriah Duffy right now. His bass tone is so insane man.....it just slays! Like a low tuned piano! Just the right amount of ping....nice low end, brilliantly played with the right touch...it's to die for! He sent me distorted tracks for the album he's playing on and I told him "dude....I just thew up in my mouth...please please PLEASE don't ruin your sound with this crap."
 
We did a few mixes with the drive and without...and he saw it my way. When you play that good and have a tone that phenomenal, a little drive isn't needed. Then again, for certain things....a little sizzle on a bass is somewhat ok, but not when it needs to have nice low end on it. Uggh....I'll listen to nails on a chalkboard before a driven bass. Especially when there's already a guitar with massive amounts of drive going on. Heck, as good as John Myung is in Dream Theater...he's the one that destroys their production with that horrendous, distorted bass tone. Man, it guts me like a fish. :(
 
Anyway, I hope some of this stuff helps you. But unfortunately, unless I can hear what your bass is really doing, there's not much I can advise you on. I can tell you this....tonight, a client came to me with a bass track he recorded using GR 4 or 5....it was a stock preset he edited. With a little tweaking by me....I left the track alone because it sounded THAT good. That came with a version of Sonar...so if you still have it, check into it. In the mean time, I'll see if I can find the name of the preset. It was quite good. Best of luck brother.
 
-Danny

Sorry for the late reply, guys. Went into phone call mode yesterday and been waiting for my fingers to heal up a bit from playing bass a few days straight after not practicing for a while.
 
@Rimshot... Hi, dude. No worries. Kind of wish you had left your post intact. I was actually interested in watching that vid you had and thought your comment was relevant. I had a couple of things in mind to reply with as input issues are something I need to sort out. Currently I'm kind of stuck with what I've got but am always feeling out ideas for what to get/do when I have a bit more cash. Anyway, hope you've been well and sorry I didn't get to your post right away. I was laying down for the night when I saw it and got busy doing other things yesterday. Thanks though.
 
@Chuck... Definitely helpful. I was looking at your numbers and they weren't syncing up with what I was seeing but I realized that I was just riding the low E. Just did some more fiddling around and when start playing up to the G string in first position I am indeed getting up around the 5khz range (if I went up the neck I'd probably hit the 6-7k range). The more rounded bottomy tone is kind of cutting off at about 3-4khz but that's my filler tone. The other channel is making up for it. Mixed it's definitely giving me a nice punchy tone and it's funny you mention Green Day/Longview. I'm not a big GD fan these days but that album was something I really liked and still love the bass tone. It's pretty much what I seem to be getting with this... at least through the headphones, and is what I'm looking for. This is all without in the box processing so it should be a good starting point anyway. Also I knew about the Compress before EQ thing but had kind of forgotten since I've taken so much time off so that little reminder is quite helpful. I'm gonna have to play around with the various compressors to see what's gonna work best. I have a bit of an issue with this bass though. It's an old Squire P-Bass that I've had for years and basically it was on loan to various band members and friends. So it's got the cheap single coil which is rather uneven sounding in the sense that the high notes get kind of thin and crispy while the lower notes are fatter and more dampened. On top of that the last guy who was using it dropped it in the damned road without a case (didn't even tell me either... moron) so the pickup is lopsided because one of the tension screw hole on the pickup housing busted. I think I'm gonna try the Anderton trick of filtering out the frequencies with a multiband compressor and taming the higher notes that way if necessary. A new pickup is on the list of gear to buy at the moment but again kind of have to make do with what I've got. Thanks for the input. You're a good guy. Cheers.
 
@Danny... Hi, man. Glad you popped in and I'm sorry to hear you're having a rough time. Fire me a PM if you need to vent. Things have been pretty wonked around here for quite a while too so I've basically dropped everything to get that sh*t sorted out. Looks like it'll all work out though so keeping my fingers crossed.
 
Anyway, awesome stuff as always. We've had the discussion about the Kick vs. Bass scenario before (clicky bass/thuddy kick or clicky kick/bottomy bass) and this seems to be a more advanced lesson in that concept which is great. I think I learned a lot from the Beepster Creep debacle so I am looking forward to getting this bass/drum balance locked down with this go around. As you may remember I was indeed having a very difficult time with a non existent (or not so present/powerful bass) and then a boomy bass after my muddled attempts to correct it. This is kind of why I wanted work on my input signal so I had a much better jumping off point than the straight Hi-Z DI. The Scarlett does have a great sounding Inst. setting but it was still just a direct in. Right now what I'm getting is already sounding better than what I had after endless tweaking and screwing around with effects.
 
I like the comment about the older school rock having the kick and bass closer together because in a lot of ways I kind of want that but kind of don't. Like I don't necessarily want the bass getting too blended in or unnoticeable like those older recordings but I also don't want it to be sticking out like a sore thumb. One thing I was playing around with the other day was the EQ types on the Quad Curve. Up until now I had pretty much been sticking with the "Hybrid" setting or trying to use more surgical type EQ's where everything is flat until I move something and then only that part of the frequency is being affected. After messing around with the Blue Tubes Pultec model X3 came with and reading up about these EQ's that boost and cut simultaneously or create interesting curves I got adventurous and tried the Quad Curve "Pure" setting (and the others) and I gotta say there's a bit of magic there. I've always shied away because it always felt like I wasn't in complete control watching those wacky curves going all over the place but now I realize there is a reason for it and they would not have modeled that stuff unless it was beneficial. Just gotta tweak and listen I guess. Interesting stuff.
 
In regards to the listening situation... well my set up is still the same so not really good. I have been spending a LOT of time on my two main sets of headphones for general listening (TV shows, movies, music, whatever) so I think my ears are getting pretty well trained to how they respond and I'm finding that flopping between the two pairs I can isolate issues and then things sound good in both and then I can put things through the monitors and it will be reflected there as well. I also have both my stereo systems set up in another room, my two sets of laptop speakers and a bagfull of other headphones/earbuds I can test things through. Might have a bit more monetary leeway soon too so a VRM box is my next acquisition. With all that I should at least be able to get decent mixes together and let the mastering guys do the mastering if something needs to be released commercially. I am annoyed though because I expected to have at least a few more songs mixed at this point because I need the practice but this apartment bullsh*t really consumed all my time and messed with my head to the point any real time at the DAW was impossible. Screw the gear, screw the room, screw it all... what I REALLY need is practice. The one benefit has been all this mixing stuff has been percolating in the back of my mind this whole time so now that I'm in front of the rig again the concepts are sticking, I'm not stumbling or getting confused over simple crap and more importantly the material is flowing so much I can't keep up with it.
 
Whatever... too much talking there but I typed it so I'll leave it. lol
 
As far as the Duoverb, it is indeed a guitar head but it seems, based on this thread and from what I am hearing/seeing in my experiments, that it's giving me all the signals I need to get a quality bass signal to work with. Better than just plugging into the interface anyway which really is my only other option right now. You have all the really high end goodies kicking around so it might not be much use to you and it is very much original modelling stuff but they can be had for dirt cheap these days and they really are quite cool for the price. I paid about $300 for it about 6 years ago and although it did not serve its intended purpose (I just wanted a head for live and it just wouldn't push enough on stage for what I was doing but I always had a hard time finding enough power for my insanity) in the studio it has been absolutely great. It's got the two XLR outs, two channels that can be split or blended (via the line outs or to speakers), each channel has 8 models (total 16 models... the hi gain ones are kind of ass but the clean ones are really good for this type of pre input stuff), cabinet modelling and each channel has it's own strip of independent controls like you'd find on a normal amp (Drive, Volume, Bass, Mid, Tone, Reverb, etc). It also has four programmable banks onboard so if you like something you just press and hold one of the bank buttons and it saves everything and you can go back to manual mode and screw around with all the knobs/models and return to the bank and it's all there despite any changes to the knobs. You get the idea. Pretty archaic by today's standards but it still gets great reviews and like I said it's cheap as hell (probably easily obtained for a lot less than the $300 I paid for the 100w head). If you see one around it might be worth the dough just to play around with it. I personally just love it for the i/o crap it has.
 
Well that's a blast of inanity and insanity but it's good to chat with you again. Still dealing with some chaos but I should be around again. I've been pondering a few things for you but that can wait for another day. I'm gonna go mess around with this track a bit. I might put together a little snippet of this bass tone so you can check it out but I want to get my guitar tone down too so it can be heard in context. I'm only on scratch guit tracks right now that I did DI so that's the next adventure. Cheers and thanks.

i have found that low shelf works better for individual bass tracks, better than HPF.
 
but what is key...
is to have your tone happening at the source.
 
then, you don't have to mess with eq very much.
 
every time you mess with eq, you are messing with phase.
 
and phase is what can make your mixes blurry....

Someone recently posted an old thread about EQ which referenced a link called, "The Dipping Sauce". I quickly copied it and pasted it into my Notes on my iPad. My iPad has become a handy companion these days when I am mixing. Anyway, I have pasted in the Bass comments from that link below:

bass
reduce fundamentals at 40hz (q 1.4)
reduce resonance at 100hz (q 1.4)

I have been experimenting a little with doing a slight dip at 100hz on the last couple of songs I have mixed and in my case, for me, it kind of did as advertised; made for a cleaner bass tone.

I still mix everything by ear on bass and there seems to be no clear set frequencies, it depends on the song and what I am playing. By ear I roll off the lows until it sits right, same with the highs. If it's not adding anything up there it's gone.

batsbrew
 
but what is key...
is to have your tone happening at the source.
 
then, you don't have to mess with eq very much.
 
every time you mess with eq, you are messing with phase.
 
and phase is what can make your mixes blurry....

 
Hey Beeps, no problem man. Glad to see you're recording and messing with this stuff again. I quoted the above stuff from Bats because it's so true....it's what makes this field easier than most people know. That guy Uriah Duffy I was talking about that I'm working with right now...we recorded his bass tone so well, it can't fail unless I load it up with sub lows, congested mids or high end that makes it squawk. Honest when I tell you, the stuff I record these days is so on the mark at the tracking stage, I don't have to carve it up using an EQ EVER anymore. So it's good you're getting into this whole source thing now. The better you get it going in, the better it stays while it's in there and the less you have to mess with it.
 
Mike: I have a difficult time with people that post "starting points" or "stuff you should always do" when they have never heard the sounds YOU are working with. This is why I hate video's and books written by supposed guru's. What do they know about the tones YOU are getting? Why would we reduce ANYTHING automatically without hearing the sound? Granted, those areas may be good for most people that have a grasp on what a decent recorded bass should sound like. But what about the people that don't that may be recording sounds that don't have enough of those frequencies in them from the start to even pull them out or curb them? See my point? If you don't have sub lows in the bass that are 40 and below, there's nothing to touch. If you don't have 100 Hz in the bass enough to where it's a problem, you don't remove what may not be there enough to make it an issue, see my point?
 
Each sound is different. Each person's interpretation on what a decent useable sound is will differ. So though *some* eq starting points may be of use, they will be useless to others in certain situations. Example....
 
If I curbed 40 Hz in the basses I record, I wouldn't like the sound of them. Sometimes I high pass at 60....sometimes at 75, sometimes at 80 and at times, when I master the same song, I *may* bring in a little 45 Hz sub with a tight Q just to feel a little something if I need it. My point is...it's tough to even use a starting point unless you use the exact same sound for yourself. THEN you can save all your curves and stuff and re-apply as starting points. But as soon as the sound changes drastically, they are all moot. So this is why it's hard to even share starting points with others.
 
The dude you talked about mentions 1.4 Q...using what EQ? To me, that's useless information because it deals with his sound using his EQ...not your sound or your eq, understand? Compare a Waves Q-10 using a Q of 1.4 and then do the same with a Sonitus. Definitely a difference. If someone can't hear your sound or see your gear, it's near impossible to give you a stating point that will help you at all. The same with me giving out guitar tone advice.....if I can't hear the tone the person is working with, what good would it be for me to say "high pass at 120, experiment in the 215-250 range cutting by -3 dB, boost 3.5 k by +2 and low pass to 7k" if I've never heard the actual guitar sound? See what I mean? If I'm Steve Vai giving out that information, I've STILL not done a thing to help the guy that doesn't have a 120 Hz problem, may not have enough 215-250 to even pull out, may have too much 3.5 k already and might have so much sizzle due to possibly not using any speaker simulation at all, that he needs to low pass as far down as 4k instead of 7 k, follow me?
 
All the same stuff applies to bass and other instruments too. Starting points are just not valid because of all the different ways people record as well as how their sounds will be printed. We can't alter what may not be there, know what I mean? So be careful with any starting point type stuff because it can be VERY misleading. :)
 
-Danny