We all know it's important to eq your bass and kick so they don't clash. This means either the bass sits under the kick, or the kick sits under the bass.

Now, what if you have a song where the verse is typically played on the lower notes of the bass, but the chorus is played around an octave higher. The fundamentals probably cover the full range of where the kick might want to sit, ie everything under 100Hz. Now you could just go OK, kick sits under the whole time and just highpass or shelf the lows out of the bass. But what about automating so the kick sits above the bass in the verse and under the bass in the chorus. Ever thought about doing this? Just thinking. Do you think it would be distracting? Or maybe interesting and provide a different type of power to make distinction in the chorus? I don't have a particular song with this as such, but it may happen so wondering how I'd deal with it. Are you aware of any songs where the engineer has done this?

Here's the problem I have with that, Matt. When a bassist plays up higher on the neck, regardless of what tone he uses or how he plays, the bottom drops out. A kick drum can't replace this.

What I like to do is, add in a bass over-dub and just have it gently in there while the bass goes up. This keeps things tight and doesn't give it that "where did the bass go?!" situation.

You could also layer in a keyboard as well if you wanted to instead of an over-dubbed bass. Quite a few guys that record boards usually leave all the left hand stuff in there. This really walks on the bass guitar and is not really needed on the majority of material. However, if you have one of those dancing bassists or "a bass guitarist" that seems to play a little more bass than maybe he should, a nice left hand keyboard line (high passed and controlled) can really add in some extra life.

But yeah, when I'm faced with the situation of a bass going a bit higher than normal, I just about always layer in another bass part an octave down. Even if you just use it sparingly, it makes sure you never get that dreaded bass drop out. :)
Or, this is a good spot to use that Octaver you have. As long as it doesn't sound synthetic, this can be pretty cool if done in moderation. The problem with most of those Octaver boxes is...they just don't sound real enough to me or track well enough. The only one I trust for that is my Eventide. They just got that stuff down.
 
-Danny

This is an interesting question.  I consider Paul McCartney to be an super bass player and he used the upper register of bass notes all the time.  When he did, there was no additional compensation for bass in the lower end.  It was just how the music was intended.  I think the same goes for most music too.  If the bass player chooses to play up an octave, that is what was intended.  If not, maybe the producer would step in and make other suggestions?

Rimshot

Danny Danzi


Here's the problem I have with that, Matt. When a bassist plays up higher on the neck, regardless of what tone he uses or how he plays, the bottom drops out. A kick drum can't replace this.

What I like to do is, add in a bass over-dub and just have it gently in there while the bass goes up. This keeps things tight and doesn't give it that "where did the bass go?!" situation. 

 
 
-Danny

Danny - this is confusing me.  when a bass player plays higher on the neck...the bottom drops out. 
 
I would think the bottom would drop out of the bass player played LOWER on the neck.  where am I getting confused?

Depends what you consider "higher" Reece. LOL! To me, the closer you are to the nut/tuning pegs, the lower the notes. That's considered "lower on the neck". As he goes up towards the 12th fret, the notes get higher in pitch...higher on the neck towards the pick-ups. :)

What happens is, our ears get used to a certain sound in a lower register. When someone makes a drastic change for example...and plays something an octave higher, and stays there, it gives the impression of "the bottom dropping out". There's no meat in those upper notes for a bassist unless he's soloing, thus, all the bottom goes away.

This sort of thing was more acceptable in the 70's and earlier, but today due to all the low tuning and how thick mixes are, as soon as that bassist goes up for too long, it just sounds like the whole bottom dropped out. Especially if the bassist has a good tone like say, John Entwistle. He at times had that beautiful, low note, almost piano sounding bass tone. This low end is so awesome that once it leaves, all the bottom leaves too. As long as he doesn't stay up on those high notes for too long, it's cool, but quite a few guys do this and stay there too long. When they do...there is no bottom other than the kick drum. This to me leaves the mix sound empty...kinda like the bottom of a floor dropping out.

I have nothing against high notes on a bass, I just don't like how the bottom drops out completely. It's more an "ear getting used to the nice low end" really. If the tune didn't start there and had high notes to begin with, you don't notice it as much. But man...once you get used to the lows and then the dude goes up high, it just sounds empty to me and affects the impact of the song.

-Danny 

Right Danny.  However, if the bass player does go up, I don't think the engineers are trying to compensate for it!  I don't think this was more exceptable in the 70's either.  Maybe it was perhaps more widely used due to the nature of the songs?  

My point being that if the musician's elect to play something a certain way, they really should know what the impact of that will be or at least get input and direction from their producer.  Outside of that, anything is possible IMO.  

Rimshot
    

Danny Danzi


Depends what you consider "higher" Reece. LOL! To me, the closer you are to the nut/tuning pegs, the lower the notes. That's considered "lower on the neck". As he goes up towards the 12th fret, the notes get higher in pitch...higher on the neck towards the pick-ups. :)

-Danny 

OK.  I've always heard that nearer the tuning pegs are higher on the neck, but I know that's the lower notes.  I've not heard anyone call the higher notes the higher end of the neck.
 
just me, tho!  ;-)

Rimshot
Right Danny. However, if the bass player does go up, I don't think the engineers are trying to compensate for it! I don't think this was more exceptable in the 70's either. Maybe it was perhaps more widely used due to the nature of the songs?

My point being that if the musician's elect to play something a certain way, they really should know what the impact of that will be or at least get input and direction from their producer. Outside of that, anything is possible IMO.

Oh believe me, they compensate for it if the bottom drops out if it is indeed too apparent. I see it all the time, do it all the time and have watched grammy award winning engineers do it before I master their stuff because they too noticed this as "Too apparent".

It WAS more acceptable in the 70's. You're looking at an entirely different style of music today. Sonics, playing, lack of layering in the 70's, 4 piece recorded live verses 4 piece recorded in sections with layers, room ambience verses up front and direct...totally different ball game, trust me.

It's fine for a musician or bassist to play whatever he wants. I'm just saying, when they go up high, the bottom drops out and it does. Whether it bothers you or anyone else like it does me isn't the point. The point is it DOES drop out and it presents quite a difference in my opinion.

Reece
OK. I've always heard that nearer the tuning pegs are higher on the neck, but I know that's the lower notes. I've not heard anyone call the higher notes the higher end of the neck.

just me, tho! ;-)

Look at it like this Reece. If we play an open E on our 6th string on a guitar, and then play on the first fret we are going up the neck. Each time you play a note higher in pitch, you are going "higher" up the neck to achieve these notes. Even if you played notes on different strings on the first fret, they are all "higher" notes going up the neck because you are going up. Up=higher in pitch, down=lower in pitch.

I'm not saying what you said is wrong, I just can't see how it could be taken any other way. :)

-Danny

Interesting discussion, and one I can relate to.

I recently tracked the bass guitar for a piece and at a couple of points during the song, to my ears, it cried for a couple of bass harmonics, so I practiced what I wanted to hear and recorded it that way.

When it came to mix, the bottom end did indeed "drop out", leaving a sonic hole that needed to be filled, so I overdubbed from just before where the harmonics were played with a single long-ish sustained bass note, and the bottom end filled out nicely.

Danny - I fully understand what you're saying, thank you.