Skol303

Good call! I played that album to death whilst DJing at the time. Happy days Literally wore out my copy and had to buy another recently when I found its tattered remains in my record collection. Kept it for posterity, however.

Then whilst they may be bloody good bass players, it’s fair to say they are bloody inexperienced when it comes to sound engineering. Which is perfectly fine. We can’t all be good at everything

Exactly this. The market will decide the fate of such shops, if it hasn't already. You can buy a bass guitar online, often more cheaply and delivered next day with the option to return it for a no-quibbles refund within 14 days if expectations aren’t met. That’s a tough act for music shops to beat. They know it and most of them show it… hence their amosphere of impending doom and general apathy, which reinforces the vicious cycle. The only guy I knew who got this right was Drew from the Great British Bass Lounge (Manchester); but that was largely because the shop was in his house and buying from him was like having a coffee and banter with a mate (he did make great coffee did Drew). But he’s since closed down. For boutique stuff (which I don’t buy itself) I can see the need for specialist shops. For everything else, online uber alles.

^ Glad to be of service

Your probably need a compressor in the signal chain! (yeah, that's going to get old very quickly...). But in all seriousness, it's hard to advise on fixing ground loops over the internet, 'cos the problems are often very localised. I had a significant ground loop at home - constant buzz through my monitors - that I was unable to localise even after a good deal of faffing around. In the end I capitulated and bought one of these on recommendation of a friend: Ebtech HE-2 Hum Eliminator It sits at the end of the signal chain between my mixer and active monitors... and it has completely killed my ground loop. Like, quite literally silenced it. The Ebtech box is quite expensive new but can usually be found second hand on eBay, which is where I got mine.You might otherwise be able to buy one on a 14-day returns policy and just try it out. I'm sure others will also be along with better advice...

Good question. And that sounds like a great band, by the way! If you have a sound engineer on your team who knows the band well (you mention the band leader) and if you're not familiar with using compression yourself, then I'd leave it up to him. It's always best if one person has the role of adjusting the band's sound as a whole. BUT... (that's a big but)... there's nothing stopping you from using compression to shape your individual tone; it can be used for that purpose (the classic "fattening" effect) leaving your band leader to then mix your compressed signal in with the rest of the band - even applying a second compressor whilst doing so if he wishes. ^ Good comments from Cuzzie above too.

Oh and I don't think anyone has said that compression makes music sound better. It just helps music 'fit together better when needed'. School boy error; small yet significant difference; but you are forgiven

Clever comment! But in all seriousness there are of course reasons why classical musicians tend not to use compressors: The first and most obvious is because they tend to play acoustic/unplugged and so there’s... err... no signal chain for the compressor to be linked into. That's quite a biggie, really. Compressors are definitely most transparent when there's nothing to plug them into. On occasions when classical musicians are mic'd up and their performances fed through a mixing desk, there'll certainly be some sneaky compression being applied to help manage the overall mix. But yeah, you won't find it being used on stomp-boxes at the musicians' feet. Classical arrangements are written to avoid clashes between instruments of similar frequency. That’s not how composers think of it, they tend to think in terms of balancing tone and timbre, but it has the same end result. Very different to five tubby blokes belting out Moondance with instruments all fighting for the same frequency band. Classical concerts tend to be performed in rooms with far better acoustics than your average Dog & Duck. Other than that, yeah, classical musicians are mostly amateurs. Why anyone would waste their time with that sort of guff is beyond me

PS: this one is for metal...

Should we...? HELL NO! Will we...? HELL YES!

Some useful info in this previous thread… https://www.basschat.co.uk/topic/319562-compressors-do-i-need-one/ …which also proves that the topic of “Compressors: Uh??” is evidence of the world being controlled by some kind of nightmarish, Matrix-style supercomputer determined to mess up my head with its sick sense of deja vu. At least that's the most logical conclusion I've come to. I mean it can't be that we have the collective memory of a goldfish. And by the way, some useful info in this previous thread... https://www.basschat.co.uk/topic/319562-compressors-do-i-need-one/

^ Hi Paul, yep that's a good example of how compression can even out a signal, thanks for posting. If you wanted to preserve more the dynamics, then you'd simply dial back the compressor to suit (e.g. reduce the ratio or increase the threshold).

That's because you're confusing a compressor with trousers. Again

The thing is Al, you might as well ask what impact wood glue has on the comfort of a dining chair? (bear with me...!). The glue helps to hold the chair together. Without it, that function is left to the screws alone. The chair still stands, but it's not as sturdy. And none of this is noticed by the people who sit on it. Thats about all I've got left on this discussion. My tank is empty, but I wish you well

Hi Dave, sorry to say that rolls of carpet underlay won't do much for room acoustics. Traditional 'bass traps' work by being filled with mineral wool - the tiny fibres of which vibrate when sound waves hit them and in doing so convert some of the sound energy into heat. The fibres in carpet underlay will be far too heavy and/or dense to function in this way (in any practical sense). They'll dampen some of the mid-to-high frequencies, which are affected by most fabrics, even curtains. But the bass frequencies will just pass right through unhindered - and without any significant amount of sound energy being converted into heat along the way. So yeah. You're probably losing out on frequencies you want to hear, and doing feck all to hinder those you have too much of. Ergo, ditch the underlay PS: you could just stack some plastic-wrapped bails of mineral wool in the corners instead. That's about as basic as it gets, but it would be a helluva lot more effective.

Acoustics can be a very complicated topic... as I've discovered for myself ...but the basics are easy enough, especially if you stick to the simpler mineral wool panels: in which case, more is always better!

Hello mate, fancy seeing you here?!

Forget egg boxes and also forget about 'acoustic foam' (in case you were considering using it). Both are next to useless at dealing with bass frequencies, which is where 99% of your problems will be. Too many egg crates and/or foam will in fact make your room sound very 'boxy' (dull mids/highs), so definitely avoid. Persian carpet on the floor is good. Windows behave a bit like bass traps... they're 'acoustically floppy' (!) and will let most of the low end pass right through (whilst reflecting some of the highs back into the room), so they can in fact be advantageous. If the room is small and anywhere near square-shape then you're in for acoustic problems, there's no escaping that unfortunately. In terms of solutions, it pretty much always boils down to one or a combination the following: Panels stuffed with mineral wool (aka velocity or absorber panels) and the bigger/thicker the better when trying to flatten the low end. This will mean sacrificing some of the space in your room: you need to be aiming for at least 20% coverage of the room surface area to get real benefit (my own room has 37% coverage, not including the floor, and it resembles a padded cell). Helmholtz (aka tuned membrane) panels that are designed to vibrate at specific frequency ranges and are great at targeting low end problems. They can be much smaller than mineral wool panels but are difficult to DIY and relatively expensive to purchase. Examples here. Multiple subwoofers! yes, that might sound counter-intuitive when trying to fix bass problems, but 2+ subs can be set up to create an exceptionally flat frequency response in the low end - and it's a trick that works in pretty much any room. Brief explanation here from SoundOnSound. This approach requires some technical understanding and/or trial and error - not to mention cost - but it's proven to work well. ...and that's pretty much it in terms of options. Most people (myself included) plump for option 1: mineral wool panels, because it's the most cost-effective, easy to DIY and can be installed to a large extent based guesswork, rather than needing to take acoustic measurements (although measurements are always recommended). DIY is the cheapest option. If you want to buy new, a budget of around £1000 for a domestic room will cover all of the basic essentials. I've done both - bought some brand new, studied their construction and then DIY'd my own equivalents. And I'm quite crap at DIY. Hope that helps! PS: there is in fact a fourth option... Use good pair of headphones. Some rooms simply can't be acoustically treated to any practical level - e.g. if the room is a small square box, or if the acoustic treatment would get in the way of other uses the room might have... like functioning as a toilet! In which case, forget acoustic treatment and invest in a good pair of mixing headphones - e.g. Sennheiser HD 600 or 650 - and just do whatever treatment you can to make your monitor speakers more usable. I mixed for several years on headphones alone; it worked for me.

This comment allows me to hopefully explain some of the misunderstanding around compression, so if you don't mind I'm going to dive in a dissect it a little Firstly, and with respect (not wanting to single you out), this type of response suggests that you don’t fully understand the purpose of compression. And I’m not trying to be deliberately patronising here! It's just an unfortunate by-product of me trying to explain all this. So apologies and please bear with me. Unless you are slamming a drum kit with hard New York-style parallel compression, it is very unlikely to ever give someone “a boner” as you put it. Boner causation is just not the purpose of compression, I’m sorry to say. It really is the 'bass player' of audio effects in that respect. Quiet and steady, doing its job, holding things together; no real glamour or glory. That's a compressor. Great! And you can pretty much stop right there, because you've got it - that is precisely the purpose of a compressor. And helping you sit better in the mix should not be understated. It’s the difference between a great-sounding band and indeed, one with potential to bring about boners. Even amongst the female members of the audience. And that's the part where the misunderstanding sets in. Other than very hard compression, which can be done for effect, there really isn't "any other application" apart from helping even out your signal so that it sits better in the mix. And maybe it's because you expect compression to do something else that you find it underwhelming. It's great that people comment on your tone and they most certainly do so because you’re a competent bass player and you use nice gear. But if you were to give me a bunch of your band's recordings and asked me to mix them, I guarantee there would be moments on each song where your bass is noticeably too loud or too quiet - and this would need fixing if I were to do my job properly as a (albeit unpaid amateur!) mix engineer. I could approach this by trying to automate or ‘ride the fader’: manually adjusting the level of your bass to compensate for loud and quiet notes. Or I could use a compressor to do this automatically. And the important thing to note here is that a compressor doesn't just apply to the solo instrument: it's about helping that instrument sit well alongside others playing simultaneously. It's a tool for helping to mix the whole band; not a tool for drawing attention to any one player. Does this matter in a live context? If you, your band and your audience are happy with your sound, then no it probably doesn't. As I’ve said before, compression is rarely essential, but it's nearly always beneficial. If you’re an obsessive like me, who likes to squeeze every % of quality out of a performance (live or recorded), then yes it matters. And that’s why the bass guitar on nearly every recorded song - and played by nearly every professional musician - has compression applied either at source or at the mixing desk. Such pro players have technique in spades and they use compression: because they want to attain the best sound possible. Does a pub band need to do the same? That's a question for you to answer. But if you're spending good money on your instruments and obsessing over string types/gauges, maple/rosewood boards, etc, then you're already obsessing over things that arguably have a lesser effect on your band as a whole than compression. TL/DR: you can mix your porridge smooth, or you can mix it lumpy. It's still porridge. But if you want to add other ingredients, like some blueberries and bananas, then it's best to mix it smooth for a better overall experience. Simple, right?

^ Strictly speaking, compressors are dynamic 'effects' (anything that alters a signal based on its frequency content and amplitude). But yeah, I totally agree that using the term ‘FX’ probably confuses matters further, as it implies something that very noticeably alters the signal. And I think therein lies the confusion for some when using a compressor: they either crank it hard until they hear an obvious change (by which point the signal is probably too squashed, depending on genre); or they can't discern any obvious difference and ask "what's the fuss all about?" Of course the 'Goldilocks Zone' in most cases is somewhere in the middle.

I will. But it's really less combative than it might seem. The necessity for using compression is borne out of the laws of physics and well-recognised good practice in sound engineering. It's not something subjective, like whether a new set of strings makes your tone sound 'better'. It's proven by the measurable behaviour of sound traveling through air. All quite dull and predictable, really. The short story is that every bass player should use a compressor. Because the bass guitar is an instrument capable of producing extremes of both low and high frequency energy, and there's not a cat-in-hell's chance that anyone can compensate for that by 'good technique' alone, least of all during a live performance. This is why 100% of sound engineers apply compressors to bass, to compensate for the 50% of bass players who apparently don't. Ultimately it's not essential. Just like changing your strings regularly isn't essential. But the question as to whether it's beneficial has been answered long ago, which is why I find threads like this a little tedious (no offence). Compression is complex and very different to the majority of other FX we apply to our instruments, where we plug something in and turn a dial until we hear a noticeable difference. And I think that is partly why it confuses some people and leads others to believe that it's a case of the Emperor's New Clothes. What I find odd is how this confusion seems most prevalent amongst bass players - the very people who stand to benefit most from compression. You just don't get threads like this appearing on sound engineering forums. Instead, you just get endless debate about 'which compressor is best for bass'... and that's just as tedious! Anyway. Next time I record some bass I'll post some clips of the dry signal and the same signal (at the same volume) run through a compressor - and also both again in the context of a mix with other instruments - so you can hear the difference. Until then, my advice would be to cease tilting at windmills

I live in hope. I really do In the meantime here's a useful summary from Fender... a brand that some of us may have heard of: https://www.fender.com/articles/tech-talk/effects-guide-compression-decompressed I love this opening line... "Compression is possibly the single most misunderstood effect that a guitarist can use." Ain't that the truth.

Not really interesting. Just evidence that we bass players are perhaps deserving of being viewed as the ‘slow learners club’ amongst musicians. PS: when I can be arsed, I’m going to post a thread explaining the necessity of compression with some audio clips to help illustrate; just so this topic can finally be taken out back, shot in the head and buried for all time. Until then, as you were.