51m0n

This is about the cheapest a quick search has turned up:- [url="http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/lexicon-alpha-stereo-usb-audio-interface--36113"]lexicon[/url]

[quote name='hudson_m' post='1135979' date='Feb 21 2011, 06:54 PM']I have recently bought one of these Archer basses as a return to playing after 20 years of not really doing much and after a bit of setting up - bridge height and some working of fingerboard - it now has a decent action. My previous bass was a quite nice French Jacquet School, but I'm not sure yet about this very nice looking (in terms of the wood) bass. It's fine for pizz work with the supplied strings - they are actually quite nice and smooth sounding, but for arco work its terrible! My guess is that this is most likely the fault of the default strings and that I need to invest in some better ones. After a lot of reading, I am tempted by the D'Addario Hybrids but does anybody really know that this will make the difference I'm after. Some more info perhaps: Slow slurred arco is fine - warm even sound across all four strings. Slow detached arco - also OK but bow attack needs some effort to ensure consistency (& strong left hand) Fast detached - terrible scratchy noise - strings hardly speak at all! - and this is what I want the bass to be able to do! As said, I assume I need better strings, but before I fork out the £100+ needed ... can anyone think of anything else I should try setup-wise first? Mark[/quote] I dont know, Plux's bass has the damnably expensive strings on it. Arco is massive though, unbelievable tone and volume, even I can get a nice note out of it (albeit out of tune).

[quote name='ras52' post='1138707' date='Feb 23 2011, 03:30 PM']Interesting... I see it recommends 2Gb of RAM, and presumably that's on top of everything else. Is there a reference somewhere with recommended minimum machine specs, e.g. if I want to record X tracks at sample rate Y, I need a machine with this spec ABC...[/quote] Edited due to completely misunderstanding what you were on about It runs on my old Dell desktop business machien, and my old HP laptop. Once you have a drum mix down you can mix it down to stereo and be done with it.

All the early stuff you can get your hands on - if its in print on a cd its worth a listen!

If you want old school, and your cab has a tweeter, the very first thing you need to do is turn the tweeter off, paper cones do top end very very differently to tweeters, and you'll struggle to find an old school cab with a tweeter in it.

That bundles an m-audio interface and a 'student' copy of pro-tools together. Pro-tools in an industry standard recording suite. Its good to know protools, but for the price I prefer Reaper (v. personal opinion, your mileage may vary). That would do the job...

No. But if you download mydrumset vsti [url="http://www.bluenoise.no/mydrumset.html"]clicky linky[/url] you will have an excellent free vsti to play with that works flawlessly in Repaer....

[quote name='cheddatom' post='1138243' date='Feb 23 2011, 10:06 AM']Sorry, I thought it was just an online thing. I hope it goes well anyway![/quote] +1 I'm not going to be able to get up to yours for this I'm afraid - and more than a bit gutted too!

Reaper is not shareware. It has an extended full functionality demo. The single person license works out t about £26 though, and is the best value for money DAW software I've found yet. Using your PC soundcard is very unlikely to get a decent result I'm afraid. IMpedance issues etc etc will cause you lots of grief. You will need some kind of simple USB interface. On the plus sde this will serve you well for years of writing and exchanging ideas, so its a very good investment.

2.4m cube? ooof, er basstraps. Everywhere.... Corners (supoerchunks are the way to go) and where celining meets wall, millions of examples of these on gearsluts. Here is one to give you an idea [url="http://www.gearslutz.com/board/bass-traps-acoustic-panels-foam-etc/439981-my-bass-trap-build.html"]clicky linky[/url]. Note his corner superchunk traps are very small, they really ought to be much much wider (about 2 feet) mid range absorbers on all the walls to catch first reflections, less dense rockwool - use a mirror, when sat in your mix position have sioomeone put a mirror flat against the wall, have them move it until you see the monitor on that side, thats where an absorber goes, then have them move it until you see the other monitor, you need to cover that as well. cloud on the ceiling. Small space like that this is a must! It wont fix it completely, but it will help, you are going to have enormous node build up somewhere with such similar dimensions.

Got to here URB through my rig at the SE Bass Bash. Made me sick it did, he proved that it wasn't actually my rig making me sound totally pants, but my bass. Its clearly not me after all, I'm a genius me In all honesty he did sound utterly superb, I suspect it is a lot to do with the fact that he practices, and stuff, where as I tend to bang out a couple of riffs a week if I get time! That and he can play of course, that woudl; be the other major factor I suspect....

[quote name='VxR Rusty' post='1136961' date='Feb 22 2011, 12:19 PM']Will raising the pickup help? Ive only got 1 pickup on the old EB. Ive found it to be a very trebly bass[/quote] Raising the treble side a bit may help, be careful though, if you raise it too much the magnetic field of the pickup may choke the notes a bit...

'Deep' is a funny old thing. You see if you want to hear some really deep music you are best off going to a big Cathedral with a really large organ. Honestly nothing else sounds like a 64' or 128' pipe. Bass guitar struggles to pout out much in the way of fundamental, and instead relies on the implied fundamental and mainly 2nd harmonic overtone. The average bass rig is similarly aimed at reproducing these kinds of frequencies. If you want to get very deep you need to add something to the natural sound of your bass with either careful eq, sub-harmonic synthesis (an octaver) or a low pass filter of some kind. A compressor may help you to maximise the average volume of your rig, and with enough control of attack and release etc you can use it to smooth out the transient (assuming it can catch it fast enough, a limiter may be more useful here), and by changing the volume of the sustain phase compared to the attack phase of the signal. It wont make the sound truly deeper though. So a lot of what you think is deep (wrt bass guitar) is actually not as deep as you might think, its often a lot more about the area between 80Hz and 300Hz and how those frequencies are managed with eq (either by the instrument, the amp or the cabs nature) rather than 40Hz to 80Hz. If you do boost very low down (around 40Hz) with an eq you need to keep an eye on your cab to be sure you arent over extending the cones. A judicious cut around twice the frequency you boosted may help control this, and any build up of mud as a result. One thing you cant escape from though is that if you really want deep you need power. Lots and lots and lots of it. And a big cabinet. Its not unusual to see people talking about the cabs that really can fill a room with loud deep bass running in excess of 1000watts. Certainly 500watts would be a minimum. That old Peavey head just will not produce masses of deep bass. Even pushing a 215. I've had a very similar rig to that (early 90's a Carlsbro head pushing an HH 215) and it would struggle against a heavy drummer and guitarist, and I preferred a far from deep tone, being all about tight bass and punch to try and combat the onslaught. I hope this helps...

Lightweight and warm, BF vintage or BigOne with bit of tone rolled off. Heavy and warm , Berg HT115 (god damn thats a lovely sounding cab!)

Its not the first tool to do something like this, there was an retuning bit of software (name escapes me naturally) that can change individual notes in a chord, or different instruments in an orchestral piece IIRC. Npt doing quite the same thing - it was all about changing pitches, but effectively isolating specific parts from the whole is a very similar task in both instances. Its always going to be worse than having the master tracks, you are at the mercy of what the process can determine, and what the mix engineer/mastering engineer have done. However its a pretty staggering developement IMO. Couldnt say how useful it will really be, wait long enough and someone will make somehting similar that isnt propritary though....

[quote name='urb' post='1136244' date='Feb 21 2011, 08:53 PM']I totally agree - I've got really sweet sounds from all my basses, all great quality instruments, by running them through the most basic bass/guitar amp that comes with Logic, this gives me a great clean sound that I've A/B'd with the sound I get via either the Mark Bass Studio 1 plugin, Amplitube or other modeling software - and I prefer the huge range of tones I can get from my basses than all the 'simulated' sounds. However I do think the plugins create some great tones I do use from time to time - but overall I think they can make your tone sound 'forced' IMO. One question I have got for you lovely lot is related to this subject though; is there a noticeable advantage to using a valve compressor as a preamp / interface between bass and DAW? Thanks for any answers... Mike[/quote] If you like the sound of it then its an advantage! Simple... Most tube comps are more noisy than their SS brethren though, not necessarily too noisy depending on the situation, and I am aware that its a sweeping generalisation, and that tube comps have been used succesfully iin recording for ever and a day, its still true though. Having said that FETs are noisier still very often, nature of the circuit. You may find if you are very noise averse that a very good simple pre with basic defeatable tone controls into a decent SS comp will actually get you a better result, assuming you set them up right. Your Sei sounded gorgeous through my rig at the SE Bash, hitting the compressor pretty hard without you noticing it as you played. I know the ae410 isnt considered the warmest of cabs, but married to the sa450 and with the right compression on the front its a crazy good sound. I'd DI and mic that in a heartbeat....

[quote name='Joelwidds' post='1135750' date='Feb 21 2011, 04:48 PM']This all seems to have got carried away. If i've learn anything recording is so so simple Good equipment and techniques = Good sound theres no magic going on. Good player -> Good Bass -> New strings -> Good DI -> Good AD Converters -> Hardrive. = Nice sound You take one of these elements away and its going to go down hill. Once you have a nice clean DI then your amp sims and VST are going to sound good and the sayings are "You cant polish and turd" and "Garbage in in garbage out". If you havent got a good bass in the first place then thats what you should fix. Thats chain neeeds to be the best it can because a amp sim and eq's arent the place to go. EQ is for fixing things but you don't have to fix it if you get it right it the first place. Plugings are a fad just used in the wrong way by so many people.[/quote] Ok, I understnd the sentiment, really I do, KISS and all that, and new strings are very important for a good bass sound, decent kit played well is a must too. It doesnt end there though. I've heard great bass tones played through pretty average signal chains set up really well, and I've heard utter plop through far more esoteric signal chains. How you set the kit up is more important than the name on the fron tof the box. EQ is not for 'fixing things' when recording and mixing. EQ is for cutting out the parts of instruments you dont need to make room for other instruments at that point in the frequency spectrum. It is for selecting the best parts of the instrument that are required in a given piece. The busier the piece the more you have to cut out of everything (generally) to get a clean mix at the end - of cource Getting a really decent overdrive requires either a mic'ed cab (my preference) or a decent amp/cab sim. In either event retaining a solid bottom end is generally easier if that part of the bass signal is dry (ie the clean DI), always was the case, and always will be. There will be times when the overall sound of the band make this not the case, but that isnt generally the case IME. This is not about polishing turds, this is about making the most of what you have, and using the constituent parts for what they do best. Its a very good mindset to have when recording. Plug ins are by no means a fad, they are very definitely here to stay. Thats a mind bogglingly weird thing to say! All recording equiptment is often used the wrong way, some of the people doing so are very deliberate about it, and the results are amazing. On the other hand some people read all the books and do everything how the books say, and turn out garbage.

[quote name='skankdelvar' post='1135573' date='Feb 21 2011, 03:06 PM']Once you find a sim that works for you, try the following: * Record your bass part clean * Copy the part to an adjacent track making sure they're perfectly aligned * Put the amp sim on the second track * Mute the clean track and fiddle with the amp sim till you get close to a sound you like * Unmute the clean track * Fiddle with the volume balance between the two, applying appropriate EQ, compression etc to each track until it sounds nice. The clean track supplies definition, the sim track adds warmth, etc. After all this fun, you can always send the two tracks to a bus, track folder, whatever, for kick drum ducking, etc.[/quote] Additional tuuppence worth:- If you want a dirtier sound then filter the clean sound at ~150Hz with a low pass filter and the simmed sound at a50Hz with a hi-pass filter. Dont be afraid to re-eq the combined signal, or compress the whole. Makes for a punchier bottom end with the option to add a lot more growl...

[quote name='flyfisher' post='1135530' date='Feb 21 2011, 02:27 PM']I reckon I could figure out how the testing part of the development could be largely automated, but I can't imagine where to start with defining an algorithm to reproduce the captured results - the clever bit indeed![/quote] You are not alone! Seems a very dark old art indeed that one, especially when taking into account the way the controls work and interact with the circuit in a lot of older analogue gear. But convolution reverbs work much the same way. I think the trick is not to assume a human writes 'the algorithm' so much as a human writes the code that compares the two signals and computes the differences, and that difference, or transformation, can then be applied to any sound with another piece of software.... It ain't that simple of course, but that is about the only way I can describe it to myself without reference to pixies, leprechauns and magic pixelated fairy dust....

In reality you dont really want to send the bass frequencies through the simulator (using the DI signal for bass is tried and tested). So really any half decent amp/cab sim is going to be fine, I've had good results with Shred, which is a free guitar oientated cab/amp sim. Dont get too carried away with 'that SVT sound', just go for somethiung you like, and remember anything under 150Hz or so is probably best left to the DI

In (extremely) simple terms modelling works by first running a lot of test signals through an actual device and measuring the diff of the output to the original, then (the clever bit) extrapolating an algorithm that can be applied to the original source to produce the output computationally. This needs to capture what happens at all frequencies and dynamic levels too. Now imagine going through all the possible setups wrt the controls on the face of the device (input gain, eq, output gain, any other filters etc) and modelling not only how they change the source sound, but how they interact with each other. Quite a big task.

Welcome, be prepared for major GAS and attendant credit card bills over the course of the next year as you discover more and more goodies you 'have to' have

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='1135049' date='Feb 21 2011, 07:12 AM']Don't know for sure, but here's some suggestions: Small 'boutique' company. They're the most solid, well-built cabs I've ever used. [b]IMO They're the best sounding cabs I've ever used.[/b] They have a great reputation, so people are prepared to pay a premium.[/quote] Yup that about sums it up, the really big deal being the one I've hi-lighted. To my ears, and I assure you I wanted to think otherwise purely for cost reasons, every time I put my ae410 up gainst another cab its closer to what I imagine a great bass tone should be. Not always by much, but I've yet to hear another cab that ticked as many of those entirely subjectivve tone boxes for me as the one I currently own.

If you need to be able to record on location then the Zoom R16 (or R24) are good buys. Especially considering you can later on get a second one and link them together for 16 tracks simulataneous recording. Data transfer from them to the PC is super easy, just get a memory card to USB converter and copy the files directly into a folder then use Reaper to mixdown. Simples. And they sound really good for the price (IMO). If location recording is irrelevant then get something like the Focusrite mentioned above, good name in kit, decent mic pres, 'nuff said.