P-T-P

I'm no expert but I've looked after the PA side of things for my band the past few years. What you'll need depends on what is going to go through the front of house (FOH) speakers (vocals only? bass/guitar/keys? some drums too?) and whether you want to have monitors (either wedges or in-ear type) sending those sounds on-stage in some form. I take it by "standard PA head" you mean something that looks a bit like a bass or guitar head but with several input channels that can be mixed and then amplified all from the one unit which then sends the signal to the FOH speakers. This is what is called a powered mixer. Some have just 4 channels and output 150 to 250w and look a lot like a bass head. There are others which are much bigger though with fader (slider) controls, individual EQ controls (bass, mid, treble) for each channel (i.e. each mic or instrument coming in). Some of these larger units are still housed in a case and just look like a big bass head, but some are designed to be laid on a table top like a more traditional mixer. You can get powered mixers that will deliver up to around 1000w (usually 2 x 500w outputs one for left channel one for right creating a stereo mix if required). They are available with up to approx 20 input channels, some of which will be stereo pairs, so you might have 12 mono channels (mics, guitars etc) and 4 stereo channels (for keyboards, sequencers etc.). You then create your mix and it gets sent to the onboard amps which then drive the speakers FOH. Some of these will have on board FX and some also will have additional controls on each channel allowing you to create one or more monitor mixes. These monitor mixes will usually need to be amplified by a seperate piece(s) of equipment. Alternative to a powered mixer is a an unpowered mixer which can do everyrthing a powered mixer can do and may or not have the same features (onboard FX, monitor mixing etc.) but it won't amplify anything. If using an unpowered mixer you need to either send the final mix signal out from the mixer and then to either.... a) A power amp(s) which then amplifies the signal and sends it to passive speakers or Active speakers i.e. speaker enclosures that have a power amp built in to them With your monitor mixes you will either send them to power amps and passive wedges or to an active wedges (with on board amp) or to in-ear monitors. There's a whole lot more that may need to be done depending on what features your desk has and what you are putting into the mixer. You may need an EQ between the mixer and power amp, you may need to route some of the channels to external FX units. You might want to use a crossover between the mixer and amp(s) to seperate the low and high frequencies sending them (via power amps) to bass bins and tops. Note: Mon and FX on each channel are usually referred to as AUX. A mixer with 6 Aux per channel can be used to create, for example, 4 monitor mixes with the other 2 being used to route signals to external (or internal) FX. Personally, I don't like using active FOH speakers or active monitor wedges because most of the time you don't have a plug socket near where they are sited and end up having to run extension cables everywhere. Plus, if you use power amps and passive speakers, your master volume controls are all in one place. In your post you mention about running a mixer into a standard PA head and that would work, but is not the optimum set-up. My band uses a powered mixer and passive speakers, in-ear monitoring and a single wedge monitor. The chain looks something like this... 4 x vocal mics 1 x bass (DI) 2 x guitar (mic'd amps) These go into powered mixer (Behringer PMP5000) which has 2 x mon sends per channel and two FX sends (to internal FX bank one and two). There is a jack output and master fader for each of the two mon sends and the two FX sends. There is also the master send for the on-board power amps. The FOH signal comes from the power amp outputs (L and R) and goes into a bass bin (one each side) which has a passive crossover built into it. The bass bin pumps out anything under 250Hz and sends everything else up to a full range cab. That's FOH taken care of. On each channel the "Mon 1" controls the amount of that particular voice or instrument sent to the Mon 1 output. Similarly with "Mon 2" FX1 is only used on the vocals and sends them to bank one of the onboard FX unit which has a nice reverb selected. FX2 is used on all the channels to send to bank two of the onboard FX but there is no effect selected. As FX2 is dry (no FX selected) I use the FX2 controls to crete a third "full" monitor mix There is an output jack for FX1 and FX2 and whatever is sent from each channel to the onboard FX is also present here. Mon 1 output is sent to lead singer's in-ear monitors. Mon 2 output is sent to my in-ear monitors. FX1 only has vocals and is a wet signal (reverb on it) and I use this for guitarist's wedge monitor (more later) FX2 is dry and is a the drummer's in-ear monitor mix. The signal from FX1 goes into what you earlier called a standard PA head and with that I power the guitarist's wedge monitor. As it's a 6 channel mixer and lighter than many power amps we use that because in an emergency it would be powerful enough to run a vocals only FOH mix. Okay that was quite a lot to take in I'm sure, but that's the basics and I hope it makes sense.

[quote name='Oxblood' post='36889' date='Jul 25 2007, 02:46 PM']When it comes to basic signal processing gear like mixers, effects, pre-amps etc., Behringer can get by pretty well. I have an old Behringer rackmount Mic pre-amp myself: the Pre-Q model 502. It was given to me as surplus by my brother. I use it now and then for recording vocals, and it's fine. Not the quietest thing on earth, but it works. Of course it does: it doesn't have to do anything very demanding or deliver any power. The problems arise when Behringer apply this same corner-cutting, cheap 'n' cheerful manufacturing philosophy to items which ARE required to do demanding things - i.e. amplifiers and loudspeakers - and then compound the sin by advertising said flimsy trash by means of vague, impressive-sounding pseudo-technical nonsense and completely unrealistic performance claims. The most telling factor is this: Behringer NEVER quote figures for power output (amplifiers) or power handling (speakers) in the generally accepted, measurable, comparable terms used by all respectable manufacturers throughout the industry: i.e. [b]RMS Watts[/b]. Instead, we get hyperbole: "An amazing X Hundred Watts of massive/earth-shaking/seismic (choose your favourite superlative) Bass Power!" - but nowhere in their literature will you ever find anything that quantifies exactly how these "hundreds of Watts" are being measured. If any of their amplifiers were actually capable of producing the wattages they claim to [i]in genuine RMS terms[/i] - and that automatically assumes being able to do so cleanly and reliably across the whole usable frequency range - Behringer would be only too keen to tell us about it. The fact that they don't (or rather DAREN'T) tells you everything you need to know. ADDED LATER: Good heavens, they must have heard me shouting all the way to Germany! Take a look at this: [url="http://www.behringerdownload.de/BB-Serie/BB210_SPECS_Rev_AB.pdf"]BB210 cabinet PDF spec sheet[/url] In describing the power handling, it actually uses the letters RMS. Nurse...the screens! Aha. Wait a mo. Just one tiny problem. What it really says is "(RMS / Music)" - and therein lies their sneaky get-out clause. They've used the term "RMS" to fool the unwary into believing that they're actually talking genuine Root Mean Square measurement. In fact, they're talking "Music Power" - a discredited (disreputable, even) measurement system invented in the 1960s for marketing cheap, low-powered home entertainment systems. It delivers figures that are impressively (but misleadingly) large. What "Music Power" describes is the maximum power the speakers are able to handle over a very short - almost instantaneous - period, such as the attack peak of a note. This is always far higher than the genuine average power handling capacity of the speaker over time. In other words, the same old brand of flim-flam, smoke, mirrors and sleight-of-hand we've all become used to from Behringer. [/quote] And yet the specs for the Behringer mixer I have state clearly both the RMS and peak output figures. As does the spec sheet for the B1220 PRO, B1520 PRO and B1800X PRO and it is the RMS figure they are quoting in the sales blurb. I can't be arsed looking through all the products but I'm guessing their newer stuff like my mixer and those cabs are quoting RMS figures now. They are far from the only company - in the music industry or otherwise - who use selective specifications in their sales blurb. I just looked quickly at the Roland site and sure enough for their Cube 30 and 15 there is no mention of how those 30w or 15w are measured, either on the product page or the spec sheet/brochure. Oh and my mixer is not cheap 'n' cheerful and there don't appear to have been any corners cut either. It sounds fantastic and has more than enough poke, certainly it seems easily as loud as hoped for based on their figures.

[quote name='Chopthebass' post='36486' date='Jul 24 2007, 05:47 PM']The words 'behringer' and 'amazing' don't go together, so I'd give up hoping! I was curious, so I had a look at the manual online.[/quote] Based on my experience of Bheringer products, I have to disagree. My band has used a PMH5000 powered mixer for the past two years and it was briliant up to the point where it died as a result of an incident involving a falling PA stack. We've replaced it with a PMP5000 and that too is equally excellent. I have a Multicom Pro and their Ultrapatch and both are fantastic too. I really don't understand the hatred for Behringer quite honestly. They make a bunch of great products and they make 'em available to the buying public at a lot less than competitor's equivalents. Like any company that has so many product lines, not everything is going to be the dingo's danglies. As for their alledged ripping off other companies. They've been sued by Aphex, who won; by Mackie who went to court, made an ass of themselves and then settled out of court and Roland/BOSS had words about the Behringer stomp boxes but as it turned out the visual similarity was where it ended, internally they were very different. Behringer apparently agreed to make a minor change to the design and everyone was happy. Do people who think Behringer are ripping off other companies have the same negative feelings about Lakland, Sadowsky, Tokai, Encore (any other company that make a Fender clone, be it cheaper copy or high end replica/refinement)? Clearly Behringer aren't doing anything massively illegal because there's no way they could have got to be the massive corporation they are now if they were.

[quote name='stewblack' post='36446' date='Jul 24 2007, 04:32 PM']Cheers for the heads up. Marvin Gaye I can see being worth listening to, James Brown needs to shut up screeching and sing occasionally apart from that as you say excellent bass stuff, but Jamiroquai? Spare me please, I couldn't stand one track of that mind numbing, soulless, ball less lift music. Each to their own of course, just my humble opinion.[/quote] Yeah, know what you mean on the Jamiroquai front, but can't deny that there's some delicious bass playing on there.

Just picked the following up from my local Tesco... Marvin Gaye Gold - Double CD all the hits and loads more besides James Brown Gold - As above but Mr. Brown Jamiroquai - High Times: Singles 1992-2006 All of them for £5 each. Even if they're not really your thing musically (and there's only so much of JB and Jam I can listen to) you kinda owe it to yourself as a bass player to broaden your horizons when it's that cheap.

We gig without a FOH engineer, usually relying on a soundcheck and then someone out front who knows what we want to sound like to advise. Usually what will happen is that vocals will need a bit of a lift. Usually this is because - as I discover when I take my in-ears out - guitarist has cranked his volume about three bars in. I'm almost always grateful for feedback from someone out front on the sound quality. I only have an issue when playing a sizeable (but empty at soundcheck) venue and someone from the committee (who for all I know spent his entire working life in a mine next to the mother of all drills) starts giving advice about how such and such is too loud. We always turn down when asked once there are people in the house, but I find it galling when asked to do so despite there being a full dancefloor, loads of applause and it's because there is one old bag who has plonked herself inches from the PA stack complaining.

Yes, bought my first Laklands from them and service was superb.

FYI Javascript errors gone now but still have this posting problem.

Okay, javascript errors gone now and pop-up search box works fine.

Just cleared cache and cookies and still have javascript error as before.

What mics are you using for the audience/ambience and where are you placing them?

The Aero's on my DJ5s are pretty loud.

[quote name='phatmonkey' post='34141' date='Jul 19 2007, 02:32 PM']Next time the problem happens, can somebody copy the exact text that is left over, save it as a .txt file and attach it here. If it's always the same size, might help indicate what it is. From Invision: When they are losing post, are they making large posts? Or is it just any size post?[/quote] Hi, details of problem attached, my comments/explanations are in quotes " " while post details entered are in between the ----------- lines. [attachment=1293:basschat..._problem.txt]

[quote name='phatmonkey' post='34137' date='Jul 19 2007, 02:28 PM']Can everybody having the problem clear their browser caches (normally in options/preferences) and tell me if it's fixed. Ta[/quote] Had already tried before posting originally. Just done it again and still getting the error.

[quote name='Sharkfinger' post='34192' date='Jul 19 2007, 04:14 PM']It's short scale but looks nice. Will see if I can pick one up second hand. I take it it didn't suffer sound-wise being short scale?[/quote] You'll do well to find one on eBay UK. They do come up in the US, but unless you can get around the customs and tax fees, might as well spend the extra £15 and get one from Thomann. It sounded great, didn't lack bottom end at all but lacking a little at the top end, not much growl, more a full on woof! Great for rock/soul/blues and some pop/funk.

We have a Shure matrix mixer, which works well, but it's a pain in the ass having to carry that and all the crap that goes with it. You're right about the lack of direct outs on "live" mixers. One of those things where had we known enough when starting to build the PA.... Yamaha do a pair of live mixers with on board FX that have 4 Aux sends plus 2 for the onboard FX. Can just about get by now using the change described in my earlier post,

£365 from Thomann new [url="http://www.thomann.de/gb/epiphone_allen_woody_rumble_kat.htm"]http://www.thomann.de/gb/epiphone_allen_woody_rumble_kat.htm[/url]

I used to have an Epiphone Allen Woody Rumblekat bass which was short(er) scale. Not sure if it was 32" or 30" but it was epic and I regret 100% having sold it. Looked pretty smart too. Obviously not designed for slapping and was tonally more thundering lows than honky mids but enough of everything that it was usable in most situations. Never really tried it with a pick, but am guessing that would have brought about a whole new palatte of tones. You can get them for about £200 on eBay from the US plus postage and customs/tax. All told no more than about £350.

Funny Bone - Chic Credit - Tower of Power With or Without You - U2 Mrs. Robinson - Lemonheads

I use Leathercraft straps which I've only ever seen hanging up in music shops, can't find any info on them. They are 4" wide along most of their length and are slightly padded (or perhaps just very soft but thick leather). Black leather on one side, black suede on the other. I tend to have the leather side down as I find the suede grips too much. Have never really noticed the weight of basses since I started using these straps.

I've been using DR Extras on all my basses for nearly a year now. None of the harshness of most stainless steel strings I've tried in the past but certainly are not lacking in the bright department while offering plenty of low-end thump too. Also feel very tonally balanced across all 5 strings. They last for ages (I gig once or twice a week and play every day) compared to a standard set (which I usually had to change about once a month) but feel like a normal string despite the coating, plus they come in a range of funky colours which is cheaper than replacing your bass when you feel the need for a change! Cheap as chips from Thomann as long as you are happy with only black beauties, order via eBay if you want other colours. Little more pricey but still way cheaper than UK prices. A word in for Lakland strings too, although taper is a problem for me as I prefer top-loaded rather than through body stringing. I especially like their nickel-wounds and ordering them via Lakland site is also very economical.

Thanks for the replies. I think perhaps I didn't explain what I'm hoping to achieve properly, namely four wholly unique and independent monitor mixes so that each band member can have a personal mix sent to their IEMs or wedge. A patchbay will do the trick, I was hoping there was perhaps some way of just linking the two (sadly there's no direct outs for each channel on these particular mixers). As it turns out though, the replacement mixers have a minor but important change to the one we used to use. The two aux sends which are dedicated to the onboard FX now have an output jack. I need three IEM mixes and one wedge and I can now achieve it all from one mixer so long as I only use one of the two onboard FX banks. Each channel has 4 aux controls, labelled... Mon 1 Mon 2 FX1 FX2 Mon 1 and Mon 2 are pre-fader. FX1 and FX2 are post-fader. Mon 1 and 2 send a signal (via fader for each) to Mon 1 jack output and Mon 2 jack output. FX1 and FX2 send signal to on-board FX1 and FX2 banks respectively as well as (via fader for each) to a single TRS jack output (FX1 at tip, FX2 at ring). Each FX bank has three rotary controls: FX1 to main; FX1 to Mon1; FX1 to Mon 2 (similar for FX2). I used the Mon 1, Mon 2 and FX2 controls to create three mixes for IEMs (turned off FX2 bank) while FX1 only has vocals being sent to FX1 bank and that is all that needs get sent to wedge monitor so cool beans. It's not 100% foolproof, and never will be unless we get a mixer with sufficient AUX sends on-board, but it worked well enough and will make a nice dent in the amount of gear we are going to have to cart about. If anyone can spot a flaw in my plan, please say so!