EBS_freak

Who? If I go off googling, Im not going to be met with images of a naked woman in bronze leather trousers am I...?

Did people ever buy Hartke because Victor was using them? I'm happy to have discussions on this... but I reckon the only two bass players that can really shift amp gear in any numbers because they play it... are Mark King and Marcus. I can't think of any other players that would be able to shift amps in any significant number because they use it. Having said that, I'm not sure the Marcus signature amp is doing the same for Markbass as it did for SWR and EBS.

Do endoresements really work like that? This isn't even a King signature... so unlikely that he's getting a kickback from them. Very few artists get stuff for "free". They normally have the opportunity to buy gear at an "artist rate". It's only the real top dogs that command stuff for free... Or conversely, the small companies that are eager to have some sort of name playing their products, they'll give it away free in the hope that it generates some sort of interest. (Yes, there are artists out there who abuse the small manufacturers - those players are the REAL enwhorsers... especially when they flip the goods on for a profit). I suspect that as long as Kingy gets his face in a few mags when there's tours going on... and he can just turn up to a gig and there be his preferred backline there, I'm guessing he'll be happy.

Sometimes people just fancy a change. I don't think there's any slur on Ashdown's support why people move on. (Not that he moved from Ashdown to Markbass... he was currently on TC) Artist's can be somewhat prickly people to deal with. I know somebody who moved on because they didn't think that the manufacturer was putting their image in enough magazine adverts...

I did read that - but it didn't even register. Mind you, I hadn't slept yesterday... so it's amazing that I could even read anything.

We even got talk of Nathan East’s signature bass in here too. Poor Markbass. They are well down the pecking order in this thread!

I can't believe that anybody has commented on MARK King having MARK Bass amps. It's all a bit cheesy isn't it? Where's the STEVE Bass? Of course, the biggest trick that MB have missed is having a set of MARK King cabs. Just replace the tweeter, job done. Want Mark's sound? Then you'll need to buy the cabs, naturally. I've got this marketing malarkey down, I swear.

a - it's an immense preamp.

Knowing first hand how much low end that a BBNE2 can put out... and the fact that you are diming the low end on your bass... I'm amazed your speakers haven't given out yet. Or your ear drums. Or both.

And this is why it's a lost cause. 😛

I suppose it could be those who are chasing the tone of a particular era? Like those that chase the same with basses that Mark used from Jaydee, Alembic, GB, Status, Pangborn etc... (whatever your preference) The thing is, you know as well as I do, the only person who hears the sound of the amp/cab combination are those on stage... once it's left the DI, it's all in the hands of FoH.

Just beat me to it. I'm convinced that King fans will buy new basses at the drop of a hat... I'm not convinced about amps. If you are a true King fan, when he (inevitably) moves on... do you want to be stuck with a King head that isn't currently being used by Mark... and have trouble shifting it on because all the Mark King fans want to be on the next thing (or not?!). I just don't know!

Out of interest, did the Mark King signature generate a lot of sale due to the name on it? I know Status can get a cash injection through releasing a new King related bass... I'm not entirely sure that that is the case with bass amps and Mr King though.

Get in a DAW, download some stems and practice, practice, practice. You can only read so much, the rest comes from your ears and experience. Pay attention to the "sub bass" and you'll soon figure out why this stuff is important.

Passion! Sometimes the brand awareness that it brings can be more meaningful than the sale of the model that is being used by an artist. For example, can you name the exact model of Marshall amp that you see guitarists with... or does it matter more to Marshall that you see the name Marshall on the cabs?

Very much agreed - all sound is subjective. If it sounds good to you, it's right. Of course, many other people may disagree... but that's why there's different audio equipment, different instruments yiddah yaddah. Interesting comment about being built for one person and it's only their view that matters? That's not a particular wise move if you are looking at shifting units! Still, there's probably enough GB fans who could potentially take an interest. Also people, it's worth noting that the class D thing is actually quite a big market in the UK - but outside of these boundaries, especially in Europe, the rockers all gravitate towards big lumps of iron in their amps as opposed to class D and lightweight.

Glad you enjoyed. You quoted me before I corrected myself - was going to add that my kick sample is very processed - with the sub sine that I talk of. I normally have a range with different sub tunings that I can match to the tuning of whatever the tuning of the bass drum is that I am micing. Should state that the sine wave frequency is tuned to be in tune with the kick drum too. Another thing that I was going to mention was that you can actually get "more" bass by having less bass. What do I mean by this? I've spoken about this before but it's pretty important and I don't think that people naturally get it... or they do get it but have never clicked. The "carving out of frequencies" is very important. Why? Due to wave theory - and particularly the addition of waves. What do I mean by this? Well - Imagine a kick drum that you have with a fundamental of circa 50Hz that is registering at -4dB on your meters. They you add a bass guitar where you have pushed the "sub bass" because you want it to sound fat. Lets say that frequency boost is around 50 Hz. The rest of the lower mids are say 6dB down on that big push in the fat end. Of course, when you add those two wave forms together, where they are in phase, the 50Hz is going to add together and go above unity and clip. That clipping sounds bad but also has limited the output of the rest of the bass in the more usable bass frequencies higher along the spectrum. In reality, if you didn't boost that bass, you could push the rest of the bass a lot harder. By making room for the kick, either by carving away the eq or ducking it as above, you'll get a lot more bass in your mix. Of course, we could take things even further and introduce a multiband compressor... which then enables us to compress different sets of frequencies within each channel, lose dynamic range.. but gain more thump. So as I allude to, in the bass, less can be more... and you want more of the clean stuff rather than more of the mud.

OK. Mighty fine taste you have too. They are both lovely looking amps. There's some sub flub talk going on - but we'll just gloss over that one

Oops. Did I do the wrong thing?

How can we go from a picture of Mrs May and talk of a special hug? This thread just keeps on giving.

PS How did we end up here?

Its rare that you can get great sub sounding bass unless you have a room that can accommodate it. Reflections are a nightmare, especially if you start raising the SPL. I can give you some starters though... Bass wise, I pin everything around the kick drum. I actually clear the fundamental (typically found somewhere around 50Hz) and concentrate on the harmonic detail above that. So what about the low end detail I've just lost? I put it back of course - by using one of two methods. I either trigger a kick sample - or perfect sine wave. The latter gives you the perfect amount of energy but without all the surrounding fluff that can quickly become mushy. Of course, I would gate the kick to stop unwanted noise entering the mic. If available, I'll typically compress too. If you have the functionality on your desk, you can also use the gate to open the door to sine wave generator to achieve the same as an external trigger triggering a sine. With all that, you have some very subby but very hard hitting kick - but without all the mush typically associated. Bass guitar wise, I'd be using a lot less sub bass than you would think. HPF would typically be at the first harmonic but again, only if the room allows it. The trouble is, you can still get a lot of mush, so I would be carving out some EQ to allow the fundamental and 1st and 2nd harmonics of the kick through. If available, I'd be side chaining the bass guitar to duck, triggered by the kick. This gives the kick drum the breathing space not to get lost when it hits. Of course, you can't do this with a standard bass amp... which is why I keep saying that ampless/silent/quiet stage is king and let the PA do all the work. The really successful sub bass comes from clean frequencies - which is something that a bass guitar is not very good at achieving. It can't do those sine, saw, triangle waves that synths can... they include a lot of mush in the surrounding frequencies... which is why when you go to hear acts that have synthesiser produced bass, they are a lot cleaner, decipherable and hard hitting in the lows compared to your standard rock bands. One of the easiest ways of keeping your mix clean, is to utilise aux fed subs and only put the instruments onto that aux that you want in your subs - this will give you more control over the eq carving to obtain your required lows, enable you to balance between the subs and tops and more importantly allow you to control how much sub bass you can introduce via those subs before the room takes over and it gets too muddy. Of course, with a standard LR crossover setup, the output of the whole set of speakers move with the fader as one... at which point, you have lost that fine level of control over your subs.

OK - I'll bite. Back to the sub harmonic vs sub bass thing. Yes, they are different - but the sub harmonic leads to an addition in the sub bass frequencies unless there is a hpf going on that prevents it from doing so. So whether they are different or not, the problem that results is the same. It goes to reason that adding the 1st order subharmonic of a note at say 70Hz, is going to give you 35Hz, which I think we can confirm is a figure that sits firmly in the sub bass range. So given that, it's not unreasonable to suggest that using sub harmonics introduces the low end sub bass mush that we have been discussing. As part of a marketing (gimmick?) I guess it could convince some people to think - "wow, this amp sounds so massive in the bass - it's so massive sounding and fat, so much more than the bass amp next to it “ and ultimately bag a sale... when in reality, that sonic trait is going to be completely detrimental to their band's sound.

Sounds like you are on it and understand the fundamentals of getting a balanced “bottom end” on stage.

A quick google suggests that they were gold/bronze. Either way, I've now got google search engine regret. No doubt the next Cambridge Analytica is going to have a field day with their targetted ads. Most subwoofers will struggle to produce anything meaningful at 30hz. Most non pro subwoofers support up to around 40 hz (but even then with big tail offs. 20 Hz is completely out of the equation as far as (standard) speakers go really. So if you've ever run a bass guitar through subs with boosted lows (say 40-80) through subs, you'll soon appreciate why using them in this manner would be undesirable in most venues. PS _ What you just explained is what I alluded to above - or a band pass filter to be more specific.