EBS_freak

Ahem, your "stinky poo list".

Well, there you go!

The velcro solution will work just fine. the guitar show is at Bingley hall - http://www.theguitarshow.co.uk/ On Birmingham, mainly guitar stuff but good for a few hours browsing - there's usually a few bass bits around.

Nice effort!

@Osiris - The G55 comes in at under 3ms latency. I seem to recall that the specs are <2.9ms. So certainly up there with pro level wireless analogue to analogue. (ULXD for example, is 2.9ms) - so you have nothing to worry about on that front. Funnily enough, even on small stages I tend to use wireless just so that I have no cables under my feet. Use it - there's certainly no reason in your setup why you shouldn't. If you were telling me you were running a Smooth Hound, I certainly would be urging your edge on the side of caution as you would be within the realms of trouble with that (in fact, it annoys me that people keep banding around that it has no audible latency and is much better than the line 6 equivalents - when in reality, when using it in an IEM setup, it is useless.) Ha - my setup - yeah, overkill for most - but for me it's the result of somebody who probably cares about IEM monitoring for all gigs a little too much. I've used this setup in front of a few thousand... and a few tens down the local I think as soon as you have experienced a great monitor mix - which no doubt you will with your planned setup - you are reluctant to give it up. For me, the more I have pushed the dual desks and external plugins, the less I want to give it up. It all comes down to the final point - I just want the best monitor mix I can have within reason. My setup is actually pretty quick to set up - it's all racked and ready to go... so no real difference to plugging in just one desk! But yeah, people are probably going to be satisfied with far less! @jrixn1 is right - the 215s will enable you to do a job - but I would urge both of you to try and get into the world of quad drivers. It's the difference between running a single 10 behind you and a four ten. Just far more headroom, control, authority... and bass! I had a brief exchange with @thommydonutsabout driver count. He's just bought some high driver count IEMs - I think he concludes with me, there's a big jump from a single to a quad... and then as you go up in driver count, the returns do diminish... however, some of these 6, 8, 12+ driver count earpieces really are nirvana. Defo worth checking out if you can stomach the cost - but as I say to people, you need to stop seeing your IEMs as headphones but as a replacement for speaker cabs. If you have the FoH doing all your amplification FoH, then see your IEM as Bergantinos (or whatever) for your ears - afterall, they are doing the same job - your personal monitor on stage. Then, the cost makes more sense. Put it like this, I'm yet to see anybody who has invested in the higher end IEMs regret doing so. I think @dood and @tonyf would agree wholeheartedly with me. And both of them have been through some serious rigs. Ask them which rig has been their fave - their 64 V8s... or their cabs. I don't know if you are about to come to LBGS or Bingley Hall at the weekend but hunt me down and I'll get some top end stuff in your ears if you want to hear the difference.

Zoom vs Helix - unless you are looking at expanding into using the features of the Helix to super charge your motown... then probably not a lot! A lot of these modellers, irrespective of their pricetag, will give you a functional tone. The 215s are preferable to say, some freebie phone headphones... but you are missing out my man!

The cumulative latency is unlikely to (read won't) be an issue. Basically, as a quick rule of thumb, for most people, the absolute highest level latency of allowed in your inears before it gets off putting/unusable is 10ms. Don't let people quote the BS that it's only 3.5m from a wedge. The difference is that your IEM is pumped directly into you ear and as a consequence the effect of latency is alot more apparent... not only in playing... but especially when singing. The B3 I believe is under 2ms - however, if you start using pitch shift, that latency increases - but that's the same for most modelling devices. Assume that your B3 is 2ms or under as a nominal value. I would imagine the latency on the desk (using it as a desk, not as an audio interface - the M20d has dire latency when being used as an audio interface) is low anyway, certainly 3ms or lower. As an idea of what low, looks like, the X32 runs at under 1ms and most digital desks are under 3ms so assume that as the worst)... I can't find any specific input->DSP->Output figures for the M20d... but I would imagine it would be all over the net if the latency was high (like people are complaining about the laency for the audio interface aspect of that particular desk) So the only other thing that could start messing anything up (assuming you aren't using a chain of digital pedals that are all engaged at the same time) is if you use a wireless with your bass. For example, if you use a Smooth Hound, you are going to be on the road to a beating because that thing comes at a woeful 8ms alone and that's going to eat up a whole lot of that 10ms. You can actually run a hell of a lot and keep that latency well down. Even with entry level gear, most latency figures will be coming comfortably under 6 or 7ms (this is allowing for desk processing, digital audio dsp in the chain and wireless). The 215s are the common entry level IEM - they will certainly give you a sound but for a lot of people, will not deliver enough bass with enough headroom to use as a ampless solution. They tend to leak a lot - so they allow alot of ambient sound in from your backline, so with a bit of tweaking, guys using the 215s get an acceptable route. With my experience of multi driver IEMs, as echoed many times in this thread, quad is going to be what the majority of bass players will crave to get the bass response they need. The reason that 215s generally do OK compared to a single driver "custom IEM" - is because the custom will be utilising a balanced armature instead of dynamic driver - that is found in the 215. The 215 therefore, in comparison with a single balanced armature IEM, is likely to develop more bass.

It depends what you are looking for - the simplest approach is a DI. If you get more complex you can move up to a pre/modeller etc. But if you just want a bass sound with no cab emulation, your rig could be a 25 quid DI box and a set of IEMs.

No problem - check out my comment on the processing on the desk vs the Zoom.... I think you had already replied before I added the edit.

^^ Perfect. Although you may find the EQ and compressor processing on the desk better than the Zoom. I don't know explicitly though - I'm not overly familiar with either device. The app for your iPad is available here : https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/stagescape-remote/id529370822?mt=8

Cripes Im blind.

Just been through his credit list. Yeah, he'd do.

Yeah it is... the Baggs is not that blue Klark Teknik DI down the side of the speaker cab. Mic - yeah, I don't dispute they know what they were doing - genuinely intrigued what they mic of choice for a bass cab is. Monitor world looks pretty immense. Lovely, lovely wireless... I'd quite like a little go on that

As I said up top - EQ pedal. Gain reduction.. with buffer in front of first pedal...

Now you've done it. Half the sexually deprived community of BC will be missing in action for at least 30 seconds.

Man, I'm such a slag for LED screens.

OK - so your signal chain description is still missing the DI bit - would be interesting to know what they have used to mic the bass cab though. I always find that there is not a great mic that captures the sound of a cab well... - to be honest, you aren't going to be getting the cab sound anyway, you are at best going to get the cone. But that's a completely different conversation. SD7s are a nice choice - presumably they were recording over MADI or DANTE. Probably straight to a laptop or Joeco or something like that. Would actually be very interested in that aspect of the production. Any seperate monitor mixer? Or was that directly off the FoH?

Jeez, you can't leave a picture of a woman anywhere.

Yes - you would need an external router... but you can literally get them for next to nothing. Basically, you'll have control of your mix via the tablet, so instead of walking over to the mixer, you'll see the mixer screen represented on your tablet for you to tailor remotely. It's the best solution - and if you haven't already got an iPad, a cheapo one from down CeX or similar will see you OK. Its the best investment you could make in regards of being in control of your mix. You are right - your mixer will give you an individual monitor mix from the desk - tailored as you say. As your B3 has two outputs, one balanced XLR and one (unbalanced? - I haven't looked) jack, you can split the signal to the front of house desk and to your Yamaha. The question would be though - why? If you want to hear more bass in your own monitor mix, just reach for the iPad and turn your bass up in your monitor mix. The other thing to watch, is because the Line6 is digital (incurs latency) and the Yamaha isn't (no latency), the two signals will be out of phase with each other. How noticeable this is depends upon how out of phase the resulting signal is... and how much you perceive it. Maybe I am missing a trick here - are you planning on sending your B3 signal to the FoH desk? Because if you aren't - you should be... even if you aren't sending your bass through the PA out front. Assume that you can't hear anything in your IEMs unless it comes from the FoH desk... and for anything to come from the FoH desk, it needs to be plugged into the FoH desk (irrespective of whether its coming out the FoH speaker or not - for example, you bass amp may be doing all the bass amplification for the venue you are in).

Shall watch out for the mic on the DVD then Seems a little odd having a stage setup and having a mic come in as an after thought. I'd like to mix a full show - probably the sort of thing I'd like to do only once because given the time it takes me to mix up a single track and be satisfied with it, I'd wager it would take what would feel like a life time to do a whole show. Herculean task - as you state. The lighting looks to be pretty good to be fair - it takes a lot of lights to light a barn - I don't know the budget of this show - but it looks to have done alright on that front.

Which mic? Where? Bleed through vocal mics? Looks like your signal chain is hitting a Klark Teknik DI which would be going straight to the desk, meaning your rig is for your ears only, not the audience or recording? Not that it really matters as the stems will be processed within an inch of their life before they get anywhere near the audio track on a DVD. Cool looking gig though - I do love a good LED screen - some serious money on display there... and some serious power requirements too! Looks like you had a great time - certainly one to tell the grand kids about one day! It was good to hear Joe McElderry - I think people write him off because of his X Factor links. That lad can proper sing. Anyway, seems like you did a top job.

The Rolls device is great as it lets you tweak your mix locally without going over to your desk. If you are in the world of digital desks, then the preferable option would be to remote control from a tablet... for @Osiris and their Line6 desk, I wouldn't bother with an external desk to power my headphones. I would just get a decent headphone amp and make sure I have a tablet as the "Monitors view" on the Line 6 desk gives you a Hi Pass, Limiter and EQ for the aux - which is going to be a lot more powerful than just the 2 band EQ on the Yamaha. I would agree that the PM351 is a pretty cool solution for analogue desks (although it hasn't got the EQ functionality of the Yamaha). A bit different to the Yamaha desk as it gives you the "through" functionality so you can tap off "more me" feeds before it gets to the desk. I think that this is what @Osiris is trying to achieve... but you won't be able to do that natively with the Yamaha as it has no throughs or monitor sends to do this. That Yamaha is a great little mixer - my O/H uses one for her Spin classes.

Most active basses are going to be OK with pedals. Some active circuits do not play well with pedals at all. It depends upon how much boost that your circuit is putting out and whether it slams the front input of the first pedal in the chain too hard. You can get around this by getting something like an EQ pedal that is left on all the time but the output is lowered... meaning that the next pedal in the chain isn't fed with a signal that is too hot.

Yup - all looking good! As you've described, that'll work for you. That will give you a perfectly serviceable setup - and it'll sound great.