Philosophical precision question

[SJA]

yeah, if you're a good engineer you can get any bass to cut through with eq, miking technique etc.
but the bog standard p bass tone doesn't need anything done to it to have presence in the mix.

just the right amount of lows, with enough mids for the notes to have definition.
(that's if it's played right, of course....)

Edited November 1, 2007 by SJA

[ARGH]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='82212' date='Nov 1 2007, 12:41 PM']I consider myself to be a bit of a recording engineer, and my comment was made with my engineer's hat on.[/quote]

Fine man,but Im just going on the comments Ive got and been given.......including "Oh thank god,a Fender..."

[thumbo]

[quote name='ARGH' post='82206' date='Nov 1 2007, 12:38 PM']Same here onstage,but in the studio its a totally different arena.
Ive tried Ibanez and warwicks...numerous stuff,but the Fender sound just...well it fits,they are bulky,heavy,and crude...but they work,and engineers smile when they come out of the case.[/quote]

My 70's P always sounds great in the studio, with minimal mucking around with things. My Warwick's on the other hand take a lot more work.

[LukeFRC]

my CIJ '57 away having a service, set up and a gold annodized aluminium pick guard fitted, mmmmm

doesn't really fit into the conversation but thought i would share my P-joy and excitement.

[Dread Bass]

I dont really like p basses. i dont like the sound or the look at all i. dont no i just dont get it i guess

[ARGH]

[quote name='metaltime' post='82456' date='Nov 1 2007, 07:04 PM']I dont really like p basses. i dont like the sound or the look at all i. dont no i just dont get it i guess[/quote]

Rickys cause the same divide...I can understand,some lads were slagging me chronic for playing a P..for being "Thats old mannnnnnnn" (clutching their Ibanez Geetarr Jems) but hey,Im still playing a P every now and again,and they cant complain about the sound.

[martthebass]

[quote name='metaltime' post='82456' date='Nov 1 2007, 07:04 PM']I dont really like p basses. i dont like the sound or the look at all i. dont no i just dont get it i guess[/quote]

Isn't a Stingray just a 'super P' with a silly scratch plate

[ARGH]

[quote name='martthebass' post='82494' date='Nov 1 2007, 08:28 PM']Isn't a Stingray just a 'super P' with a silly scratch plate [/quote]

Isnt a G&L ASAT a Stingray with an extra Pickup,and weird body?

[bnt]

When I saw the title, I thought it was a thread about the difference between Accuracy and Precision. Would anyone buy a "Fender Accuracy" bass?

Edited November 2, 2007 by bnt

[cheddatom]

[quote name='ARGH' post='82419' date='Nov 1 2007, 06:08 PM']Fine man,but Im just going on the comments Ive got and been given.......including "Oh thank god,a Fender..."[/quote]

If an engineer is thanking god because you've brought him a familiar instrument he knows how to work with, then I think there's something wrong with the way the engineer is looking at his job. He should be interested to hear new instruments and relish the challenge of getting them to sound great, not getting them to sound like a fender.

I like precisions, I just don't buy into all this "definitive bass sound hype", if you know what I mean.

[ARGH]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='82657' date='Nov 2 2007, 09:19 AM']If an engineer is thanking god because you've brought him a familiar instrument he knows how to work with, then I think there's something wrong with the way the engineer is looking at his job. He should be interested to hear new instruments and relish the challenge of getting them to sound great, not getting them to sound like a fender.

I like precisions, I just don't buy into all this "definitive bass sound hype", if you know what I mean.[/quote]

yeahman..you really have time to experiment with 'sounds' in a 15-20 mins changeover in front of 2k+ of pissed bikers at a 3 day rally...,and in a studio,time is money,full stop...ESP on demos for bands whos bills come by the hour. I dont work in Nashville (who have Alembic and Modulus settings) and in the past Ive made the mistake of bringing an uberactive 6 string superthing and wasteing alot of time getting it to 'sit' in the mix,considering the amount of work and professional output from the studio I was in and it being a name engineer,who at the end of the day 'knows' his board and equipment etc etc as I said before Time is money,but I dont want to take up as much it did to get it to sound right. Cheap or noisey eqs or just bad bass's or people that eq they're instrument to death THEN cancel out everything on their rig (duh) when the engineer can sculpt your instrument to suit the studio or the track with the clock tickking quickly.....I know what option I would take.

I know what you are thinking ,its dumb as sh*t that Engineers/producers etc,cant just make ANYTHING sound great,man you can spend over a K.5 on a prestiege range Ibanez or Warwick or Spector,thats rammed with Bartolini or 18v EMGs,and thats great live..hell I LOVE EMGs,got them in one of my fretless's and they rip.

But the fact is this,if it takes less time,and it works,and the guy getting the tracks down to tape can do his job quickly or quicker than the last guy,at a better standard,and you contribute to that...and the results are there to see,and the band are smiling and it JUST PLAIN WORKS

Well,where do you see this going?

Edited November 2, 2007 by ARGH

[SJA]

another thought-

when playing solo, a precision can sound ratty and crude when strung with steel roundwounds, but great in the mix in a rock context, with heavy guitars.

IMO Colin Hodgkinson's solo bass playing would sound a lot better with a bass with a bridge pickup too rather than his single-pickup precision. I've seen pics of him using a stingray- never heard him use it, but i'd bet his chordal playing would sound better on it.


whereas more sophisticated active basses can sound great solo, but those nuances are lost in the mix with guitars and drums.
Dave Ellefson (Megadeth) says that he uses the active precision deluxe live, but a passive 70's p in the studio as he's found active basses disappear in the mix.

[ARGH]

[quote name='SJA' post='82668' date='Nov 2 2007, 10:05 AM']another thought-

when playing solo, a precision can sound ratty and crude when strung with steel roundwounds, but great in the mix in a rock context, with heavy guitars.

IMO Colin Hodgkinson's solo bass playing would sound a lot better with a bass with a bridge pickup too rather than his single-pickup precision. I've seen pics of him using a stingray- never heard him use it, but i'd bet his chordal playing would sound better on it.


whereas more sophisticated active basses can sound great solo, but those nuances are lost in the mix with guitars and drums.
Dave Ellefson (Megadeth) says that he uses the active precision deluxe live, but a passive 70's p in the studio as he's found active basses disappear in the mix.[/quote]


Im gonna be really patronizing here.

But I geuinely think its because alot of 'engineers'..the newbies...sitting in front of their screens,from college,uni etc...that cant mic up for toffee and wouldnt know how to...they even dont want to learn full stop

The Cubase generation,just plug ANYTHING into a Basspod and then adjust on the screen. Of course it sounds great,but its 0 and 1s you are listening to,not a Bass.

I had a music college lecturer from Bradford,40odd years from making tea at the BBC to building studios..you get my drift, in my shop a year back,and he'd just quit teaching because,basically,he got fed up that kids want to bypass the basics,and just plug things into boxes,go wild with the eqs and wonder why its just mush....you can get a great guitar sound..wow..now record a brass band,see..you aint that good yet.

I come from the era of splicing tape (probably the last generation to be that way) and mics,a good DI and everyone in the room together playing (bar the drummer...and the singer..locked in their booths either end of the room. Analogue..you HAD to make it work,it took time,and the results are there for the ages. Kids cant mic and just use triggers....so the Roland or whatevers being used,dies on a gig..what now???

In a bedroom,anything can be assessed and adjusted,rewound and replayed,rerecorded until perfection,a good engineer can record anything and make it sound great,but live its a different kettle of fish. I know times moved on,and the worlds a faster place now,but basics are basics,and If the source you record,takes ages or expensive time to get down or eq,you aint getting called back,same with gear onstage,I dont want to take 10 mins with an engineer getting my Bass to sound right,when I can just put on my P bass and its there in a blink,and he can move onto the drums (back to mic technique..)..of which we go back to the triggers thing.

Im not dissing other basses,why on earth would I have the want for a 9 string,active fretless's..a status homemade hybridthingy thats jazzy and flashy as f***,etcetc....Leo got it very right,there is time to move on,and the P or J has been surpassed,by such instruments as the Lakland,but they are decendents,if not in look then in sound,and they SOUND the same,just clearer....better?...is it?..then why do we still have passive instruments?...


because ,however crude they sound,and lets be honest,a great basstone on record sounds a tad rank isolated,..it in the mix a passive sounds right and can be made to 'sit' and be recorded quickly.

Edited November 2, 2007 by ARGH

[cheddatom]

ARGH - I'm obviously not going to pursuade you on this one, as you have your opinions strongly set, and some would say rightly so from your experience.

I personally think that studio time should be a time for experimentation and creativity, but, I suppose some of us don't have the luxury of making our own cds at home!

I was in "magic garden" recording studios with Gavin Monaghan last year, and he was very sceptcial of my effects and stupid rig and active 6 string etc. He just got me to play through the songs, and went round listening to each speaker (with a facial expression like Yoda) micing them up with weird vintage mics. He loves his tubes and his ribbon mics, vintage guitars, and Precision basses! However, he claimed to love my sound, and did a good job of recording it. It was cutting through just fine on his rough mixes, shame we never got to finish them!

It took 3 hours to set up, record the bass for 2 songs, and get a rough mix. I'm not sure of normal people's time restraints, but I thought that was pretty good?

Edit: Whether it's passive or active or a Fender P or an crappy Ibanez, it will generally take me a similar amount of time to mix. I listen to the mix, I listen to what's not there in the bass sound that I want, I adjust that, i'm done.

P.P.S I know i'm comming accross as an arrogrant young student type, sorry! I do genuinley have a lot of respect for people who know a lot more in the way of recording than me, and i'm sure that you're one of them.

Edited November 2, 2007 by cheddatom

[ARGH]

Ahh..the Yoda look...kinda like that real ale drinker look

[ARGH]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='82681' date='Nov 2 2007, 10:41 AM']P.P.S I know i'm comming accross as an arrogrant young student type, sorry! I do genuinley have a lot of respect for people who know a lot more in the way of recording than me, and i'm sure that you're one of them.[/quote]

Dude no probs,I just go on what I get told to do,and by what works..and by the bitchiness and bitterness of Engineering staff and lecturers and experience's Ive come across in the years. Ive always preferred to play live,its just the biggest thing or rather the most constant,has been time and its consequenses with cost.

It wasnt a pop at you personally,Im not that evil.

[Shaggy]

Gotta say I find this discussion about recording (I won’t say “argument”), really interesting, worth a thread in its own right.
From my limited experience of studio recording – which I dislike intensely – I find that whatever bass sound you try and create the engineer just whops the bass EQ setting up and it’s lost.
I hadn’t really thought about active vs passive in a recording setting but I guess its true – the last time we recorded I took my active MM, but the slight earth hum that I can’t be arsed to suss out and usually mask with a bit of noise gate was highly audible when recording. So the engineer lent me his passive Wal Pro-bass – lurvely! – which to me sounded woolly, but in the mix was absolutely spot on. I’ll take the Precision next time!
I think the gist of the thread is that if you find a P-bass playable then it’s a hell of sound to have in your arsenal, although versatile it’s not (in standard form). Also should have said before that upgrading the stock pick-ups (to wizards, SD’s etc) makes such a difference – same sound but with hi-fi definition and clarity.

[cheddatom]

I just don't think that this idea of a precision=time saved is a fact. Maybe a precision+an engineer who always works with them/loves them will save time, and maybe most engineers love precisions, but that doesn't make it a fact.

I've never been under pressure for time during a mix though, so I really should shut up!

[ARGH]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='82706' date='Nov 2 2007, 11:38 AM']I just don't think that this idea of a precision=time saved is a fact. Maybe a precision+an engineer who always works with them/loves them will save time, and maybe most engineers love precisions, but that doesn't make it a fact.

I've never been under pressure for time during a mix though, so I really should shut up![/quote]

it isnt fact,its just interpretation,but the mainstay Ive found is that engineers know settings,they know how X (read: A Fender..or and EB3 or a Ricky) will need to be eqd through the board to fit a track,and that speed is time and money saved doing other things (like VOCAL BLOODY RETAKES!!!). Unfamilier equipment can add time,and budget,who really wants the potential of a difficult task in a day job,plus the player having the guilt that he took AGES! Because if it eats into guitarplayers solo overdubs,you aint going to hear the last of it.

People like Comfort zones,Ive looked at your myspace..and you use a 6 string and a buttload of effects..now if I said "sorry fella but you cant use them and you have to play this..(Hands are Tom a 72 blonde Jazz)" It would be sh*t wouldnt it.

Because you NEED those FX,You NEED that 6 string,because thats part of YOUR bands sound,to hand you a Fender..remove the pedals and say "Tough sh*t kid.." would just be wrong,criminal even,but thats just for one situation...one band. Im not saying its crap,but the engineer has probably never heard your band play or perform,and he's probably seen a million others wander in with 'This years latest" piece of technowhat,that probably sounds great in a bedroom,but is utter arse in the studio...and Muso REALLY wants to use it on a record..hense you got Yodaface. But its just one situation and you paid the money to the guy to get that on tape because thats what you needed. But bands are one offs,idiosyncratic,individual things....,and if an engineer can get a little ease on the session then thats one less thing for him to worry about. We aint talking New York or Memphis (if it aint a Fender go home attitude)...Even in the New Heavy Metal thang going on theres a constant (Lamb of God,Killswitch etc etc) and its SanAmps...they all use them to record. Thats the familier territory there.

Im Glad you had the time to actually experiment with sounds,I rarely have that luxury,in mates studios..I get told.."we need this..and bring your SansAmp"..and X+songwriter,spend mins nitpicking the Basspart till they agree. Live its a different fix,I have to be Duck Dunn,Dee Dee Ramone,Herbie Flowers,and The Ox plus more in one hour onstage,Pubs functions etc..I need gear that wont breakdown,isnt delicate,fits most if not all situations,and can be set up and repaired and parts replaced quickly...we are talking versatility and the Fender seems to have that most,be it on classic R'n'B or Hardcore punk,plus point being no battery to die on the wedding gig (ever been there..60 miles from home.....for got the spare Bass..No 9 volts to hand..thats fun).

Heres a spin on the point.....

Geddy Lee,used Wals and Steinys in the 80s/90s,debatably the BEST active recording Bass's on the planet,silent,phat ,juicey...yummy...tonally wonderful,and very maliable for an engineer.

And then he switches to a ratty passive 70s Jazz? go figure.....

[BigRedX]

Coming late to this particular discussion, I'm closer to point b) from the original question.

However it does depend on the music you play.
A lot of 'popular' current music is very backwards and reactionary in it's influences and sound. For this the Fender P is ideal. It sounds exactly like the bass of your 'heroes' it fits in with traditional guitar band line-ups - job done.

However bass (as a sound rather than just as an instrument) is constantly evolving. Listen to the extreme bass sounds that are possible with electronics. listen to how the bass instrument needs to fit into the audio space when the other instruments aren't rock guitar, Hammond Organ, Rhodes Piano and drums. Then you're open to a whole new array of low frequency sound possibilities that will require more than just a Fender P to articulate.

It works back the other way as well (provided your other musical collaborators have open minds). For the band I currently play in traditional basslines and sounds would work very nicely, but would make us rather ordinary. However because I've spent some time making my less than orthodox basslines and sounds fit into what would be a quite conventional band, I now find that the others are starting to also adjust their playing to make our band sound much more unique.

Edited November 2, 2007 by BigRedX

[cheddatom]

I suppose it depends on the band you're recording. A lot of bands sound the same these days, and I wonder if it's the bands trying to sound like eachother, or the engineers getting lazy, or just me being bitter.

The first ever time I went into the studio, we were 16 and paying for it all ourselves. It cost a lot of money, and when I got to put down the bass, he told me to put away the 6 string and distortion pedal (I only had 1 at the time) and just trust him to get a great bass sound, as he does it all the time. Well, it did end up sounding good, but, it sounded like every other indie band around at the time, and it really annoyed me and stuck with me, and I guess that's where I was comming from.

If I was a session player doing less original stuff, I guess I would like a 5 string precision, and (judging from your posts) it could save the engineer some time. I've never really thought of it from that point of view.

If a band sounds great live, using a certain set up, should they sound great in the studio using the same set-up? I think the answer is yes, but, more often than not, when you chuck an extra 20 guitar tracks on there and start compressing drums etc, you loose that great live sound you had.

[andy67]

Argh - 100% behind you on all of that ranting!!!


A recording studio is not the place to be creative nor experimental, time is money! all your hard work as a band should be done and completed in the practice room and finalised in the studio!


Wasted some amounts of money in studios because of creative experimental vocalists and guitarists!

I see it every day in my place of work - young students coming in telling me of software and effects they use at home to make up demos...all shallow with no real depth...however thats why I do what I do......

[ARGH]

[quote name='Shaggy' post='82701' date='Nov 2 2007, 11:31 AM']Gotta say I find this discussion about recording (I won’t say “argument”), really interesting, worth a thread in its own right.
From my limited experience of studio recording – which I dislike intensely – I find that whatever bass sound you try and create the engineer just whops the bass EQ setting up and it’s lost.
I hadn’t really thought about active vs passive in a recording setting but I guess its true – the last time we recorded I took my active MM, but the slight earth hum that I can’t be arsed to suss out and usually mask with a bit of noise gate was highly audible when recording. So the engineer lent me his passive Wal Pro-bass – lurvely! – which to me sounded woolly, but in the mix was absolutely spot on. I’ll take the Precision next time!
I think the gist of the thread is that if you find a P-bass playable then it’s a hell of sound to have in your arsenal, although versatile it’s not (in standard form). Also should have said before that upgrading the stock pick-ups (to wizards, SD’s etc) makes such a difference – same sound but with hi-fi definition and clarity.[/quote]


To be versatile is a live nessessity,instrument wise...thats why I bang on about kids learning to use 5s and 6s as early as possible,because if you can play them you get more work available,you will be asked if you have them and thats fact,period,end of. Bands are different,your sound is a group thing,when you back someone you have to do something else,be it on an open mic,soft acoustic gig,or..well..whatever. But studios are a world away,and its sound we are dealing with not what you use...SOUND. You cant argue with something that works,Hey I dont like Rickys in weight or sound really,but if it worked,I'd close my eyes and play it as if my life depended upon it,because thats what is needed,be it a dano....upright,fretless (shudder).....9 string.

I always remember the Kings X recordings,Doug Pinnick uses 12 string Hamers onstage,and EVERYONE thought thats what they heard on record,it wasnt ,it was a knackard 57 P-bass through a SansAmp.

I still think on odd days of putting a J p/u in the bridge,but my guitarist keeps banging on at me about 'vintage' value..well its 11 years old now.....

Ive modded my P,and its only let down is it dosent have a B string,and is VERY heavy!

Edited November 4, 2007 by ARGH

[ARGH]

[quote name='andy67' post='83298' date='Nov 3 2007, 08:54 PM']Argh - 100% behind you on all of that ranting!!!


A recording studio is not the place to be creative nor experimental, time is money! all your hard work as a band should be done and completed in the practice room and finalised in the studio!


Wasted some amounts of money in studios because of creative experimental vocalists and guitarists!

I see it every day in my place of work - young students coming in telling me of software and effects they use at home to make up demos...all shallow with no real depth...however thats why I do what I do......[/quote]


Sorry ,didnt think it was ranting,just common a sense soapbox moment.....
been there..wasted time...done that...never again.

[andy67]

going off on one would have been a better use of words.........do it myself regularly...............................