DI for recording Bass

[pcm]

You can't wrong with the Countryman.

[mhschmieder]

Recently, I've taken to recording my bass via one of the two DI inputs of my excellent True Precision8 octal mic preamp.

But the point is that I first run it through my Avalon U5 DI, which I use at gigs. I take one output and hook that up to my Stewart World 1.2 power amp hooked up to a 12" Aguilar GS112 cabinet, and take the other output and run it to the True for the direct signal.

Generally I need to polarity invert the amped signal when mixing with the direct signal, but this combination (using a Sennheiser MD421 mk II mic on the bass cabinet) gives me a very tight sound with every nuance and detail.

The original post was more about DI's, so I didn't bother mentioning the entire recording chain. I use the Avalon U5 on stage and it has been WAY more reliable than anything I've ever owned. I was torn between it and the Demeter bass preamp (olus a couple of boutique preamps) but decided the Demeter was too coloured (especially for studio work).

[jmoore]

Recently did a session with a pro bassist and he brought in his own Avalon U5 DI. Just for fun I did a shoot out comparing the U5 to my other pres, Neve 1272, UA 2-610, Grace 101 and API 3124. The API won hands down. It was clearer and had better low end definition. Unfortunately that's WAY more money!! On another note. I've been reamping my DI'd bass using the Izotope Trash plugin with great results. So, regardless of the exact signal going in you can really shape it using Trash. Check out the demo to see for yourself.

I'm still learning, so forgive me if this is a stupid question. All of the units that you mentioned are mic pre's if I'm not mistaken. Are you running your bass directly into those units, or are you running them through a DI first and then into the pre?

Edit: Forgive me for the premature post. I didn't realize that all of those units have HiZ inputs built in. If I understand correctly, then that means that these units can basically function as a DI as well as a mic preamp. Correct?

-jordan

[mhschmieder]

I think the confusion is that some mic pre's are internally switched to accept a different level signal and act as a DI, but most strictly disallow this.

I can't speak for the ones mentioned, even though I had already made a downpayment on the Grace octal mic pre right before the same store convinced me to switch my buy to the True Precision 8 instead. But I have since forgotten its detailed specs. Easy enough to lookup on-line.

If you have not yet bought a mic preamp, I highly recommend going octal as it saves you money in the long run (just one transformer, which is NOT an insignificant part of the cost of a preamp!), and also gives you more flexibility when buying other equipment (such as focusing on the A/D's vs. the mic pre's when buying an audio I/O unit).

And along those same lines, a mic preamp that has at least two channels of DI support will also give you a lot more bang for the buck and better quality and flexibility overall.

Using a high-end DI like the Avalon U5 can work great in and of itself -- the bigger difference is in miking the bass cabinet and feeding that into a high-end mic preamp. But I have the channels available so I may as well feed the DI into the True Precision8 as well, rather than plugging directly into the MOTU 828 mk II.

And of course if you're doing keyboard/synth work, you're usually going to be going stereo vs. mono, in which case you'd be spending close to $1000 for two U5's, and not a small amount for two of some of the other recommended DI's as well.

[chrispick]

Forgive me for the premature post. I didn't realize that all of those units have HiZ inputs built in. If I understand correctly, then that means that these units can basically function as a DI as well as a mic preamp. Correct?

For all practical purposes, yeah. Hi-Z inputs are instrument inputs. You can plug electric guitar or bass into them and they handle all the impedance issues.

[spirit]

Forgive me for the premature post. I didn't realize that all of those units have HiZ inputs built in. If I understand correctly, then that means that these units can basically function as a DI as well as a mic preamp. Correct?

For all practical purposes, yeah. Hi-Z inputs are instrument inputs. You can plug electric guitar or bass into them and they handle all the impedance issues.

Just to prevent confusion- not all "Hi-z" inputs are instruement inputs. Many line level inputs (like say the line inputs on a Mackie board or a MOTU interface) are higher impedence than mic pre's but are NOT going to pass a normal electric basses signal without changing the frequency response. Some preamps (including some MOTU interfaces) have a circuit designed for the above 100k ohms and low level characteristics of most electric guitars and basses. An interested question though is:
Is it possible for a high quality mic preamp to have a lesser quality highimpedence input tacked on. Does the reputation of a mic preamp when used with a mic neccessarily apply to it's use as a high impedence direct box? Probably a company with a reputation for superior quality preamps would put something good on there, but maybe some circuits lend themselves better than others to converting to a DI. Probably they bypass the mic transformer and maybe provide a buffer amplifier or a couple of resistors going into the actual preamp.

Less digressive- countrymans have been standard for years and many popular records and live performances have relied on them. If considering a transformer box- a good quality transformer is noticably different from a cheap one. Jensens are good, probably the most uncolored, other good transformer likely add a little color, and cheaper transformers are noticable worse than even most cheap active DI's (though they MIGHT resist hum a bit better in some cases).

[m2]

The Avalon U5 is the bomb. Later run thru a 1176 and you have classic el. bass recording. [even the 1176 plugins are good] I'm sure the API is killer. Maybe that will be our next Pre!

[jmoore]

Thanks, Spirit. That's good information, and an interesting question you pose. In the case of the preamps used in the earlier post (API, Neve, UA, Grace, etc...), I'm curious how the results would vary if the bass was first run into a Countryman (or similar) DI, and then into the mic input on the preamp of choice. In this case, the API.

-jordan

[magicd]

Bass is my primary instrument. I play a Carvin and a Ric. I rarely use a plectrum.

I have been using a Carvin Quad-X guitar pre amp for direct recording. The tubes and eq in the clean channel are very nice.

Lately however I've just been micing a 15' speaker with an MXL 603 condenser mic. I've fallen in love with these mics. I use them for many applications. The 603 goes into my 896HD with no other processing. I use a MOTU para eq (low end roll off at 30hz and wide band boost around 3k)and a Waves Rencomp on the track in mixdown (very high ratio and default attack and release settings).

I've never had a problem getting low end when I record bass. The challenge has been a controlled low end with a useable roll-off (I want the kick to have the bottom hz in the mix), and upper mids that cut through the mix. Using a mic on the cab has worked best for me. The extra ambience gives the bass some breathing room and the small diapraghm on the mic provides a refequency response that seems to be perfect for pop tracks.

But I think it's really up to the player. I handed my bass to a guitar player buddy the other night and he recorded a track - it came out half the volume of the track I had just done with the same settings.

Want a good sound? Play the heck outa your bass!

Dave

[croyal]

Thanks, Spirit. That's good information, and an interesting question you pose. In the case of the preamps used in the earlier post (API, Neve, UA, Grace, etc...), I'm curious how the results would vary if the bass was first run into a Countryman (or similar) DI, and then into the mic input on the preamp of choice. In this case, the API.

-jordan

I use my BSS DIs to directly feed API 512c pres. IMO it sounds much cleaner and clearer than directly feeding the API line/instr inputs- which BTW do sound great on their own. I know some engineerrs who only go directly in sans DI. I just think a DI adds even more of the "good stuff" to the sound, especially on instrument levels (guitars and basses.)

The BSS DIs are active (phantom power or internal 9V battery) so the pre can power them. For my money, the DI/Mic pre combo beats straight into a pre any day for any instrument or keyboard.

Chris

[fokof]

A VERY good tube DI/Preamp around that price range is the TD100 by Summit audio.
Loading control, XLR mic level and bal 1/4 line level outs.
Sound is fat as hell !

[frontierfran]

I run bass tracks right into a Grace 101, which you can get for $400. they are super clean, much like the U5. Then I run it into a Distressor for some SLIGHT squeezing (though, that a $1000 piece in itself). I love the bass tones i get from that.

[wylie]

I just did a session where we used one of these http://www.kustom.com/amps/bass/kba/kba30X_combo.asp a Fender precision and
miked using 1 Rode's NT1a, with no DI and the results where some of the best bass we've ever done.

[mhschmieder]

I've tried all of the Summit Audio half-rack gear (including their EXCELLENT new "FEQ" parametric equaliser) and give it all top marks.

Nevertheless I chose not to go with it, because the tube cannot be bypassed in their half-rack gear (this is more pertinent for the compressor and the eq units than the mic preamp half-rack). I suppose that was a necessary compromise at such a small form factor, but I personally would not want to be locked out of switching a tube out of the signal path.

[spirit]

In theory a shorter circuit path would be preferable, but aside from whether thowing in some aesthetically desirable distortion (like a transformer) makes it sound better to someone, there is the issue raised- does the preamp with a provision to accept electric instrument pickups directly match and optimize the characteristics as optimally as a purpose built direct box? Hopefully the manufacturers of quality boutique preamps will endeavor to do so, but it is possible different degrees of success are in different models.

The Avalon U5 offers line and mic level outputs, but no mic pre.
The Grace 101 is more convertable by virtue of having a mic pre (presuming it's direct is equal to the U5, which is not neccessarily a safe presumption even though the reputation of the two companies preamps are similar as clean good quality, not highly colored)- but the 101 does not have mic level out (if the pre is good studio use might not need that, but live use might).

It would be great to know where to get a Grace 101 for $400- it appears the Avalon and Grace both usually sell about $540USD.

It would also be interesting to know if those using the DI's built in on Mic Pre's are spliting to feed and amp simultaneously, and if so how.It appears Neither the Grace nor the Avalon have a split feed which provides and output to a bass/guitar amplifier with similar impedance and level characteristics as if the instrument was plugged in directly to the amp. The Countryman is good at minimizing any change to the sound of the instrument amplifier, some DI's introduce a very noticable change in color- especially cheap transformer DI's. Simply using a "Y" cable before a direct box would very like change the sound at the amplifier (and probably at the DI because the impedence is likely changed to each). BSS has an excellent reputation so it would not be a surprise if it's performance were no less than the Countryman.