Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track
| Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68502] |
Mon, 22 May 2006 22:01  |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
How's that for politically correct? lol
Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
run into impedance issues with this method?
Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
another channel, as well.
Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68510 is a reply to message #68502] |
Tue, 23 May 2006 05:03  |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for $350 used.
Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>How's that for politically correct? lol
>
>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>run into impedance issues with this method?
>
>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>
>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>another channel, as well.
>
>Neil
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68511 is a reply to message #68510] |
Tue, 23 May 2006 05:04 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
oh and the tone is worlds apart
"john" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for $350
used.
> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>
>
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>
>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>
>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>
>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>another channel, as well.
>>
>>Neil
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68516 is a reply to message #68510] |
Tue, 23 May 2006 11:01 |
justcron
Messages: 330
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
haha no it doesn't
And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>
> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for $350
> used.
> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>
>
>
> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>
>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>
>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>
>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>another channel, as well.
>>
>>Neil
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68518 is a reply to message #68516] |
Tue, 23 May 2006 11:10 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally infatuated
me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The tone
to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
How sucky is that?
John
"justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>haha no it doesn't
>
>And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>
>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>>
>> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for $350
>> used.
>> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>>
>>
>>
>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>>
>>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>>
>>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>>
>>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>>another channel, as well.
>>>
>>>Neil
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68520 is a reply to message #68518] |
Tue, 23 May 2006 11:40 |
justcron
Messages: 330
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
No I hear ya John... I like a bunch of the different ones, I just dont
personally think the sansamp 'sucks' but I respect your opinion. the only
one that I've found that really does suck is the POD, but then some people
like that too.
"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>
> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
> infatuated
> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The
> tone
> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
> How sucky is that?
> John
>
> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>haha no it doesn't
>>
>>And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>>
>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>>>
>>> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for $350
>
>>> used.
>>> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>>> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>>>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>>>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>>>
>>>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>>>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>>>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>>>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>>>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>>>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>>>
>>>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>>>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>>>
>>>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>>>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>>>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>>>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>>>another channel, as well.
>>>>
>>>>Neil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68521 is a reply to message #68502] |
Tue, 23 May 2006 12:11 |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C67E7B.21C00F70
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Neil,
Sounds like the part already sounds blatty. You may have to
rerecord as you suggested. I have great results using
a combination of a fat but clean DI track with Amplitube along side it.
Tom
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44729718$1@linux...
I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
How's that for politically correct? lol
Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output=20
level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
run into impedance issues with this method?
Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
another channel, as well.
Neil
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C67E7B.21C00F70
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Neil,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sounds like the part already sounds =
blatty. =20
You may have to</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>rerecord as you suggested. I have =
great=20
results using</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>a combination of a fat but clean DI =
track with=20
Amplitube along side it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Neil" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:OIUOIU@OIU.com">OIUOIU@OIU.com</A>> wrote=20
in message <A=20
href=3D"news:44729718$1@linux">news:44729718$1@linux</A>...</DIV><BR>I =
have a=20
bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with<BR>the sound of, =
but I=20
personally think sucks... OK, maybe I<BR>should say it a different =
way: "They=20
like it, but I think they<BR>might like it even better if I could =
improve upon=20
it :D<BR>How's that for politically correct? =
lol<BR><BR>Anyway,=20
I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,<BR>but here's =
my=20
question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the<BR>input isn't =
designed for=20
line-level stuff, so if I run the<BR>signal out of a line-level out on =
my=20
convertors, then through a<BR>mic pre that also has a line-level input =
and=20
also an output <BR>level control (of which I have a few), can I just =
feed a=20
very<BR>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will =
I<BR>run=20
into impedance issues with this method?<BR><BR>Reamping's no problem - =
I can=20
easily rig that up, so if this<BR>other option doesn't work, I can =
always fall=20
back on that, but<BR>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in =
this=20
instance?<BR><BR>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a=20
re-tracking<BR>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin =
head<BR>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other=20
options<BR>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track...=20
how's<BR>that for an achievement? lol Totally =
my=20
fault, though -<BR>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should =
have=20
at<BR>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box =
on<BR>another=20
channel, as well.<BR><BR>Neil<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
and=20
you?<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
..html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY ></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C67E7B.21C00F70--
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68534 is a reply to message #68521] |
Tue, 23 May 2006 20:17 |
cujo
Messages: 285
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I wonder what my Germainuim could do to it.
Wanna send me just the track?
"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>Neil,
>Sounds like the part already sounds blatty. You may have to
>rerecord as you suggested. I have great results using
>a combination of a fat but clean DI track with Amplitube along side it.
>Tom
>
>
> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44729718$1@linux...
>
> I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
> the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
> should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
> might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
> How's that for politically correct? lol
>
> Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
> but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
> input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
> signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
> mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output=20
> level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
> low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
> run into impedance issues with this method?
>
> Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
> other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
> for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>
> Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
> with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
> line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
> first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
> that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
> despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
> least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
> another channel, as well.
>
> Neil
>
>
>
>
>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
>http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
>
><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
><HTML><HEAD>
><META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
>charset=3Diso-8859-1">
><META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
><STYLE></STYLE>
></HEAD>
><BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Neil,</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sounds like the part already sounds =
>blatty. =20
>You may have to</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>rerecord as you suggested. I have =
>great=20
>results using</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>a combination of a fat but clean DI =
>track with=20
>Amplitube along side it.</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV> </DIV>
><BLOCKQUOTE=20
>style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
>BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV>"Neil" <<A =
>href=3D"mailto:OIUOIU@OIU.com">OIUOIU@OIU.com</A>> wrote=20
> in message <A=20
> href=3D"news:44729718$1@linux">news:44729718$1@linux</A>...</DIV><BR>I
=
>have a=20
> bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with<BR>the sound of,
=
>but I=20
> personally think sucks... OK, maybe I<BR>should say it a different =
>way: "They=20
> like it, but I think they<BR>might like it even better if I could =
>improve upon=20
> it :D<BR>How's that for politically correct? =
>lol<BR><BR>Anyway,=20
> I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,<BR>but here's
=
>my=20
> question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the<BR>input isn't =
>designed for=20
> line-level stuff, so if I run the<BR>signal out of a line-level out on
=
>my=20
> convertors, then through a<BR>mic pre that also has a line-level input
=
>and=20
> also an output <BR>level control (of which I have a few), can I just =
>feed a=20
> very<BR>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will =
>I<BR>run=20
> into impedance issues with this method?<BR><BR>Reamping's no problem -
=
>I can=20
> easily rig that up, so if this<BR>other option doesn't work, I can =
>always fall=20
> back on that, but<BR>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in =
>this=20
> instance?<BR><BR>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a=20
> re-tracking<BR>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin
=
>
> head<BR>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other=20
> options<BR>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track...=20
> how's<BR>that for an achievement? lol Totally =
>my=20
> fault, though -<BR>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should
=
>have=20
> at<BR>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box =
>on<BR>another=20
> channel, as well.<BR><BR>Neil<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
><DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
>and=20
>you?<BR><A=20
>href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
>.html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68535 is a reply to message #68534] |
Tue, 23 May 2006 20:21 |
cujo
Messages: 285
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I bet he spent a boatload on that Carvin too, I faced a band with a Carvin
a few years ago, and all the bass player told me was how much he spent on
it.
On the other hand, I just went to practice with a band I am doing a session
for, and thay had a Randall with a 15, I almost liked it better than my SVT,
much more clear "note" and still plenty of low end.
"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote:
>
>
>I wonder what my Germainuim could do to it.
>Wanna send me just the track?
>
>
>"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>Neil,
>>Sounds like the part already sounds blatty. You may have to
>>rerecord as you suggested. I have great results using
>>a combination of a fat but clean DI track with Amplitube along side it.
>>Tom
>>
>>
>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44729718$1@linux...
>>
>> I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>> the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>> should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>> might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>> How's that for politically correct? lol
>>
>> Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>> but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>> input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>> signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>> mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output=20
>> level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>> low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>> run into impedance issues with this method?
>>
>> Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>> other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>> for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>
>> Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>> with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>> line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>> first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>> that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>> despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>> least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>> another channel, as well.
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
>>http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
>>
>><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
>><HTML><HEAD>
>><META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
>>charset=3Diso-8859-1">
>><META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
>><STYLE></STYLE>
>></HEAD>
>><BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Neil,</FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sounds like the part already sounds =
>>blatty. =20
>>You may have to</FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>rerecord as you suggested. I have =
>>great=20
>>results using</FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>a combination of a fat but clean DI =
>>track with=20
>>Amplitube along side it.</FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
>><DIV> </DIV>
>><BLOCKQUOTE=20
>>style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
>>BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
>> <DIV>"Neil" <<A =
>>href=3D"mailto:OIUOIU@OIU.com">OIUOIU@OIU.com</A>> wrote=20
>> in message <A=20
>> href=3D"news:44729718$1@linux">news:44729718$1@linux</A>...</DIV><BR>I
>=
>>have a=20
>> bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with<BR>the sound of,
>=
>>but I=20
>> personally think sucks... OK, maybe I<BR>should say it a different =
>>way: "They=20
>> like it, but I think they<BR>might like it even better if I could =
>>improve upon=20
>> it :D<BR>How's that for politically correct? =
>>lol<BR><BR>Anyway,=20
>> I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,<BR>but here's
>=
>>my=20
>> question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the<BR>input isn't =
>>designed for=20
>> line-level stuff, so if I run the<BR>signal out of a line-level out on
>=
>>my=20
>> convertors, then through a<BR>mic pre that also has a line-level input
>=
>>and=20
>> also an output <BR>level control (of which I have a few), can I just
=
>>feed a=20
>> very<BR>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will =
>>I<BR>run=20
>> into impedance issues with this method?<BR><BR>Reamping's no problem
-
>=
>>I can=20
>> easily rig that up, so if this<BR>other option doesn't work, I can =
>>always fall=20
>> back on that, but<BR>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in
=
>>this=20
>> instance?<BR><BR>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a=20
>> re-tracking<BR>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin
>=
>>
>> head<BR>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other=20
>> options<BR>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track...=20
>> how's<BR>that for an achievement? lol Totally =
>>my=20
>> fault, though -<BR>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should
>=
>>have=20
>> at<BR>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box =
>>on<BR>another=20
>> channel, as well.<BR><BR>Neil<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
>><DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
>>and=20
>>you?<BR><A=20
>>href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
>>.html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68536 is a reply to message #68520] |
Tue, 23 May 2006 20:25 |
cujo
Messages: 285
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I use the Pod a lot. I only have 7 "High end" mic pre's and 3 other channels
of "prosumer" so I use them for drums when tracking, and often use the pod
to record a scratch. Then replace it. I hear the Brick is cool. I may need
to try one
"justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>No I hear ya John... I like a bunch of the different ones, I just dont
>personally think the sansamp 'sucks' but I respect your opinion. the only
>one that I've found that really does suck is the POD, but then some people
>like that too.
>
>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>>
>> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
>> infatuated
>> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The
>> tone
>> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
>> How sucky is that?
>> John
>>
>> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>haha no it doesn't
>>>
>>>And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>>>
>>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for
$350
>>
>>>> used.
>>>> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>>>> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>>>>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>>>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>>>>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>>>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>>>>
>>>>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>>>>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>>>>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>>>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>>>>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>>>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>>>>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>>>>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>>>>
>>>>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>>>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>>>>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>>>>
>>>>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>>>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>>>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>>>>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>>>>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>>>>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>>>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>>>>another channel, as well.
>>>>>
>>>>>Neil
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68539 is a reply to message #68536] |
Tue, 23 May 2006 22:05 |
justcron
Messages: 330
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
That proves any tool can be worth it.
The SansAmp doesn't suck for tone.. it just needs a little EQ :)
"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
news:4473d21e$1@linux...
>
>
> I use the Pod a lot. I only have 7 "High end" mic pre's and 3 other
> channels
> of "prosumer" so I use them for drums when tracking, and often use the pod
> to record a scratch. Then replace it. I hear the Brick is cool. I may need
> to try one
>
>
> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>No I hear ya John... I like a bunch of the different ones, I just dont
>
>>personally think the sansamp 'sucks' but I respect your opinion. the
>>only
>
>>one that I've found that really does suck is the POD, but then some people
>
>>like that too.
>>
>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>>>
>>> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
>
>>> infatuated
>>> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The
>
>>> tone
>>> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
>>> How sucky is that?
>>> John
>>>
>>> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>>haha no it doesn't
>>>>
>>>>And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>>>>
>>>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for
> $350
>>>
>>>>> used.
>>>>> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>>>>> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>>>>>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>>>>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>>>>>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>>>>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>>>>>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>>>>>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>>>>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>>>>>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>>>>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>>>>>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>>>>>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>>>>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>>>>>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>>>>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>>>>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>>>>>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>>>>>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>>>>>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>>>>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>>>>>another channel, as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Neil
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68544 is a reply to message #68539] |
Wed, 24 May 2006 04:25 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I promise you if you hear my Ampeg VST preamp you'll say the sansamp sucks
for tone. I think I'm becoming a gear slut!
"justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>That proves any tool can be worth it.
>
>The SansAmp doesn't suck for tone.. it just needs a little EQ :)
>
>"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
>news:4473d21e$1@linux...
>>
>>
>> I use the Pod a lot. I only have 7 "High end" mic pre's and 3 other
>> channels
>> of "prosumer" so I use them for drums when tracking, and often use the
pod
>> to record a scratch. Then replace it. I hear the Brick is cool. I may
need
>> to try one
>>
>>
>> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>No I hear ya John... I like a bunch of the different ones, I just dont
>>
>>>personally think the sansamp 'sucks' but I respect your opinion. the
>>>only
>>
>>>one that I've found that really does suck is the POD, but then some people
>>
>>>like that too.
>>>
>>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
>>
>>>> infatuated
>>>> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The
>>
>>>> tone
>>>> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
>>>> How sucky is that?
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>>>haha no it doesn't
>>>>>
>>>>>And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>>>>>
>>>>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for
>> $350
>>>>
>>>>>> used.
>>>>>> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>>>>>> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>>>>>>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>>>>>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>>>>>>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>>>>>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>>>>>>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>>>>>>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>>>>>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>>>>>>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>>>>>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>>>>>>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>>>>>>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>>>>>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>>>>>>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>>>>>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>>>>>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>>>>>>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>>>>>>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>>>>>>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>>>>>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>>>>>>another channel, as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Neil
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68548 is a reply to message #68535] |
Wed, 24 May 2006 05:56 |
Ne
Messages: 17
Registered: May 2007
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Not sure how much he spent on the head, but I'm tending to think
there might be something wrong with it, or perhaps with his
bass (active electronics), considering the type of distortion
I'm dealing with on these tracks. FWIW I've recorded a Carvin
bass head once before, albeit mic'ed through a cabinet, and I
Seem to recall it being a different model head, and it
sounded great, so I don't think they necessarily all suck.
BTW thanks for your offer on trying to do something with the
tracks, but they're at 88.2k, so you couldn't do anything with
it via Paris, and also there are a couple of edits here & there
that I haven't finalized/rendered on two of the songs, both of
which I'm referring to have full-song edits for timing purposes
between one section & another, so it'd be a mess for you with
all the various file pieces therein.
I'll figure it out, and if I come up with some amazing magic
bullet that saves these tracks withut having to re-record, I'll
let you guys know for the sake of future reference.
Neil
"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>I bet he spent a boatload on that Carvin too, I faced a band with a Carvin
>a few years ago, and all the bass player told me was how much he spent on
>it.
>On the other hand, I just went to practice with a band I am doing a session
>for, and thay had a Randall with a 15, I almost liked it better than my
SVT,
>much more clear "note" and still plenty of low end.
>
>
>"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>I wonder what my Germainuim could do to it.
>>Wanna send me just the track?
>>
>>
>>"Tom Bruhl" <arpegio@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>Neil,
>>>Sounds like the part already sounds blatty. You may have to
>>>rerecord as you suggested. I have great results using
>>>a combination of a fat but clean DI track with Amplitube along side it.
>>>Tom
>>>
>>>
>>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44729718$1@linux...
>>>
>>> I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>>> the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>> should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>>> might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>> How's that for politically correct? lol
>>>
>>> Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>>> but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>>> input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>> signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>>> mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output=20
>>> level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>>> low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>>> run into impedance issues with this method?
>>>
>>> Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>> other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>>> for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>>
>>> Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>> with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>> line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>>> first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>>> that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>>> despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>> least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>> another channel, as well.
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
>>>http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
>>>
>>><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
>>><HTML><HEAD>
>>><META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
>>>charset=3Diso-8859-1">
>>><META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
>>><STYLE></STYLE>
>>></HEAD>
>>><BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
>>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Neil,</FONT></DIV>
>>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sounds like the part already sounds =
>>>blatty. =20
>>>You may have to</FONT></DIV>
>>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>rerecord as you suggested. I have =
>>>great=20
>>>results using</FONT></DIV>
>>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>a combination of a fat but clean DI =
>>>track with=20
>>>Amplitube along side it.</FONT></DIV>
>>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
>>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
>>><DIV> </DIV>
>>><BLOCKQUOTE=20
>>>style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
>>>BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
>>> <DIV>"Neil" <<A =
>>>href=3D"mailto:OIUOIU@OIU.com">OIUOIU@OIU.com</A>> wrote=20
>>> in message <A=20
>>> href=3D"news:44729718$1@linux">news:44729718$1@linux</A>...</DIV><BR>I
>>=
>>>have a=20
>>> bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with<BR>the sound of,
>>=
>>>but I=20
>>> personally think sucks... OK, maybe I<BR>should say it a different =
>>>way: "They=20
>>> like it, but I think they<BR>might like it even better if I could =
>>>improve upon=20
>>> it :D<BR>How's that for politically correct? =
>>>lol<BR><BR>Anyway,=20
>>> I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,<BR>but here's
>>=
>>>my=20
>>> question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the<BR>input isn't =
>>>designed for=20
>>> line-level stuff, so if I run the<BR>signal out of a line-level out
on
>>=
>>>my=20
>>> convertors, then through a<BR>mic pre that also has a line-level input
>>=
>>>and=20
>>> also an output <BR>level control (of which I have a few), can I just
>=
>>>feed a=20
>>> very<BR>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will
=
>>>I<BR>run=20
>>> into impedance issues with this method?<BR><BR>Reamping's no problem
>-
>>=
>>>I can=20
>>> easily rig that up, so if this<BR>other option doesn't work, I can =
>>>always fall=20
>>> back on that, but<BR>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in
>=
>>>this=20
>>> instance?<BR><BR>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a=20
>>> re-tracking<BR>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin
>>=
>>>
>>> head<BR>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other=20
>>> options<BR>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track...=20
>>> how's<BR>that for an achievement? lol Totally =
>>>my=20
>>> fault, though -<BR>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should
>>=
>>>have=20
>>> at<BR>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box =
>>>on<BR>another=20
>>> channel, as well.<BR><BR>Neil<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
>>><DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam,
=
>>>and=20
>>>you?<BR><A=20
>>>href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
>>>.html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>>>
>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68555 is a reply to message #68510] |
Wed, 24 May 2006 08:30 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey John,
If I get one of these Ampeg doohickeys, can I put it in a rack between two
other tube preamps and catch my studio on fire? I've got an old B15N here
that can heat the whole studio in about 15 minutes.
;oD
"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>
> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for $350
used.
> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>
>
>
> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >
> >I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
> >the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
> >should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
> >might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
> >How's that for politically correct? lol
> >
> >Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
> >but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
> >input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
> >signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
> >mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
> >level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
> >low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
> >run into impedance issues with this method?
> >
> >Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
> >other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
> >for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
> >
> >Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
> >with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
> >line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
> >first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
> >that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
> >despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
> >least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
> >another channel, as well.
> >
> >Neil
> >
> >
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68558 is a reply to message #68518] |
Wed, 24 May 2006 10:57 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against my *go to*
bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to infatuate me.
;o)
"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>
> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
infatuated
> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The
tone
> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
> How sucky is that?
> John
>
> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
> >haha no it doesn't
> >
> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
> >
> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
> >>
> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for
$350
>
> >> used.
> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
> >> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
> >>>
> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
> >>>
> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
> >>>
> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
> >>>another channel, as well.
> >>>
> >>>Neil
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68561 is a reply to message #68544] |
Wed, 24 May 2006 11:22 |
rick
Messages: 1976
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
as opposed the garden variety one???
On 24 May 2006 21:25:40 +1000, "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>I promise you if you hear my Ampeg VST preamp you'll say the sansamp sucks
>for tone. I think I'm becoming a gear slut!
>
>"justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>That proves any tool can be worth it.
>>
>>The SansAmp doesn't suck for tone.. it just needs a little EQ :)
>>
>>"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
>>news:4473d21e$1@linux...
>>>
>>>
>>> I use the Pod a lot. I only have 7 "High end" mic pre's and 3 other
>>> channels
>>> of "prosumer" so I use them for drums when tracking, and often use the
>pod
>>> to record a scratch. Then replace it. I hear the Brick is cool. I may
>need
>>> to try one
>>>
>>>
>>> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>>No I hear ya John... I like a bunch of the different ones, I just dont
>>>
>>>>personally think the sansamp 'sucks' but I respect your opinion. the
>
>>>>only
>>>
>>>>one that I've found that really does suck is the POD, but then some people
>>>
>>>>like that too.
>>>>
>>>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
>>>
>>>>> infatuated
>>>>> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The
>>>
>>>>> tone
>>>>> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
>>>>> How sucky is that?
>>>>> John
>>>>>
>>>>> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>>>>haha no it doesn't
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for
>>> $350
>>>>>
>>>>>>> used.
>>>>>>> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>>>>>>> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>>>>>>>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>>>>>>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>>>>>>>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>>>>>>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>>>>>>>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>>>>>>>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>>>>>>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>>>>>>>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>>>>>>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>>>>>>>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>>>>>>>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>>>>>>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>>>>>>>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>>>>>>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>>>>>>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>>>>>>>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>>>>>>>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>>>>>>>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>>>>>>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>>>>>>>another channel, as well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Neil
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68562 is a reply to message #68558] |
Wed, 24 May 2006 11:41 |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
or burst into flames... which ever comes first! ;-)
David.
DJ wrote:
> I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against my *go to*
> bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to infatuate me.
>
> ;o)
>
> "john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>
>>Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
>
> infatuated
>
>>me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The
>
> tone
>
>>to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
>>How sucky is that?
>>John
>>
>>"justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>
>>>haha no it doesn't
>>>
>>>And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>>>
>>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>>>
>>>>sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for
>
> $350
>
>>>>used.
>>>>Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>>>> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>>>>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>>>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>>>>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>>>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>>>>
>>>>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>>>>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>>>>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>>>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>>>>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>>>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>>>>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>>>>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>>>>
>>>>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>>>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>>>>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>>>>
>>>>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>>>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>>>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>>>>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>>>>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>>>>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>>>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>>>>another channel, as well.
>>>>>
>>>>>Neil
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68563 is a reply to message #68558] |
Wed, 24 May 2006 12:55 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
This one right? Ampeg SVPCL
http://www.musiciansfriend.com/product/AmpegSVPCLClassicBass Preamp?sku=481842
If it takes you more than 5 minutes to be impressed and 2 weeks to fall in
love I'll be suprised. This is as near perfect a bass pre as I could have
ever dreamed. See for me it's all about the sounds of the 70's and 80's
with prog rock and rock. This bass just has that sound for me. Totally
and 100%. Of the hundreds of concerts I've seen of my favorite bands this
preamp gets me that sounds of the real live bass player, not a studio album
and for recording it's just dreamy cuz that sound goes right out at line
level. Word is that theres a replacement chip to give even more output but
I haven't looked into it yet cuz I get enough output so far.
Let me know honestly what you think (like you won't, hehe), particularly
regarding how even the bass guitar plays ALL over the fretboard and how seriously
deep and smooth the bass goes and how good the tone is overall. If you disagree
on all three of those please say so. Good luck.
John
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against my *go to*
>bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to infatuate me.
>
>;o)
>
>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>>
>> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
>infatuated
>> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The
>tone
>> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
>> How sucky is that?
>> John
>>
>> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>> >haha no it doesn't
>> >
>> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>> >
>> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>> >>
>> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for
>$350
>>
>> >> used.
>> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>> >> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>> >>>
>> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>> >>>
>> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>> >>>
>> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>> >>>another channel, as well.
>> >>>
>> >>>Neil
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68564 is a reply to message #68555] |
Wed, 24 May 2006 12:56 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I don't now how much heat it puts out but fire is a possibility with all this
stuff, kinda like the istanbul airport today (burned to hell).
John
DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Hey John,
>
>If I get one of these Ampeg doohickeys, can I put it in a rack between two
>other tube preamps and catch my studio on fire? I've got an old B15N here
>that can heat the whole studio in about 15 minutes.
>
>;oD
>
>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>>
>> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for $350
>used.
>> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>>
>>
>>
>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>> >the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>> >should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>> >might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>> >How's that for politically correct? lol
>> >
>> >Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>> >but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>> >input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>> >signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>> >mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>> >level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>> >low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>> >run into impedance issues with this method?
>> >
>> >Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>> >other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>> >for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>> >
>> >Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>> >with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>> >line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>> >first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>> >that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>> >despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>> >least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>> >another channel, as well.
>> >
>> >Neil
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68574 is a reply to message #68558] |
Thu, 25 May 2006 04:00 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
DJ, Also add 3 to 6 db of compression post to get it right in the pocket.
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against my *go to*
>bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to infatuate me.
>
>;o)
>
>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>>
>> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
>infatuated
>> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The
>tone
>> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
>> How sucky is that?
>> John
>>
>> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>> >haha no it doesn't
>> >
>> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>> >
>> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>> >>
>> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for
>$350
>>
>> >> used.
>> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>> >> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>> >>>
>> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>> >>>
>> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>> >>>
>> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>> >>>another channel, as well.
>> >>>
>> >>>Neil
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68576 is a reply to message #68561] |
Thu, 25 May 2006 04:03 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
With the TD20 and the ampeg now i'm a certified slut. The TD20 presets are
terrible but the presets from vepxressionsltd.com make this thing exactly
what I want. I have never had so much fun, except maybe in high school.....hehe.
John
rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
>as opposed the garden variety one???
>
>On 24 May 2006 21:25:40 +1000, "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>I promise you if you hear my Ampeg VST preamp you'll say the sansamp sucks
>>for tone. I think I'm becoming a gear slut!
>>
>>"justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>That proves any tool can be worth it.
>>>
>>>The SansAmp doesn't suck for tone.. it just needs a little EQ :)
>>>
>>>"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
>>>news:4473d21e$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I use the Pod a lot. I only have 7 "High end" mic pre's and 3 other
>>>> channels
>>>> of "prosumer" so I use them for drums when tracking, and often use the
>>pod
>>>> to record a scratch. Then replace it. I hear the Brick is cool. I may
>>need
>>>> to try one
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>>>No I hear ya John... I like a bunch of the different ones, I just dont
>>>>
>>>>>personally think the sansamp 'sucks' but I respect your opinion. the
>>
>>>>>only
>>>>
>>>>>one that I've found that really does suck is the POD, but then some
people
>>>>
>>>>>like that too.
>>>>>
>>>>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
>>>>
>>>>>> infatuated
>>>>>> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again.
The
>>>>
>>>>>> tone
>>>>>> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
>>>>>> How sucky is that?
>>>>>> John
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>haha no it doesn't
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL
for
>>>> $350
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> used.
>>>>>>>> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>>>>>>>> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>>>>>>>>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>>>>>>>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>>>>>>>>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>>>>>>>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>>>>>>>>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>>>>>>>>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>>>>>>>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>>>>>>>>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>>>>>>>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>>>>>>>>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>>>>>>>>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>>>>>>>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>>>>>>>>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>>>>>>>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>>>>>>>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>>>>>>>>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>>>>>>>>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>>>>>>>>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>>>>>>>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>>>>>>>>another channel, as well.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Neil
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68579 is a reply to message #68574] |
Thu, 25 May 2006 06:12 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
So now I've got to buy one of those compressor thingies?
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44758e35$1@linux...
>
> DJ, Also add 3 to 6 db of compression post to get it right in the pocket.
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against my *go to*
> >bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to infatuate
me.
> >
> >;o)
> >
> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
> >>
> >> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
> >infatuated
> >> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The
> >tone
> >> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
> >> How sucky is that?
> >> John
> >>
> >> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
> >> >haha no it doesn't
> >> >
> >> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
> >> >
> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
> >> >>
> >> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for
> >$350
> >>
> >> >> used.
> >> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
> >> >> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
> >> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
> >> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
> >> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
> >> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
> >> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
> >> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
> >> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
> >> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
> >> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
> >> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
> >> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
> >> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
> >> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
> >> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
> >> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
> >> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
> >> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
> >> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
> >> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
> >> >>>another channel, as well.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Neil
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68581 is a reply to message #68579] |
Thu, 25 May 2006 07:12 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
It should look like this, only in orange.
http://tinyurl.com/gytrd
Glad to help,
John
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>So now I've got to buy one of those compressor thingies?
>
>
>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44758e35$1@linux...
>>
>> DJ, Also add 3 to 6 db of compression post to get it right in the pocket.
>>
>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>> >I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against my *go
to*
>> >bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to infatuate
>me.
>> >
>> >;o)
>> >
>> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>> >>
>> >> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
>> >infatuated
>> >> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again.
The
>> >tone
>> >> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
>> >> How sucky is that?
>> >> John
>> >>
>> >> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>> >> >haha no it doesn't
>> >> >
>> >> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>> >> >
>> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL
for
>> >$350
>> >>
>> >> >> used.
>> >> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>> >> >> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>> >> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>> >> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>> >> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>> >> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>> >> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>> >> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>> >> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>> >> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>> >> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>> >> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>> >> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>> >> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>> >> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>> >> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>> >> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>> >> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>> >> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>> >> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>> >> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>> >> >>>another channel, as well.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>Neil
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68585 is a reply to message #68576] |
Thu, 25 May 2006 07:58 |
rick
Messages: 1976
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
sluts always had the most fun in high school. glad to see that you're
able to continue funess.
On 25 May 2006 21:03:50 +1000, "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>With the TD20 and the ampeg now i'm a certified slut. The TD20 presets are
>terrible but the presets from vepxressionsltd.com make this thing exactly
>what I want. I have never had so much fun, except maybe in high school.....hehe.
>John
>
>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>as opposed the garden variety one???
>>
>>On 24 May 2006 21:25:40 +1000, "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>I promise you if you hear my Ampeg VST preamp you'll say the sansamp sucks
>>>for tone. I think I'm becoming a gear slut!
>>>
>>>"justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>>That proves any tool can be worth it.
>>>>
>>>>The SansAmp doesn't suck for tone.. it just needs a little EQ :)
>>>>
>>>>"Cujo" <chris@nospamapplemanstudio.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:4473d21e$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I use the Pod a lot. I only have 7 "High end" mic pre's and 3 other
>
>>>>> channels
>>>>> of "prosumer" so I use them for drums when tracking, and often use the
>>>pod
>>>>> to record a scratch. Then replace it. I hear the Brick is cool. I may
>>>need
>>>>> to try one
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>>>>No I hear ya John... I like a bunch of the different ones, I just dont
>>>>>
>>>>>>personally think the sansamp 'sucks' but I respect your opinion. the
>>>
>>>>>>only
>>>>>
>>>>>>one that I've found that really does suck is the POD, but then some
>people
>>>>>
>>>>>>like that too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
>>>>>
>>>>>>> infatuated
>>>>>>> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again.
> The
>>>>>
>>>>>>> tone
>>>>>>> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
>>>>>>> How sucky is that?
>>>>>>> John
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>haha no it doesn't
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL
>for
>>>>> $350
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> used.
>>>>>>>>> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>>>>>>>>> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>>>>>>>>>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>>>>>>>>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>>>>>>>>>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>>>>>>>>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>>>>>>>>>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>>>>>>>>>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>>>>>>>>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>>>>>>>>>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>>>>>>>>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>>>>>>>>>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>>>>>>>>>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>>>>>>>>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>>>>>>>>>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>>>>>>>>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>>>>>>>>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>>>>>>>>>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>>>>>>>>>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>>>>>>>>>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>>>>>>>>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>>>>>>>>>another channel, as well.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Neil
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68649 is a reply to message #68574] |
Fri, 26 May 2006 21:11 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi John,
The Ampeg preamp came in today. It's got some nice (and startlingly obvious)
tone shaping possibilities that are very specific to bass. One
question.............when I crank the master knob, you'd think I would hear
a difference in output volume, but nothing is happening. Could be that I've
got a defective unit.. I'm running the balanced output direct to a Paris A/D
converter. Cranking the volume knob completely clockwise gets me to
around -10dB on the Paris meter.
It sounds nice, but to be quite honest, I'm using a stock PBass (passive
pickups) and A/B'ing it with an Avalon 737 and a Presonus ADL 600 and those
two preamps are kicking it's ass most seriously in every way. The ADL is an
absolute monster as a bass DI, even though it doesn't have an EQ. Every
nuance of the finger touching the string, touching the fret, pulling off the
fret is so friggin articulated with this preamp that it's absolutely sick.
This preamp actually picks up my thought patterns, converts them to audio
and I hear them through the Paris converters as I'm deciding where to fret
next.
Anyway, like I said, maybe I've got a defective Ampeg.
Cheers,
Deej
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44758e35$1@linux...
>
> DJ, Also add 3 to 6 db of compression post to get it right in the pocket.
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against my *go to*
> >bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to infatuate
me.
> >
> >;o)
> >
> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
> >>
> >> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has totally
> >infatuated
> >> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The
> >tone
> >> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal output.
> >> How sucky is that?
> >> John
> >>
> >> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
> >> >haha no it doesn't
> >> >
> >> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
> >> >
> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
> >> >>
> >> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for
> >$350
> >>
> >> >> used.
> >> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
> >> >> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
> >> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
> >> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
> >> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
> >> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
> >> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
> >> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
> >> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
> >> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
> >> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
> >> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
> >> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
> >> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
> >> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
> >> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
> >> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
> >> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
> >> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
> >> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
> >> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
> >> >>>another channel, as well.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Neil
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68653 is a reply to message #68649] |
Fri, 26 May 2006 22:38 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Deej.. it's typical for the master to only run the amp / amp output.. since
you're into the DI out this is probably a normal operating procedure. That
keeps the player from jacking gain on the soundman in a live situation when
playing volume war with the gtr player. There are some exceptions (SWR model
400 is one) that don't stick to this ruling, but I bet the Ampeg is on the
'standard'.
Try hitting a DI from the *to the amp* output and I bet the master works.
AA
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:4477d24d@linux...
> Hi John,
>
> The Ampeg preamp came in today. It's got some nice (and startlingly
> obvious)
> tone shaping possibilities that are very specific to bass. One
> question.............when I crank the master knob, you'd think I would
> hear
> a difference in output volume, but nothing is happening. Could be that
> I've
> got a defective unit.. I'm running the balanced output direct to a Paris
> A/D
> converter. Cranking the volume knob completely clockwise gets me to
> around -10dB on the Paris meter.
> It sounds nice, but to be quite honest, I'm using a stock PBass (passive
> pickups) and A/B'ing it with an Avalon 737 and a Presonus ADL 600 and
> those
> two preamps are kicking it's ass most seriously in every way. The ADL is
> an
> absolute monster as a bass DI, even though it doesn't have an EQ. Every
> nuance of the finger touching the string, touching the fret, pulling off
> the
> fret is so friggin articulated with this preamp that it's absolutely sick.
> This preamp actually picks up my thought patterns, converts them to audio
> and I hear them through the Paris converters as I'm deciding where to fret
> next.
>
> Anyway, like I said, maybe I've got a defective Ampeg.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Deej
>
>
> "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44758e35$1@linux...
>>
>> DJ, Also add 3 to 6 db of compression post to get it right in the
>> pocket.
>>
>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>> >I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against my *go to*
>> >bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to infatuate
> me.
>> >
>> >;o)
>> >
>> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>> >>
>> >> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has
>> >> totally
>> >infatuated
>> >> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again. The
>> >tone
>> >> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal
>> >> output.
>> >> How sucky is that?
>> >> John
>> >>
>> >> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>> >> >haha no it doesn't
>> >> >
>> >> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>> >> >
>> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL for
>> >$350
>> >>
>> >> >> used.
>> >> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>> >> >> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>> >> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>> >> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>> >> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>> >> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
>> >> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>> >> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>> >> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
>> >> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>> >> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>> >> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>> >> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>> >> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>> >> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>> >> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>> >> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>> >> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>> >> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>> >> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>> >> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>> >> >>>another channel, as well.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>Neil
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68654 is a reply to message #68653] |
Fri, 26 May 2006 22:44 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
OK then.. thanks. I'll probably RTFM tonight. This thing has some very
interesting tone shaping properties. I'm liking what it's doing but it
really needs to be used with either active pickups or, if used with passive
pickups, to be output to another device with additional gain staging (like a
compressor as John suggested) in order to achieve optimal recording levels.
When I first opened it up, I though "o'gawd.......another tweakhead box.
It's gonna' take me forever to dial in anything usable". Wrong. It's very
easy to snag your basic sound and then contour it to taste. I've got a
Demeter "H" series opto preamp that is starting to look like it's gonna end
up being the Ampeg's bitch. What I have achieved so far with this is a very
coloured sound, but so is my B15-N and I like that color just fine.
;o)
"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
news:4477e4ca$1@linux...
> Deej.. it's typical for the master to only run the amp / amp output..
since
> you're into the DI out this is probably a normal operating procedure. That
> keeps the player from jacking gain on the soundman in a live situation
when
> playing volume war with the gtr player. There are some exceptions (SWR
model
> 400 is one) that don't stick to this ruling, but I bet the Ampeg is on the
> 'standard'.
> Try hitting a DI from the *to the amp* output and I bet the master works.
>
> AA
>
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> news:4477d24d@linux...
> > Hi John,
> >
> > The Ampeg preamp came in today. It's got some nice (and startlingly
> > obvious)
> > tone shaping possibilities that are very specific to bass. One
> > question.............when I crank the master knob, you'd think I would
> > hear
> > a difference in output volume, but nothing is happening. Could be that
> > I've
> > got a defective unit.. I'm running the balanced output direct to a Paris
> > A/D
> > converter. Cranking the volume knob completely clockwise gets me to
> > around -10dB on the Paris meter.
> > It sounds nice, but to be quite honest, I'm using a stock PBass (passive
> > pickups) and A/B'ing it with an Avalon 737 and a Presonus ADL 600 and
> > those
> > two preamps are kicking it's ass most seriously in every way. The ADL is
> > an
> > absolute monster as a bass DI, even though it doesn't have an EQ. Every
> > nuance of the finger touching the string, touching the fret, pulling off
> > the
> > fret is so friggin articulated with this preamp that it's absolutely
sick.
> > This preamp actually picks up my thought patterns, converts them to
audio
> > and I hear them through the Paris converters as I'm deciding where to
fret
> > next.
> >
> > Anyway, like I said, maybe I've got a defective Ampeg.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Deej
> >
> >
> > "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44758e35$1@linux...
> >>
> >> DJ, Also add 3 to 6 db of compression post to get it right in the
> >> pocket.
> >>
> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >> >I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against my *go
to*
> >> >bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to infatuate
> > me.
> >> >
> >> >;o)
> >> >
> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
> >> >>
> >> >> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has
> >> >> totally
> >> >infatuated
> >> >> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again.
The
> >> >tone
> >> >> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal
> >> >> output.
> >> >> How sucky is that?
> >> >> John
> >> >>
> >> >> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
> >> >> >haha no it doesn't
> >> >> >
> >> >> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL
for
> >> >$350
> >> >>
> >> >> >> used.
> >> >> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
> >> >> >>
http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
> >> >> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
> >> >> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
> >> >> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
> >> >> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing it,
> >> >> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
> >> >> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
> >> >> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through a
> >> >> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
> >> >> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
> >> >> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
> >> >> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
> >> >> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
> >> >> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
> >> >> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
> >> >> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
> >> >> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
> >> >> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
> >> >> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
> >> >> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
> >> >> >>>another channel, as well.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>Neil
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
> http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68655 is a reply to message #68654] |
Fri, 26 May 2006 23:21 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Well, FWIW, I ended up picking up a SansampBass & ran the
signal out through my reamp box (it's the one made by Radial),
and did both... Sansamp-ed the track, then reamped it as
well... it's MUCH, much better, though still not what I'd
consider "killer", it'll definitely work, though. The Sansamp
gave it some presence & wooliness that it was lacking, and the
reamped track gave it presence and better articulation/clarity,
using a Mesa head on the cleanest setting, and running it
through a guitar cab with some really tight speakers, then
micing it with a TLM-103 through a Neve Portico I also recently
snagged. I think it'll all work out fine with a blend of those
two tracks.
Also tried the new Portico on a soft vocal track with a Claytor
Special (the Royer-modded MXL)... jury's still out on that,
though - took me about two seconds to yank it & put the mic
back through the Chandler TG2 - the Chandler kicked it's ass.
Was not really impressed with the Portico for that application.
Hard vox tomorrow - we'll see how it does up against the ISA
428, which is what we've been using for the harder-edged stuff
on this project.
Neil
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>OK then.. thanks. I'll probably RTFM tonight. This thing has some very
>interesting tone shaping properties. I'm liking what it's doing but it
>really needs to be used with either active pickups or, if used with passive
>pickups, to be output to another device with additional gain staging (like
a
>compressor as John suggested) in order to achieve optimal recording levels.
>When I first opened it up, I though "o'gawd.......another tweakhead box.
>It's gonna' take me forever to dial in anything usable". Wrong. It's very
>easy to snag your basic sound and then contour it to taste. I've got a
>Demeter "H" series opto preamp that is starting to look like it's gonna
end
>up being the Ampeg's bitch. What I have achieved so far with this is a very
>coloured sound, but so is my B15-N and I like that color just fine.
>
>;o)
>
>"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
>news:4477e4ca$1@linux...
>> Deej.. it's typical for the master to only run the amp / amp output..
>since
>> you're into the DI out this is probably a normal operating procedure.
That
>> keeps the player from jacking gain on the soundman in a live situation
>when
>> playing volume war with the gtr player. There are some exceptions (SWR
>model
>> 400 is one) that don't stick to this ruling, but I bet the Ampeg is on
the
>> 'standard'.
>> Try hitting a DI from the *to the amp* output and I bet the master works.
>>
>> AA
>>
>>
>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>> news:4477d24d@linux...
>> > Hi John,
>> >
>> > The Ampeg preamp came in today. It's got some nice (and startlingly
>> > obvious)
>> > tone shaping possibilities that are very specific to bass. One
>> > question.............when I crank the master knob, you'd think I would
>> > hear
>> > a difference in output volume, but nothing is happening. Could be that
>> > I've
>> > got a defective unit.. I'm running the balanced output direct to a Paris
>> > A/D
>> > converter. Cranking the volume knob completely clockwise gets me to
>> > around -10dB on the Paris meter.
>> > It sounds nice, but to be quite honest, I'm using a stock PBass (passive
>> > pickups) and A/B'ing it with an Avalon 737 and a Presonus ADL 600 and
>> > those
>> > two preamps are kicking it's ass most seriously in every way. The ADL
is
>> > an
>> > absolute monster as a bass DI, even though it doesn't have an EQ. Every
>> > nuance of the finger touching the string, touching the fret, pulling
off
>> > the
>> > fret is so friggin articulated with this preamp that it's absolutely
>sick.
>> > This preamp actually picks up my thought patterns, converts them to
>audio
>> > and I hear them through the Paris converters as I'm deciding where to
>fret
>> > next.
>> >
>> > Anyway, like I said, maybe I've got a defective Ampeg.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > Deej
>> >
>> >
>> > "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44758e35$1@linux...
>> >>
>> >> DJ, Also add 3 to 6 db of compression post to get it right in the
>> >> pocket.
>> >>
>> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>> >> >I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against my *go
>to*
>> >> >bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to infatuate
>> > me.
>> >> >
>> >> >;o)
>> >> >
>> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has
>> >> >> totally
>> >> >infatuated
>> >> >> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again.
>The
>> >> >tone
>> >> >> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal
>> >> >> output.
>> >> >> How sucky is that?
>> >> >> John
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >haha no it doesn't
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg SVPCL
>for
>> >> >$350
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >> used.
>> >> >> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is neither.
>> >> >> >>
> http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
>> >> >> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>> >> >> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
>> >> >> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>> >> >> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing
it,
>> >> >> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know the
>> >> >> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>> >> >> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through
a
>> >> >> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>> >> >> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>> >> >> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
>> >> >> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>> >> >> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
>> >> >> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>> >> >> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>> >> >> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other options
>> >> >> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track... how's
>> >> >> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
>> >> >> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>> >> >> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>> >> >> >>>another channel, as well.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>Neil
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
>> http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68657 is a reply to message #68655] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 00:23 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Keep us posted on the Portico. I've been lusting after one of those, but
tonight I took the plunge, stuck some rubber feet on the module below it so
I wouldn't scratch it and actually inserted the ADL 600 in the top of my
rack where it can't get scratched top or bottom and it will be stable riding
the rubber feet on top of the other module without using rack screws. Morgan
has been kind enough to allow me to demo it for a while and now I'm getting
blown away by it more and more each day.. Using this exhalted top rack
position means three things..........
1. It needs (and gets) plenty of ventilation (this is a slant rack so the
top of any module in this rack is angled downward, nothing covers the top of
the module and therefore it has lots of air above it for ventilation..
2. I'm now gonna be patching it into my bay.
3. I'm gonna figure out a way to pay for it.
It ain't cheap, but I'm finding it so useful that I think it's going to be
it's worth every penny. This thing sounds big and expensive, like my Great
River MP2-MH sounds big and expensive, though obviously in two different
ways.
Damned impressive piece of work.
;o)
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OI.com> wrote in message news:4477f007$1@linux...
>
> Well, FWIW, I ended up picking up a SansampBass & ran the
> signal out through my reamp box (it's the one made by Radial),
> and did both... Sansamp-ed the track, then reamped it as
> well... it's MUCH, much better, though still not what I'd
> consider "killer", it'll definitely work, though. The Sansamp
> gave it some presence & wooliness that it was lacking, and the
> reamped track gave it presence and better articulation/clarity,
> using a Mesa head on the cleanest setting, and running it
> through a guitar cab with some really tight speakers, then
> micing it with a TLM-103 through a Neve Portico I also recently
> snagged. I think it'll all work out fine with a blend of those
> two tracks.
>
> Also tried the new Portico on a soft vocal track with a Claytor
> Special (the Royer-modded MXL)... jury's still out on that,
> though - took me about two seconds to yank it & put the mic
> back through the Chandler TG2 - the Chandler kicked it's ass.
> Was not really impressed with the Portico for that application.
> Hard vox tomorrow - we'll see how it does up against the ISA
> 428, which is what we've been using for the harder-edged stuff
> on this project.
>
> Neil
>
>
>
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >OK then.. thanks. I'll probably RTFM tonight. This thing has some very
> >interesting tone shaping properties. I'm liking what it's doing but it
> >really needs to be used with either active pickups or, if used with
passive
> >pickups, to be output to another device with additional gain staging
(like
> a
> >compressor as John suggested) in order to achieve optimal recording
levels.
> >When I first opened it up, I though "o'gawd.......another tweakhead box.
> >It's gonna' take me forever to dial in anything usable". Wrong. It's very
> >easy to snag your basic sound and then contour it to taste. I've got a
> >Demeter "H" series opto preamp that is starting to look like it's gonna
> end
> >up being the Ampeg's bitch. What I have achieved so far with this is a
very
> >coloured sound, but so is my B15-N and I like that color just fine.
> >
> >;o)
> >
> >"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
> >news:4477e4ca$1@linux...
> >> Deej.. it's typical for the master to only run the amp / amp output..
> >since
> >> you're into the DI out this is probably a normal operating procedure.
> That
> >> keeps the player from jacking gain on the soundman in a live situation
> >when
> >> playing volume war with the gtr player. There are some exceptions (SWR
> >model
> >> 400 is one) that don't stick to this ruling, but I bet the Ampeg is on
> the
> >> 'standard'.
> >> Try hitting a DI from the *to the amp* output and I bet the master
works.
> >>
> >> AA
> >>
> >>
> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> >> news:4477d24d@linux...
> >> > Hi John,
> >> >
> >> > The Ampeg preamp came in today. It's got some nice (and startlingly
> >> > obvious)
> >> > tone shaping possibilities that are very specific to bass. One
> >> > question.............when I crank the master knob, you'd think I
would
> >> > hear
> >> > a difference in output volume, but nothing is happening. Could be
that
> >> > I've
> >> > got a defective unit.. I'm running the balanced output direct to a
Paris
> >> > A/D
> >> > converter. Cranking the volume knob completely clockwise gets me to
> >> > around -10dB on the Paris meter.
> >> > It sounds nice, but to be quite honest, I'm using a stock PBass
(passive
> >> > pickups) and A/B'ing it with an Avalon 737 and a Presonus ADL 600 and
> >> > those
> >> > two preamps are kicking it's ass most seriously in every way. The ADL
> is
> >> > an
> >> > absolute monster as a bass DI, even though it doesn't have an EQ.
Every
> >> > nuance of the finger touching the string, touching the fret, pulling
> off
> >> > the
> >> > fret is so friggin articulated with this preamp that it's absolutely
> >sick.
> >> > This preamp actually picks up my thought patterns, converts them to
> >audio
> >> > and I hear them through the Paris converters as I'm deciding where to
> >fret
> >> > next.
> >> >
> >> > Anyway, like I said, maybe I've got a defective Ampeg.
> >> >
> >> > Cheers,
> >> >
> >> > Deej
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44758e35$1@linux...
> >> >>
> >> >> DJ, Also add 3 to 6 db of compression post to get it right in the
> >> >> pocket.
> >> >>
> >> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >> >> >I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against my
*go
> >to*
> >> >> >bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to
infatuate
> >> > me.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >;o)
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has
> >> >> >> totally
> >> >> >infatuated
> >> >> >> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again.
> >The
> >> >> >tone
> >> >> >> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal
> >> >> >> output.
> >> >> >> How sucky is that?
> >> >> >> John
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >haha no it doesn't
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg
SVPCL
> >for
> >> >> >$350
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> used.
> >> >> >> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is
neither.
> >> >> >> >>
> > http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy with
> >> >> >> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
> >> >> >> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think they
> >> >> >> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
> >> >> >> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing
> it,
> >> >> >> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know
the
> >> >> >> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
> >> >> >> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through
> a
> >> >> >> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
> >> >> >> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
> >> >> >> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will I
> >> >> >> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
> >> >> >> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that, but
> >> >> >> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
> >> >> >> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
> >> >> >> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other
options
> >> >> >> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track...
how's
> >> >> >> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though -
> >> >> >> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
> >> >> >> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
> >> >> >> >>>another channel, as well.
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>Neil
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
> >> http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68662 is a reply to message #68657] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 04:13 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
DJ,
The SVPCL page 7 of the manual has a schematic and the Transformer Balanced
Line Out is PRE Master and so Master has no effect. The two PreAmp outs
are Post Master though. Also I'm running an Ibanez attack bass with ACTIVE
electronics so that helps I'm sure. I also read that there is a chip replacement
for more gain. E
ven with the active electronics I'm right on the edge of having enough gain
but the tone is totally where I want it. Now I'm not saying the $2000 preamps
won't sound better but that's a whole nother price range and the Sansamp
is a lower priced unit too, but for me this box totally gets me the sound
I need for rock and roll and jazz. I'll investigate the chip mode to get
more output. I also don't remember if I set the Paris Patchbay to -10db
or +4. I'm betting I have it on -10db. I'm using the Preouts though and
I'll try the Balanced Out next. For me there is no comparison with a sansamp
though. For me the sansamp is very uneven in response, very low on output
and really bad tone compared to the SVPCL.
John
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Keep us posted on the Portico. I've been lusting after one of those, but
>tonight I took the plunge, stuck some rubber feet on the module below it
so
>I wouldn't scratch it and actually inserted the ADL 600 in the top of my
>rack where it can't get scratched top or bottom and it will be stable riding
>the rubber feet on top of the other module without using rack screws. Morgan
>has been kind enough to allow me to demo it for a while and now I'm getting
>blown away by it more and more each day.. Using this exhalted top rack
>position means three things..........
>
>1. It needs (and gets) plenty of ventilation (this is a slant rack so the
>top of any module in this rack is angled downward, nothing covers the top
of
>the module and therefore it has lots of air above it for ventilation..
>2. I'm now gonna be patching it into my bay.
>3. I'm gonna figure out a way to pay for it.
>
>It ain't cheap, but I'm finding it so useful that I think it's going to
be
>it's worth every penny. This thing sounds big and expensive, like my Great
>River MP2-MH sounds big and expensive, though obviously in two different
>ways.
>
>Damned impressive piece of work.
>
>;o)
>
>
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OI.com> wrote in message news:4477f007$1@linux...
>>
>> Well, FWIW, I ended up picking up a SansampBass & ran the
>> signal out through my reamp box (it's the one made by Radial),
>> and did both... Sansamp-ed the track, then reamped it as
>> well... it's MUCH, much better, though still not what I'd
>> consider "killer", it'll definitely work, though. The Sansamp
>> gave it some presence & wooliness that it was lacking, and the
>> reamped track gave it presence and better articulation/clarity,
>> using a Mesa head on the cleanest setting, and running it
>> through a guitar cab with some really tight speakers, then
>> micing it with a TLM-103 through a Neve Portico I also recently
>> snagged. I think it'll all work out fine with a blend of those
>> two tracks.
>>
>> Also tried the new Portico on a soft vocal track with a Claytor
>> Special (the Royer-modded MXL)... jury's still out on that,
>> though - took me about two seconds to yank it & put the mic
>> back through the Chandler TG2 - the Chandler kicked it's ass.
>> Was not really impressed with the Portico for that application.
>> Hard vox tomorrow - we'll see how it does up against the ISA
>> 428, which is what we've been using for the harder-edged stuff
>> on this project.
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>> >OK then.. thanks. I'll probably RTFM tonight. This thing has some very
>> >interesting tone shaping properties. I'm liking what it's doing but it
>> >really needs to be used with either active pickups or, if used with
>passive
>> >pickups, to be output to another device with additional gain staging
>(like
>> a
>> >compressor as John suggested) in order to achieve optimal recording
>levels.
>> >When I first opened it up, I though "o'gawd.......another tweakhead box.
>> >It's gonna' take me forever to dial in anything usable". Wrong. It's
very
>> >easy to snag your basic sound and then contour it to taste. I've got
a
>> >Demeter "H" series opto preamp that is starting to look like it's gonna
>> end
>> >up being the Ampeg's bitch. What I have achieved so far with this is
a
>very
>> >coloured sound, but so is my B15-N and I like that color just fine.
>> >
>> >;o)
>> >
>> >"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
>> >news:4477e4ca$1@linux...
>> >> Deej.. it's typical for the master to only run the amp / amp output..
>> >since
>> >> you're into the DI out this is probably a normal operating procedure.
>> That
>> >> keeps the player from jacking gain on the soundman in a live situation
>> >when
>> >> playing volume war with the gtr player. There are some exceptions (SWR
>> >model
>> >> 400 is one) that don't stick to this ruling, but I bet the Ampeg is
on
>> the
>> >> 'standard'.
>> >> Try hitting a DI from the *to the amp* output and I bet the master
>works.
>> >>
>> >> AA
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:4477d24d@linux...
>> >> > Hi John,
>> >> >
>> >> > The Ampeg preamp came in today. It's got some nice (and startlingly
>> >> > obvious)
>> >> > tone shaping possibilities that are very specific to bass. One
>> >> > question.............when I crank the master knob, you'd think I
>would
>> >> > hear
>> >> > a difference in output volume, but nothing is happening. Could be
>that
>> >> > I've
>> >> > got a defective unit.. I'm running the balanced output direct to
a
>Paris
>> >> > A/D
>> >> > converter. Cranking the volume knob completely clockwise gets me
to
>> >> > around -10dB on the Paris meter.
>> >> > It sounds nice, but to be quite honest, I'm using a stock PBass
>(passive
>> >> > pickups) and A/B'ing it with an Avalon 737 and a Presonus ADL 600
and
>> >> > those
>> >> > two preamps are kicking it's ass most seriously in every way. The
ADL
>> is
>> >> > an
>> >> > absolute monster as a bass DI, even though it doesn't have an EQ.
>Every
>> >> > nuance of the finger touching the string, touching the fret, pulling
>> off
>> >> > the
>> >> > fret is so friggin articulated with this preamp that it's absolutely
>> >sick.
>> >> > This preamp actually picks up my thought patterns, converts them
to
>> >audio
>> >> > and I hear them through the Paris converters as I'm deciding where
to
>> >fret
>> >> > next.
>> >> >
>> >> > Anyway, like I said, maybe I've got a defective Ampeg.
>> >> >
>> >> > Cheers,
>> >> >
>> >> > Deej
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44758e35$1@linux...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> DJ, Also add 3 to 6 db of compression post to get it right in the
>> >> >> pocket.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against my
>*go
>> >to*
>> >> >> >bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to
>infatuate
>> >> > me.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >;o)
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp has
>> >> >> >> totally
>> >> >> >infatuated
>> >> >> >> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again.
>> >The
>> >> >> >tone
>> >> >> >> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal
>> >> >> >> output.
>> >> >> >> How sucky is that?
>> >> >> >> John
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >haha no it doesn't
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg
>SVPCL
>> >for
>> >> >> >$350
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> used.
>> >> >> >> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is
>neither.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> > http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy
with
>> >> >> >> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>> >> >> >> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think
they
>> >> >> >> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>> >> >> >> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing
>> it,
>> >> >> >> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know
>the
>> >> >> >> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>> >> >> >> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through
>> a
>> >> >> >> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>> >> >> >> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a very
>> >> >> >> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will
I
>> >> >> >> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>> >> >> >> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that,
but
>> >> >> >> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>> >> >> >> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>> >> >> >> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other
>options
>> >> >> >> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track...
>how's
>> >> >> >> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though
-
>> >> >> >> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>> >> >> >> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>> >> >> >> >>>another channel, as well.
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>>Neil
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
>> >> http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68663 is a reply to message #68662] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 04:14 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I guess I'm not really a true slut. :-(
"John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>DJ,
>
>The SVPCL page 7 of the manual has a schematic and the Transformer Balanced
>Line Out is PRE Master and so Master has no effect. The two PreAmp outs
>are Post Master though. Also I'm running an Ibanez attack bass with ACTIVE
>electronics so that helps I'm sure. I also read that there is a chip replacement
>for more gain. E
>
>ven with the active electronics I'm right on the edge of having enough gain
>but the tone is totally where I want it. Now I'm not saying the $2000 preamps
>won't sound better but that's a whole nother price range and the Sansamp
>is a lower priced unit too, but for me this box totally gets me the sound
>I need for rock and roll and jazz. I'll investigate the chip mode to get
>more output. I also don't remember if I set the Paris Patchbay to -10db
>or +4. I'm betting I have it on -10db. I'm using the Preouts though and
>I'll try the Balanced Out next. For me there is no comparison with a sansamp
>though. For me the sansamp is very uneven in response, very low on output
>and really bad tone compared to the SVPCL.
>
>John
>
>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>Keep us posted on the Portico. I've been lusting after one of those, but
>>tonight I took the plunge, stuck some rubber feet on the module below it
>so
>>I wouldn't scratch it and actually inserted the ADL 600 in the top of my
>>rack where it can't get scratched top or bottom and it will be stable riding
>>the rubber feet on top of the other module without using rack screws. Morgan
>>has been kind enough to allow me to demo it for a while and now I'm getting
>>blown away by it more and more each day.. Using this exhalted top rack
>>position means three things..........
>>
>>1. It needs (and gets) plenty of ventilation (this is a slant rack so the
>>top of any module in this rack is angled downward, nothing covers the top
>of
>>the module and therefore it has lots of air above it for ventilation..
>>2. I'm now gonna be patching it into my bay.
>>3. I'm gonna figure out a way to pay for it.
>>
>>It ain't cheap, but I'm finding it so useful that I think it's going to
>be
>>it's worth every penny. This thing sounds big and expensive, like my Great
>>River MP2-MH sounds big and expensive, though obviously in two different
>>ways.
>>
>>Damned impressive piece of work.
>>
>>;o)
>>
>>
>>
>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OI.com> wrote in message news:4477f007$1@linux...
>>>
>>> Well, FWIW, I ended up picking up a SansampBass & ran the
>>> signal out through my reamp box (it's the one made by Radial),
>>> and did both... Sansamp-ed the track, then reamped it as
>>> well... it's MUCH, much better, though still not what I'd
>>> consider "killer", it'll definitely work, though. The Sansamp
>>> gave it some presence & wooliness that it was lacking, and the
>>> reamped track gave it presence and better articulation/clarity,
>>> using a Mesa head on the cleanest setting, and running it
>>> through a guitar cab with some really tight speakers, then
>>> micing it with a TLM-103 through a Neve Portico I also recently
>>> snagged. I think it'll all work out fine with a blend of those
>>> two tracks.
>>>
>>> Also tried the new Portico on a soft vocal track with a Claytor
>>> Special (the Royer-modded MXL)... jury's still out on that,
>>> though - took me about two seconds to yank it & put the mic
>>> back through the Chandler TG2 - the Chandler kicked it's ass.
>>> Was not really impressed with the Portico for that application.
>>> Hard vox tomorrow - we'll see how it does up against the ISA
>>> 428, which is what we've been using for the harder-edged stuff
>>> on this project.
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>> >OK then.. thanks. I'll probably RTFM tonight. This thing has some very
>>> >interesting tone shaping properties. I'm liking what it's doing but
it
>>> >really needs to be used with either active pickups or, if used with
>>passive
>>> >pickups, to be output to another device with additional gain staging
>>(like
>>> a
>>> >compressor as John suggested) in order to achieve optimal recording
>>levels.
>>> >When I first opened it up, I though "o'gawd.......another tweakhead
box.
>>> >It's gonna' take me forever to dial in anything usable". Wrong. It's
>very
>>> >easy to snag your basic sound and then contour it to taste. I've got
>a
>>> >Demeter "H" series opto preamp that is starting to look like it's gonna
>>> end
>>> >up being the Ampeg's bitch. What I have achieved so far with this is
>a
>>very
>>> >coloured sound, but so is my B15-N and I like that color just fine.
>>> >
>>> >;o)
>>> >
>>> >"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
>>> >news:4477e4ca$1@linux...
>>> >> Deej.. it's typical for the master to only run the amp / amp output..
>>> >since
>>> >> you're into the DI out this is probably a normal operating procedure.
>>> That
>>> >> keeps the player from jacking gain on the soundman in a live situation
>>> >when
>>> >> playing volume war with the gtr player. There are some exceptions
(SWR
>>> >model
>>> >> 400 is one) that don't stick to this ruling, but I bet the Ampeg is
>on
>>> the
>>> >> 'standard'.
>>> >> Try hitting a DI from the *to the amp* output and I bet the master
>>works.
>>> >>
>>> >> AA
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>>> >> news:4477d24d@linux...
>>> >> > Hi John,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > The Ampeg preamp came in today. It's got some nice (and startlingly
>>> >> > obvious)
>>> >> > tone shaping possibilities that are very specific to bass. One
>>> >> > question.............when I crank the master knob, you'd think I
>>would
>>> >> > hear
>>> >> > a difference in output volume, but nothing is happening. Could be
>>that
>>> >> > I've
>>> >> > got a defective unit.. I'm running the balanced output direct to
>a
>>Paris
>>> >> > A/D
>>> >> > converter. Cranking the volume knob completely clockwise gets me
>to
>>> >> > around -10dB on the Paris meter.
>>> >> > It sounds nice, but to be quite honest, I'm using a stock PBass
>>(passive
>>> >> > pickups) and A/B'ing it with an Avalon 737 and a Presonus ADL 600
>and
>>> >> > those
>>> >> > two preamps are kicking it's ass most seriously in every way. The
>ADL
>>> is
>>> >> > an
>>> >> > absolute monster as a bass DI, even though it doesn't have an EQ.
>>Every
>>> >> > nuance of the finger touching the string, touching the fret, pulling
>>> off
>>> >> > the
>>> >> > fret is so friggin articulated with this preamp that it's absolutely
>>> >sick.
>>> >> > This preamp actually picks up my thought patterns, converts them
>to
>>> >audio
>>> >> > and I hear them through the Paris converters as I'm deciding where
>to
>>> >fret
>>> >> > next.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Anyway, like I said, maybe I've got a defective Ampeg.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Cheers,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Deej
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44758e35$1@linux...
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> DJ, Also add 3 to 6 db of compression post to get it right in
the
>>> >> >> pocket.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>> >> >> >I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against
my
>>*go
>>> >to*
>>> >> >> >bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to
>>infatuate
>>> >> > me.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >;o)
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp
has
>>> >> >> >> totally
>>> >> >> >infatuated
>>> >> >> >> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp again.
>>> >The
>>> >> >> >tone
>>> >> >> >> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal
>>> >> >> >> output.
>>> >> >> >> How sucky is that?
>>> >> >> >> John
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>> >> >> >> >haha no it doesn't
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>>> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg
>>SVPCL
>>> >for
>>> >> >> >$350
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >> used.
>>> >> >> >> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is
>>neither.
>>> >> >> >> >>
>>> > http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>>> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>> >> >> >> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy
>with
>>> >> >> >> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
>>> >> >> >> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think
>they
>>> >> >> >> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>> >> >> >> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>> >> >> >> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing
>>> it,
>>> >> >> >> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know
>>the
>>> >> >> >> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>> >> >> >> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through
>>> a
>>> >> >> >> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>> >> >> >> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a
very
>>> >> >> >> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will
>I
>>> >> >> >> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>> >> >> >> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if this
>>> >> >> >> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that,
>but
>>> >> >> >> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>> >> >> >> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>> >> >> >> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin head
>>> >> >> >> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other
>>options
>>> >> >> >> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track...
>>how's
>>> >> >> >> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though
>-
>>> >> >> >> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
>>> >> >> >> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
>>> >> >> >> >>>another channel, as well.
>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>> >> >> >> >>>Neil
>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
>>> >> http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68664 is a reply to message #68663] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 07:20 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>For me the sansamp is very uneven in response, very low on
>output and really bad tone compared to the SVPCL.
For the first time using the Sansamp, I didn't find it to be
necessarily uneven in response - I think it interprets dynamics
more "dynamically" than, let's say, a straight-ahead direct
box, or perhaps the Ampeg you're referring to, but in this
case, that seemed to be a big benefit. I used it with the blend
setting set all the way on the processed side (figuring if I
wanted any of the original sound, I could just bring up the
original track), so I'm sure that makes some kind of
difference, as well. Add just a little drive to bring in some
constant distortion to mask the intermittent distortion that
the Carvin head imparted, and we've now got a completely
useable metal bass track. If the guy's up to re-doing these
parts, I'd still like to seem him do that, just for the sake of
trying to get it to a higher level of quality. Once I played
the re-amped-sansamped tracks for a couple of the guys last
night, their opinion of the original track changed
dramatically... It went from "yeah that's cool, we like that
sound, no don't change it" to: "Yeah, I see what you're saying"
when I pointed out that even though this was better, I felt we
could get better still if we re-did them through something
other than the line-out on that particular bass head.
Anyway, as far as gain goes, there was plenty, and in fact I
had the level on the Sansamp set at maybe an "8" out of "10" to
avoid clipping the inputs - but then I was running out of a
line-level signal & dropping it down to instrument level
through the reamp box, so again, I'm sure that makes a
difference, too. So, I found it to be a pretty useful little
tool for this purpose, and my local Guitar Center drone gave me
a pretty good deal on it ($160, plus an a/c adaptor for another
five bucks), so that doesn't hurt, either. Is it better than
your Ampeg thingy? I doubt it, just on principle LOL but for
what I needed on these tracks, it seems to have worked.
Neil
>>
>>John
>>
>>"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>Keep us posted on the Portico. I've been lusting after one of those, but
>>>tonight I took the plunge, stuck some rubber feet on the module below
it
>>so
>>>I wouldn't scratch it and actually inserted the ADL 600 in the top of
my
>>>rack where it can't get scratched top or bottom and it will be stable
riding
>>>the rubber feet on top of the other module without using rack screws.
Morgan
>>>has been kind enough to allow me to demo it for a while and now I'm getting
>>>blown away by it more and more each day.. Using this exhalted top rack
>>>position means three things..........
>>>
>>>1. It needs (and gets) plenty of ventilation (this is a slant rack so
the
>>>top of any module in this rack is angled downward, nothing covers the
top
>>of
>>>the module and therefore it has lots of air above it for ventilation..
>>>2. I'm now gonna be patching it into my bay.
>>>3. I'm gonna figure out a way to pay for it.
>>>
>>>It ain't cheap, but I'm finding it so useful that I think it's going to
>>be
>>>it's worth every penny. This thing sounds big and expensive, like my Great
>>>River MP2-MH sounds big and expensive, though obviously in two different
>>>ways.
>>>
>>>Damned impressive piece of work.
>>>
>>>;o)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OI.com> wrote in message news:4477f007$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> Well, FWIW, I ended up picking up a SansampBass & ran the
>>>> signal out through my reamp box (it's the one made by Radial),
>>>> and did both... Sansamp-ed the track, then reamped it as
>>>> well... it's MUCH, much better, though still not what I'd
>>>> consider "killer", it'll definitely work, though. The Sansamp
>>>> gave it some presence & wooliness that it was lacking, and the
>>>> reamped track gave it presence and better articulation/clarity,
>>>> using a Mesa head on the cleanest setting, and running it
>>>> through a guitar cab with some really tight speakers, then
>>>> micing it with a TLM-103 through a Neve Portico I also recently
>>>> snagged. I think it'll all work out fine with a blend of those
>>>> two tracks.
>>>>
>>>> Also tried the new Portico on a soft vocal track with a Claytor
>>>> Special (the Royer-modded MXL)... jury's still out on that,
>>>> though - took me about two seconds to yank it & put the mic
>>>> back through the Chandler TG2 - the Chandler kicked it's ass.
>>>> Was not really impressed with the Portico for that application.
>>>> Hard vox tomorrow - we'll see how it does up against the ISA
>>>> 428, which is what we've been using for the harder-edged stuff
>>>> on this project.
>>>>
>>>> Neil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>> >OK then.. thanks. I'll probably RTFM tonight. This thing has some very
>>>> >interesting tone shaping properties. I'm liking what it's doing but
>it
>>>> >really needs to be used with either active pickups or, if used with
>>>passive
>>>> >pickups, to be output to another device with additional gain staging
>>>(like
>>>> a
>>>> >compressor as John suggested) in order to achieve optimal recording
>>>levels.
>>>> >When I first opened it up, I though "o'gawd.......another tweakhead
>box.
>>>> >It's gonna' take me forever to dial in anything usable". Wrong. It's
>>very
>>>> >easy to snag your basic sound and then contour it to taste. I've got
>>a
>>>> >Demeter "H" series opto preamp that is starting to look like it's gonna
>>>> end
>>>> >up being the Ampeg's bitch. What I have achieved so far with this is
>>a
>>>very
>>>> >coloured sound, but so is my B15-N and I like that color just fine.
>>>> >
>>>> >;o)
>>>> >
>>>> >"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
>>>> >news:4477e4ca$1@linux...
>>>> >> Deej.. it's typical for the master to only run the amp / amp output..
>>>> >since
>>>> >> you're into the DI out this is probably a normal operating procedure.
>>>> That
>>>> >> keeps the player from jacking gain on the soundman in a live situation
>>>> >when
>>>> >> playing volume war with the gtr player. There are some exceptions
>(SWR
>>>> >model
>>>> >> 400 is one) that don't stick to this ruling, but I bet the Ampeg
is
>>on
>>>> the
>>>> >> 'standard'.
>>>> >> Try hitting a DI from the *to the amp* output and I bet the master
>>>works.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> AA
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>>>> >> news:4477d24d@linux...
>>>> >> > Hi John,
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > The Ampeg preamp came in today. It's got some nice (and startlingly
>>>> >> > obvious)
>>>> >> > tone shaping possibilities that are very specific to bass. One
>>>> >> > question.............when I crank the master knob, you'd think
I
>>>would
>>>> >> > hear
>>>> >> > a difference in output volume, but nothing is happening. Could
be
>>>that
>>>> >> > I've
>>>> >> > got a defective unit.. I'm running the balanced output direct to
>>a
>>>Paris
>>>> >> > A/D
>>>> >> > converter. Cranking the volume knob completely clockwise gets me
>>to
>>>> >> > around -10dB on the Paris meter.
>>>> >> > It sounds nice, but to be quite honest, I'm using a stock PBass
>>>(passive
>>>> >> > pickups) and A/B'ing it with an Avalon 737 and a Presonus ADL 600
>>and
>>>> >> > those
>>>> >> > two preamps are kicking it's ass most seriously in every way. The
>>ADL
>>>> is
>>>> >> > an
>>>> >> > absolute monster as a bass DI, even though it doesn't have an EQ.
>>>Every
>>>> >> > nuance of the finger touching the string, touching the fret, pulling
>>>> off
>>>> >> > the
>>>> >> > fret is so friggin articulated with this preamp that it's absolutely
>>>> >sick.
>>>> >> > This preamp actually picks up my thought patterns, converts them
>>to
>>>> >audio
>>>> >> > and I hear them through the Paris converters as I'm deciding where
>>to
>>>> >fret
>>>> >> > next.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Anyway, like I said, maybe I've got a defective Ampeg.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Cheers,
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Deej
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44758e35$1@linux...
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> DJ, Also add 3 to 6 db of compression post to get it right in
>the
>>>> >> >> pocket.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>>> >> >> >I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against
>my
>>>*go
>>>> >to*
>>>> >> >> >bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to
>>>infatuate
>>>> >> > me.
>>>> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >;o)
>>>> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
>>>> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp
>has
>>>> >> >> >> totally
>>>> >> >> >infatuated
>>>> >> >> >> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp
again.
>>>> >The
>>>> >> >> >tone
>>>> >> >> >> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low signal
>>>> >> >> >> output.
>>>> >> >> >> How sucky is that?
>>>> >> >> >> John
>>>> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
>>>> >> >> >> >haha no it doesn't
>>>> >> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
>>>> >> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
>>>> >> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg
>>>SVPCL
>>>> >for
>>>> >> >> >$350
>>>> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> >> used.
>>>> >> >> >> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is
>>>neither.
>>>> >> >> >> >>
>>>> > http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
>>>> >> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>>> >> >> >> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy
>>with
>>>> >> >> >> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe
I
>>>> >> >> >> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think
>>they
>>>> >> >> >> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
>>>> >> >> >> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
>>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>>> >> >> >> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe Sans-amp-ing
>>>> it,
>>>> >> >> >> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I know
>>>the
>>>> >> >> >> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
>>>> >> >> >> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then through
>>>> a
>>>> >> >> >> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an output
>>>> >> >> >> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a
>very
>>>> >> >> >> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or will
>>I
>>>> >> >> >> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
>>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>>> >> >> >> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if
this
>>>> >> >> >> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that,
>>but
>>>> >> >> >> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this instance?
>>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>>> >> >> >> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a re-tracking
>>>> >> >> >> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin
head
>>>> >> >> >> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other
>>>options
>>>> >> >> >> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track...
>>>how's
>>>> >> >> >> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though
>>-
>>>> >> >> >> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have
at
>>>> >> >> >> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box
on
>>>> >> >> >> >>>another channel, as well.
>>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>>> >> >> >> >>>Neil
>>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>>> >> >> >> >>>
>>>> >> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
>>>> >> http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68666 is a reply to message #68663] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 08:10 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Yes you are. Just look again at that giant drum kit that is now sitting in
your wife's living room.
;o)
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44783479@linux...
>
> I guess I'm not really a true slut. :-(
>
>
> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
> >
> >DJ,
> >
> >The SVPCL page 7 of the manual has a schematic and the Transformer
Balanced
> >Line Out is PRE Master and so Master has no effect. The two PreAmp outs
> >are Post Master though. Also I'm running an Ibanez attack bass with
ACTIVE
> >electronics so that helps I'm sure. I also read that there is a chip
replacement
> >for more gain. E
> >
> >ven with the active electronics I'm right on the edge of having enough
gain
> >but the tone is totally where I want it. Now I'm not saying the $2000
preamps
> >won't sound better but that's a whole nother price range and the Sansamp
> >is a lower priced unit too, but for me this box totally gets me the sound
> >I need for rock and roll and jazz. I'll investigate the chip mode to get
> >more output. I also don't remember if I set the Paris Patchbay to -10db
> >or +4. I'm betting I have it on -10db. I'm using the Preouts though
and
> >I'll try the Balanced Out next. For me there is no comparison with a
sansamp
> >though. For me the sansamp is very uneven in response, very low on
output
> >and really bad tone compared to the SVPCL.
> >
> >John
> >
> >"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >>Keep us posted on the Portico. I've been lusting after one of those, but
> >>tonight I took the plunge, stuck some rubber feet on the module below it
> >so
> >>I wouldn't scratch it and actually inserted the ADL 600 in the top of my
> >>rack where it can't get scratched top or bottom and it will be stable
riding
> >>the rubber feet on top of the other module without using rack screws.
Morgan
> >>has been kind enough to allow me to demo it for a while and now I'm
getting
> >>blown away by it more and more each day.. Using this exhalted top rack
> >>position means three things..........
> >>
> >>1. It needs (and gets) plenty of ventilation (this is a slant rack so
the
> >>top of any module in this rack is angled downward, nothing covers the
top
> >of
> >>the module and therefore it has lots of air above it for ventilation..
> >>2. I'm now gonna be patching it into my bay.
> >>3. I'm gonna figure out a way to pay for it.
> >>
> >>It ain't cheap, but I'm finding it so useful that I think it's going to
> >be
> >>it's worth every penny. This thing sounds big and expensive, like my
Great
> >>River MP2-MH sounds big and expensive, though obviously in two different
> >>ways.
> >>
> >>Damned impressive piece of work.
> >>
> >>;o)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OI.com> wrote in message news:4477f007$1@linux...
> >>>
> >>> Well, FWIW, I ended up picking up a SansampBass & ran the
> >>> signal out through my reamp box (it's the one made by Radial),
> >>> and did both... Sansamp-ed the track, then reamped it as
> >>> well... it's MUCH, much better, though still not what I'd
> >>> consider "killer", it'll definitely work, though. The Sansamp
> >>> gave it some presence & wooliness that it was lacking, and the
> >>> reamped track gave it presence and better articulation/clarity,
> >>> using a Mesa head on the cleanest setting, and running it
> >>> through a guitar cab with some really tight speakers, then
> >>> micing it with a TLM-103 through a Neve Portico I also recently
> >>> snagged. I think it'll all work out fine with a blend of those
> >>> two tracks.
> >>>
> >>> Also tried the new Portico on a soft vocal track with a Claytor
> >>> Special (the Royer-modded MXL)... jury's still out on that,
> >>> though - took me about two seconds to yank it & put the mic
> >>> back through the Chandler TG2 - the Chandler kicked it's ass.
> >>> Was not really impressed with the Portico for that application.
> >>> Hard vox tomorrow - we'll see how it does up against the ISA
> >>> 428, which is what we've been using for the harder-edged stuff
> >>> on this project.
> >>>
> >>> Neil
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >>> >OK then.. thanks. I'll probably RTFM tonight. This thing has some
very
> >>> >interesting tone shaping properties. I'm liking what it's doing but
> it
> >>> >really needs to be used with either active pickups or, if used with
> >>passive
> >>> >pickups, to be output to another device with additional gain staging
> >>(like
> >>> a
> >>> >compressor as John suggested) in order to achieve optimal recording
> >>levels.
> >>> >When I first opened it up, I though "o'gawd.......another tweakhead
> box.
> >>> >It's gonna' take me forever to dial in anything usable". Wrong. It's
> >very
> >>> >easy to snag your basic sound and then contour it to taste. I've got
> >a
> >>> >Demeter "H" series opto preamp that is starting to look like it's
gonna
> >>> end
> >>> >up being the Ampeg's bitch. What I have achieved so far with this is
> >a
> >>very
> >>> >coloured sound, but so is my B15-N and I like that color just fine.
> >>> >
> >>> >;o)
> >>> >
> >>> >"Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote in message
> >>> >news:4477e4ca$1@linux...
> >>> >> Deej.. it's typical for the master to only run the amp / amp
output..
> >>> >since
> >>> >> you're into the DI out this is probably a normal operating
procedure.
> >>> That
> >>> >> keeps the player from jacking gain on the soundman in a live
situation
> >>> >when
> >>> >> playing volume war with the gtr player. There are some exceptions
> (SWR
> >>> >model
> >>> >> 400 is one) that don't stick to this ruling, but I bet the Ampeg is
> >on
> >>> the
> >>> >> 'standard'.
> >>> >> Try hitting a DI from the *to the amp* output and I bet the master
> >>works.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> AA
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> >>> >> news:4477d24d@linux...
> >>> >> > Hi John,
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > The Ampeg preamp came in today. It's got some nice (and
startlingly
> >>> >> > obvious)
> >>> >> > tone shaping possibilities that are very specific to bass. One
> >>> >> > question.............when I crank the master knob, you'd think I
> >>would
> >>> >> > hear
> >>> >> > a difference in output volume, but nothing is happening. Could be
> >>that
> >>> >> > I've
> >>> >> > got a defective unit.. I'm running the balanced output direct to
> >a
> >>Paris
> >>> >> > A/D
> >>> >> > converter. Cranking the volume knob completely clockwise gets me
> >to
> >>> >> > around -10dB on the Paris meter.
> >>> >> > It sounds nice, but to be quite honest, I'm using a stock PBass
> >>(passive
> >>> >> > pickups) and A/B'ing it with an Avalon 737 and a Presonus ADL 600
> >and
> >>> >> > those
> >>> >> > two preamps are kicking it's ass most seriously in every way. The
> >ADL
> >>> is
> >>> >> > an
> >>> >> > absolute monster as a bass DI, even though it doesn't have an EQ.
> >>Every
> >>> >> > nuance of the finger touching the string, touching the fret,
pulling
> >>> off
> >>> >> > the
> >>> >> > fret is so friggin articulated with this preamp that it's
absolutely
> >>> >sick.
> >>> >> > This preamp actually picks up my thought patterns, converts them
> >to
> >>> >audio
> >>> >> > and I hear them through the Paris converters as I'm deciding
where
> >to
> >>> >fret
> >>> >> > next.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Anyway, like I said, maybe I've got a defective Ampeg.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Cheers,
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Deej
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44758e35$1@linux...
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> DJ, Also add 3 to 6 db of compression post to get it right in
> the
> >>> >> >> pocket.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >>> >> >> >I just ordered one of these from MF. I want to A/B it against
> my
> >>*go
> >>> >to*
> >>> >> >> >bass DI which is an Avalon 737. I'm gonna give it 45 days to
> >>infatuate
> >>> >> > me.
> >>> >> >> >
> >>> >> >> >;o)
> >>> >> >> >
> >>> >> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:44735027$1@linux...
> >>> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> Ymmv but my sansamp was crap tonewise and this Ampeg preamp
> has
> >>> >> >> >> totally
> >>> >> >> >infatuated
> >>> >> >> >> me. You need to try them but I will never have a sans amp
again.
> >>> >The
> >>> >> >> >tone
> >>> >> >> >> to me is totally amateurish and not even at all plus low
signal
> >>> >> >> >> output.
> >>> >> >> >> How sucky is that?
> >>> >> >> >> John
> >>> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> "justcron" <paris@hydrorecords.com> wrote:
> >>> >> >> >> >haha no it doesn't
> >>> >> >> >> >
> >>> >> >> >> >And Neil... I dont think thats a good idear...
> >>> >> >> >> >
> >>> >> >> >> >"john" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4472fa19$1@linux...
> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> >> sans-amp sucks. i sold mine on ebay and bought the Ampeg
> >>SVPCL
> >>> >for
> >>> >> >> >$350
> >>> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> >> used.
> >>> >> >> >> >> Awesome! The tone is EVEN and LOW where the sansamp is
> >>neither.
> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >>> > http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM04/Content/Ampeg/PR/SVP CL.html
> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> >> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >>> >> >> >> >>>I have a bass track that this band I'm recording is happy
> >with
> >>> >> >> >> >>>the sound of, but I personally think sucks... OK, maybe I
> >>> >> >> >> >>>should say it a different way: "They like it, but I think
> >they
> >>> >> >> >> >>>might like it even better if I could improve upon it :D
> >>> >> >> >> >>>How's that for politically correct? lol
> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >>> >> >> >> >>>Anyway, I'm thinking about reamping it or maybe
Sans-amp-ing
> >>> it,
> >>> >> >> >> >>>but here's my question: If I pick up a Bass Sansamp, I
know
> >>the
> >>> >> >> >> >>>input isn't designed for line-level stuff, so if I run the
> >>> >> >> >> >>>signal out of a line-level out on my convertors, then
through
> >>> a
> >>> >> >> >> >>>mic pre that also has a line-level input and also an
output
> >>> >> >> >> >>>level control (of which I have a few), can I just feed a
> very
> >>> >> >> >> >>>low level out of the preamp into the Sansamp input, or
will
> >I
> >>> >> >> >> >>>run into impedance issues with this method?
> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >>> >> >> >> >>>Reamping's no problem - I can easily rig that up, so if
this
> >>> >> >> >> >>>other option doesn't work, I can always fall back on that,
> >but
> >>> >> >> >> >>>for another choice, would a Sansamp box work in this
instance?
> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >>> >> >> >> >>>Problem is "Farty distortion", BTW. It may take a
re-tracking
> >>> >> >> >> >>>with a better input chain than the bass player's Carvin
head
> >>> >> >> >> >>>line-out jack, but I want to at least investigate other
> >>options
> >>> >> >> >> >>>first. Worst bass sound I ever permitted to go to track...
> >>how's
> >>> >> >> >> >>>that for an achievement? lol Totally my fault, though
> >-
> >>> >> >> >> >>>despite the band insisting they liked it, I should have at
> >>> >> >> >> >>>least taken a direct feed though a preamp or direct box on
> >>> >> >> >> >>>another channel, as well.
> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >>> >> >> >> >>>Neil
> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> >
> >>> >> >> >> >
> >>> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >
> >>> >> >> >
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
> >>> >> http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68667 is a reply to message #68657] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 08:27 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Keep us posted on the Portico. I've been lusting after one of
>those
I will... I may play around with it some more today before the
band gets here, if have time after running my usual spate of
Saturday errands. One of the things slotted for this afternoon
is some harmony tracks one one song that the singer's not sure
about intervals & such, so I'm going to have to guide him
through those & in preparation I may throw down some scratch
harmonies (although they won't be very "scratch", they'll have
to be pretty much right on) for him to reference... If I do
have time, I'll use the Portico for these to see how it comes
across with a different mic - it sure didn't compliment the
Claytor-67, that's for sure.
This project is turning out to be a challenge in terms of vocal
tone, because the guy wants a thick sort of character to his
voice, but he rejects the thicker/warmer-sounding signal
chains... when we were auditioning mics & pres, the
warmest/thickest-sounding combinations utilized either the
Claytor-67 or my modded M-147 with the k-67 capsule through
either the Avalon 737 or the Chandler TG2... both mics have a
lot of warmth, for sure, but the modded-147 has more high end &
air, and the Chandler pre has more of than than does the
Avalon. IMO the Kiwi through either of those pres worked really
well for his voice... it was pretty thick, with less "air" than
those two mics, but the combination he went for was a TLM-103
through the ISA 428 for the harder-edged stuff (he did like the
Claytor/Chandler combo for the softer parts, so that's what
we've been using there). Now, the -103 through the 428 - that's
a pretty clean combination with very little coloration, and the
reason he liked that is that it emphasized the breakup/rasp in
his voice, but it is NOT what I'd consider a really thick-
sounding signal chain. I'm also running the hard-edged takes
through a Distressor in "British Mode" on it's way to track.
So I figured we'll be doubling a lot, in order to thicken things
up, and he actually doubles his parts really well... in fact,
he takes quite a bit of time & is willing to do a bazillion re-
takes if necessary in order to get his main track sounding
right, but once that's done, he can usually double it REALLY
tightly & on-pitch in one take with maybe a couple of punches
at the most.
Here's the interesting part... the guy wants his voice to sound
like Jonathan Davis (of Korn), specifically he's looking for
something like the chorus parts of their song "Coming Undone"...
note that he tells me this AFTER we've done the majority of the
vocals on two of the three songs, and some of the vox on the
3rd song, and are wrapping up for one evening's worth of work.
Keep in mind we've discussed the vocal tone he wants quite at
length, and this is the first time he mentions a specific
example. So I ask him do they have a CD of it, and one
of the guys has it on his iPod, so I listen to it, and yeah,
it's got a nice thickness to it, but it also has a really nice
bit of high-end air....hmmmmm... sounds like one or two of the
signal chains this guy rejected earlier. lol
It's also doubled & tripled & has a metric buttload of
processing on it, but apart from that, I think we would've
nailed it on this guys voice with the Avalon & either the
Claytor-67 or the Modded-147.
So I get online & try to find out who produced and/or engineered
it, and the engineer was Frank Filipetti, so I google his name
together with Korn & "mic" & "vocal" & "preamp" - all the usual
stuff - and I find an interview where he said for lead vox
they usually use a Sanken CU-44x; shit, that's a $2,300 mic - I
can't be buying one of THOSE just for this project, but it's
also not a tube mic.... hmmm..... it also said they used a Tube-
Tech MP1A mic pre and a Neve 1173 for EQ going to track, and an
1176 for compression.
So with several non-tube LDC's to choose from here (although
every voice is different, and I think one of my tube mics
would've gotten this particular guy closer), and with a tube
preamp that also has EQ going to track (the 737), and with
a VERY versatile compressor in the Distressor, I think there's
a pretty good chance that after some dicking around with various
settings, we could've gotten this guy right in the ballpark
going to track - despite not having the exact same signal
chain, having some similar elements therein can often get
you close - if he had just mentioned this specific Korn track
or specific vocal tone earlier. ARRRGH! Now it's going to be a
matter of having to try to get there with plugin's.
Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68669 is a reply to message #68667] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 09:06 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>they usually use a Sanken CU-44x; shit, that's a $2,300 mic - I
can't be buying one of THOSE just for this project, but it's
also not a tube mic.... hmmm..... it also said they used a Tube-
Tech MP1A mic pre and a Neve 1173 for EQ going to track, and an
1176 for compression.<
You just need to go out and buy this stuff immediately and quit dickin' with
workarounds man. What's wrong with you dude????
;oP
Seriously though, thanksfor the rundown on what you're doing and trying to
accomplish. Your following comment........
:he tells me this AFTER we've done the majority of the
> vocals on two of the three songs, and some of the vox on the
> 3rd song, and are wrapping up for one evening's worth of work.
> Keep in mind we've discussed the vocal tone he wants quite at
> length, and this is the first time he mentions a specific
> example.
.............is soooo typical of some of the stuff I've experienced lately.
Good luck and keep us posted.
;o)
"Neil" <OIUIO@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44786fca$1@linux...
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>
> >Keep us posted on the Portico. I've been lusting after one of
> >those
>
> I will... I may play around with it some more today before the
> band gets here, if have time after running my usual spate of
> Saturday errands. One of the things slotted for this afternoon
> is some harmony tracks one one song that the singer's not sure
> about intervals & such, so I'm going to have to guide him
> through those & in preparation I may throw down some scratch
> harmonies (although they won't be very "scratch", they'll have
> to be pretty much right on) for him to reference... If I do
> have time, I'll use the Portico for these to see how it comes
> across with a different mic - it sure didn't compliment the
> Claytor-67, that's for sure.
>
> This project is turning out to be a challenge in terms of vocal
> tone, because the guy wants a thick sort of character to his
> voice, but he rejects the thicker/warmer-sounding signal
> chains... when we were auditioning mics & pres, the
> warmest/thickest-sounding combinations utilized either the
> Claytor-67 or my modded M-147 with the k-67 capsule through
> either the Avalon 737 or the Chandler TG2... both mics have a
> lot of warmth, for sure, but the modded-147 has more high end &
> air, and the Chandler pre has more of than than does the
> Avalon. IMO the Kiwi through either of those pres worked really
> well for his voice... it was pretty thick, with less "air" than
> those two mics, but the combination he went for was a TLM-103
> through the ISA 428 for the harder-edged stuff (he did like the
> Claytor/Chandler combo for the softer parts, so that's what
> we've been using there). Now, the -103 through the 428 - that's
> a pretty clean combination with very little coloration, and the
> reason he liked that is that it emphasized the breakup/rasp in
> his voice, but it is NOT what I'd consider a really thick-
> sounding signal chain. I'm also running the hard-edged takes
> through a Distressor in "British Mode" on it's way to track.
>
> So I figured we'll be doubling a lot, in order to thicken things
> up, and he actually doubles his parts really well... in fact,
> he takes quite a bit of time & is willing to do a bazillion re-
> takes if necessary in order to get his main track sounding
> right, but once that's done, he can usually double it REALLY
> tightly & on-pitch in one take with maybe a couple of punches
> at the most.
>
> Here's the interesting part... the guy wants his voice to sound
> like Jonathan Davis (of Korn), specifically he's looking for
> something like the chorus parts of their song "Coming Undone"...
> note that he tells me this AFTER we've done the majority of the
> vocals on two of the three songs, and some of the vox on the
> 3rd song, and are wrapping up for one evening's worth of work.
> Keep in mind we've discussed the vocal tone he wants quite at
> length, and this is the first time he mentions a specific
> example. So I ask him do they have a CD of it, and one
> of the guys has it on his iPod, so I listen to it, and yeah,
> it's got a nice thickness to it, but it also has a really nice
> bit of high-end air....hmmmmm... sounds like one or two of the
> signal chains this guy rejected earlier. lol
> It's also doubled & tripled & has a metric buttload of
> processing on it, but apart from that, I think we would've
> nailed it on this guys voice with the Avalon & either the
> Claytor-67 or the Modded-147.
>
> So I get online & try to find out who produced and/or engineered
> it, and the engineer was Frank Filipetti, so I google his name
> together with Korn & "mic" & "vocal" & "preamp" - all the usual
> stuff - and I find an interview where he said for lead vox
> they usually use a Sanken CU-44x; shit, that's a $2,300 mic - I
> can't be buying one of THOSE just for this project, but it's
> also not a tube mic.... hmmm..... it also said they used a Tube-
> Tech MP1A mic pre and a Neve 1173 for EQ going to track, and an
> 1176 for compression.
>
> So with several non-tube LDC's to choose from here (although
> every voice is different, and I think one of my tube mics
> would've gotten this particular guy closer), and with a tube
> preamp that also has EQ going to track (the 737), and with
> a VERY versatile compressor in the Distressor, I think there's
> a pretty good chance that after some dicking around with various
> settings, we could've gotten this guy right in the ballpark
> going to track - despite not having the exact same signal
> chain, having some similar elements therein can often get
> you close - if he had just mentioned this specific Korn track
> or specific vocal tone earlier. ARRRGH! Now it's going to be a
> matter of having to try to get there with plugin's.
>
> Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: Re-Amping/Sans-amping a bass track [message #68670 is a reply to message #68667] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 09:17 |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_004E_01C68187.7F4CDE70
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Neil,
Try the Sansamp...
Tom
"Neil" <OIUIO@OIU.com> wrote in message news:44786fca$1@linux...
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Keep us posted on the Portico. I've been lusting after one of=20
>those
I will... I may play around with it some more today before the
band gets here, if have time after running my usual spate of
Saturday errands. One of the things slotted for this afternoon
is some harmony tracks one one song that the singer's not sure
about intervals & such, so I'm going to have to guide him
through those & in preparation I may throw down some scratch
harmonies (although they won't be very "scratch", they'll have
to be pretty much right on) for him to reference... If I do
have time, I'll use the Portico for these to see how it comes
across with a different mic - it sure didn't compliment the
Claytor-67, that's for sure.
This project is turning out to be a challenge in terms of vocal
tone, because the guy wants a thick sort of character to his
voice, but he rejects the thicker/warmer-sounding signal
chains... when we were auditioning mics & pres, the
warmest/thickest-sounding combinations utilized either the
Claytor-67 or my modded M-147 with the k-67 capsule through
either the Avalon 737 or the Chandler TG2... both mics have a
lot of warmth, for sure, but the modded-147 has more high end &
air, and the Chandler pre has more of than than does the
Avalon. IMO the Kiwi through either of those pres worked really
well for his voice... it was pretty thick, with less "air" than
those two mics, but the combination he went for was a TLM-103
through the ISA 428 for the harder-edged stuff (he did like the
Claytor/Chandler combo for the softer parts, so that's what
we've been using there). Now, the -103 through the 428 - that's
a pretty clean combination with very little coloration, and the
reason he liked that is that it emphasized the breakup/rasp in
his voice, but it is NOT what I'd consider a really thick-
sounding signal chain. I'm also running the hard-edged takes
through a Distressor in "British Mode" on it's way to track.
So I figured we'll be doubling a lot, in order to thicken things
up, and he actually doubles his parts really well... in fact,
he takes quite a bit of time & is willing to do a bazillion re-
takes if necessary in order to get his main track sounding
right, but once that's done, he can usually double it REALLY
tightly & on-pitch in one take with maybe a couple of punches
at the most.=20
Here's the interesting part... the guy wants his voice to sound
like Jonathan Davis (of Korn), specifically he's looking for
something like the chorus parts of their song "Coming Undone"...
note that he tells me this AFTER we've done the majority of the
vocals on two of the three songs, and some of the vox on the
3rd song, and are wrapping up for one evening's worth of work.
Keep in mind we've discussed the vocal tone he wants quite at
length, and this is the first time he mentions a specific
example. So I ask him do they have a CD of it, and one
of the guys has it on his iPod, so I listen to it, and yeah,
it's got a nice thickness to it, but it also has a really nice
bit of high-end air....hmmmmm... sounds like one or two of the
signal chains this guy rejected earlier. lol
It's also doubled & tripled & has a metric buttload of
processing on it, but apart from that, I think we would've
nailed it on this guys voice with the Avalon & either the
Claytor-67 or the Modded-147.
So I get online & try to find out who produced and/or engineered
it, and the engineer was Frank Filipetti, so I google his name
together with Korn & "mic" & "vocal" & "preamp" - all the usual
stuff - and I find an interview where he said for lead vox
they usually use a Sanken CU-44x; shit, that's a $2,300 mic - I
can't be buying one of THOSE just for this project, but it's
also not a tube mic.... hmmm..... it also said they used a Tube-
Tech MP1A mic pre and a Neve 1173 for EQ going to track, and an
1176 for compression.
So with several non-tube LDC's to choose from here (although
every voice is different, and I think one of my tube mics
would've gotten this particular guy closer), and with a tube
preamp that also has EQ going to track (the 737), and with
a VERY versatile compressor in the Distressor, I think there's
a pretty good chance that after some dicking around with various
settings, we could've gotten this guy right in the ballpark
going to track - despite not having the exact same signal
chain, having some similar elements therein can often get
you close - if he had just mentioned this specific Korn track
or specific vocal tone earlier. ARRRGH! Now it's going to be a
matter of having to try to get there with plugin's.
Neil
I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
------=_NextPart_000_004E_01C68187.7F4CDE70
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Neil,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Try the Sansamp...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tom</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Neil" <<A href=3D"mailto:OIUIO@OIU.com">OIUIO@OIU.com</A>> =
wrote in=20
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:44786fca$1@linux">news:44786fca$1@linux</A>...</DIV><BR>"DJ"=
<<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net">animix_spam-this-ahole=
_@animas.net</A>>=20
wrote:<BR><BR>>Keep us posted on the Portico. I've been lusting =
after one=20
of <BR>>those<BR><BR>I will... I may play around with it some more =
today=20
before the<BR>band gets here, if have time after running my usual =
spate=20
of<BR>Saturday errands. One of the things slotted for this =
afternoon<BR>is=20
some harmony tracks one one song that the singer's not sure<BR>about =
intervals=20
& such, so I'm going to have to guide him<BR>through those & =
in=20
preparation I may throw down some scratch<BR>harmonies (although they =
won't be=20
very "scratch", they'll have<BR>to be pretty much right on) for him to =
reference... If I do<BR>have time, I'll use the Portico for these to =
see how=20
it comes<BR>across with a different mic - it sure didn't compliment=20
the<BR>Claytor-67, that's for sure.<BR><BR>This project is turning out =
to be a=20
challenge in terms of vocal<BR>tone, because the guy wants a thick =
sort of=20
character to his<BR>voice, but he rejects the thicker/warmer-sounding=20
signal<BR>chains... when we were auditioning mics & pres,=20
the<BR>warmest/thickest-sounding combinations utilized either=20
the<BR>Claytor-67 or my modded M-147 with the k-67 capsule =
through<BR>either=20
the Avalon 737 or the Chandler TG2... both mics have a<BR>lot of =
warmth, for=20
sure, but the modded-147 has more high end &<BR>air, and the =
Chandler pre=20
has more of than than does the<BR>Avalon. IMO the Kiwi through either =
of those=20
pres worked really<BR>well for his voice... it was pretty thick, with =
less=20
"air" than<BR>those two mics, but the combination he went for was a=20
TLM-103<BR>through the ISA 428 for the harder-edged stuff (he did like =
the<BR>Claytor/Chandler combo for the softer parts, so that's =
what<BR>we've=20
been using there). Now, the -103 through the 428 - that's<BR>a pretty =
clean=20
combination with very little coloration, and the<BR>reason he liked =
that is=20
that it emphasized the breakup/rasp in<BR>his voice, but it is NOT =
what I'd=20
consider a really thick-<BR>sounding signal chain. I'm also running =
the=20
hard-edged takes<BR>through a Distressor in "British Mode" on it's way =
to=20
track.<BR><BR>So I figured we'll be doubling a lot, in order to =
thicken=20
things<BR>up, and he actually doubles his parts really well... in =
fact,<BR>he=20
takes quite a bit of time & is willing to do a bazillion =
re-<BR>takes if=20
necessary in order to get his main track sounding<BR>right, but once =
that's=20
done, he can usually double it REALLY<BR>tightly & on-pitch in one =
take=20
with maybe a couple of punches<BR>at the most. <BR><BR>Here's the =
interesting=20
part... the guy wants his voice to sound<BR>like Jonathan Davis (of =
Korn),=20
specifically he's looking for<BR>something like the chorus parts of =
their song=20
"Coming Undone"...<BR>note that he tells me this AFTER we've done the =
majority=20
of the<BR>vocals on two of the three songs, and some of the vox on =
the<BR>3rd=20
song, and are wrapping up for one evening's worth of work.<BR>Keep in =
mind=20
we've discussed the vocal tone he wants quite at<BR>length, and this =
is the=20
first time he mentions a specific<BR>example. So I ask him do they =
have a CD=20
of it, and one<BR>of the guys has it on his iPod, so I listen to it, =
and=20
yeah,<BR>it's got a nice thickness to it, but it also has a really =
nice<BR>bit=20
of high-end air....hmmmmm... sounds like one or two of the<BR>signal =
chains=20
this guy rejected earlier. lol<BR>It's also doubled & =
tripled=20
& has a metric buttload of<BR>processing on it, but apart from =
that, I=20
think we would've<BR>nailed it on this guys voice with the Avalon =
& either=20
the<BR>Claytor-67 or the Modded-147.<BR><BR>So I get online & try =
to find=20
out who produced and/or engineered<BR>it, and the engineer was Frank=20
Filipetti, so I google his name<BR>together with Korn & "mic" =
&=20
"vocal" & "preamp" - all the usual<BR>stuff - and I find an=20
interview where he said for lead vox<BR>they usually use a Sanken =
CU-44x;=20
shit, that's a $2,300 mic - I<BR>can't be buying one of THOSE just for =
this=20
project, but it's<BR>also not a tube mic.... hmmm..... it also said =
they used=20
a Tube-<BR>Tech MP1A mic pre and a Neve 1173 for EQ going to track, =
and=20
an<BR>1176 for compression.<BR><BR>So with several non-tube LDC's to =
choose=20
from here (although<BR>every voice is different, and I think one of my =
tube=20
mics<BR>would've gotten this particular guy closer), and with a =
tube<BR>preamp=20
that also has EQ going to track (the 737), and with<BR>a VERY =
versatile=20
compressor in the Distressor, I think there's<BR>a pretty good chance =
that=20
after some dicking around with various<BR>settings, we could've gotten =
this=20
guy right in the ballpark<BR>going to track - despite not having the =
exact=20
same signal<BR>chain, having some similar elements therein can often=20
get<BR>you close - if he had just mentioned this specific Korn =
track<BR>or=20
specific vocal tone earlier. ARRRGH! Now it's going to be a<BR>matter =
of=20
having to try to get there with plugin's.<BR><BR>Neil</BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR><BR>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, =
and=20
you?<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html">http://www.polesoft.com/refer=
..html</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY ></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_004E_01C68187.7F4CDE70--
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Dec 29 05:38:29 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.06059 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
