Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

Der JD

Member
  • Posts

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Der JD

  • Birthday 14/02/1975

Der JD's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Total Watts

  1. Big 'Deth fan here too...well, at least their early stuff. After that, it's hit and miss. Peace Sells is my favorite. Absolutely love Chris Poland's guitar work. By the way, anyone who is a Chris Poland fan should check out OHM. He's more of a fusion player now. As a bonus, OHM features incredible bass work on a fretless 6 string by Robert Pagliari.
  2. I'm not a fan of the MEC 2-band preamps. You're right, the treble center frequency is much lower than most preamps (2.5k, I believe). The MEC 3-band frequency is much higher. I prefer preamps with treble frequency points much higher than 2.5k. I find that with it higher, there's not as much harshness. Adding highs seems to open and clear things up, adding "sweetness" vs. harshness. I've had good luck with Bart and Aguilar preamps in Warwicks, as have many others. For pickups, you probably won't notice a huge difference in tone unless you choose something with a really unique EQ curve. I like MEC, Bart, and Nordstrand PUs on Warwicks. With EMG, it really just depends on the bass. I had some on a Streamer Stage II that sounded great. Tried some on a Thumb BO and a Corvette Fretless and I found that on those basses I lost a bit of the "woody growl". The EMGs were just too hi-fi for those two basses. Sometimes with pickups it's just trial and error. One model of pickup might sound good on one bass but not on another.
  3. [quote name='throwoff' timestamp='1430392809' post='2760918']Like I said before, I would happily pay a lot for a heavily flamed Warwick Streamer, but make no mistake, I pay that money firstly for the build quality, secondly for the looks. If I just wanted the tone I would buy the MEC J set, the 3 band active EQ and put them into a Squier.[/quote] Sorry, but that's just insane. A Squier with an MEC J set and 3 band EQ will not sound like a Streamer. It will still sound like a Squier (or Jazz bass if you will). I've had Warwicks that I've experimented with different pickups and preamps. MEC, EMG, and Bart. Guess what? No matter what PU/preamp combination was in them, they still sounded like the same bass- a Warwick! There were subtle EQ/feel/output differences, but the "voice" the bass stayed the same. My Thumb always sounded like a Thumb. The Streamer like a Streamer. The Corvette like a Corvette. I've also had the exact same pair of pickups (Bartolini) in a Jazz bass and a Corvette. By your logic they should sound the same, correct? No, when they were in my Jazz, it still sounded like a typical Fender Jazz. In the Corvette...still sounded like a Corvette (both had passive electronics). People put way too much stock into how much the pickups influence the overall tone of a guitar/bass. One of the major reasons why people spend 10k on a Fodera is that there's little else out there that gives you that particular tone. If you want that exact tone you either buy a Fodera or get a custom built copy of a Fodera.
  4. I have tried swapping pickups between instruments, and I'm not talking about just the same brand/model, I mean THE exact same pickups. Same pickups in 2 instruments that are nearly identical in terms of woods, construction, etc.= nearly the same tone. Same pickups in 2 instruments that differ in terms of woods, construction, etc. = massively different tone Pickups are basically like microphones. If I take 2 different mics and I speak into them and another person speaks into them, we'll still know who is who regardless of what mic is being used. The mic might have subtle EQ characteristics that influence the overall sound of our voices but the point is that the instrument itself (woods, hardware, construction, etc.) is like our voices. The pickup just "mics" the "voice" of the instrument.
  5. I've done plenty of pickup experimentation with both guitars and basses. If you take 2 pickups, same brand and model, machine-wound, and think you can hear a difference between them then wow, you've got some really good ears. Even with 2 pickups of a different brand and model, assuming same size/type (e.g. standard J pickup true single coil), I find there's just subtle differences in the overall tone. Now, if you change the type (soapbar quad-coil vs. J single coil), sure, there will be a noticeable difference. If you change the PU placement the differences will be even more apparent. Same thing with electronics. If you simply change the wiring/brand of pots good luck hearing much of a difference. Change the pot values, a little more difference. Change how it's wired (e.g. parallel vs. series), a little more. For active basses- change the preamp (e.g. Aguilar to Glock), even more difference. Woods matter. The construction matters. Pickups and electronics matter. All of it does. The tone of the bass is the sum of all its parts. As mentioned before, you're not going to get Fodera tone by sticking Fodera PUs/preamp in just anything. If so, everyone would be doing it.
  6. I love playing just about anything by Rush, Iron Maiden, Jamiroquai, and Chic.
  7. Yesterday I just started learning Havona by Weather Report. Tough song, but I've found that I only progress if I pick things to learn that I find really challenging. I only made it a few measures in. It's going to take a long time to nail that fast arpeggio lick up to speed.
  8. I agree that the majority of bass demos out there are just too flashy and involve too much slapping and tapping. In most cases, spending more time on less-flashy grooves would serve the purpose better. However, everyone has a different style. The demo wasn't created just for YOU. Not everyone plays the way YOU do. Personally, I want a little of everything in a demo. I want to hear everything the instrument can offer. Simple grooves/patterns/scales down low, a little slapping, chording, soloing in the higher register, possibly even a tiny bit of tapping. AND, I want to hear it all with different pickups selected and with different variations on the tone controls. I do a little of everything and although simple grooves down low are the bread and butter, a demo just limited to that would be of little use to me. Wouldn't show me what the instrument is capable of. I suppose that's why I like Ed Friedland's demos a lot. He does a little of everything without it being a total w***fest.
  9. I had GAS for one of these for a while. One day I tried stringing one of my current 5 string basses E-C. Sounds great and the only adjustment I needed to do was intonation. Now all my 5-string basses are E-C and I have crossed this one off the GAS list.
  10. Since the OP already said "played this beautiful bass" I'm assuming it looks modern with nice woods. The more "coffee table" it looks, the better. Can't stand the vintage look. One of my basses is a Fender but I still can't stand the way it looks. First and foremost has to be the sound. It needs to have definition and be articulate. I'm not a fan of undefined,round, big, fuzzy tones. I know they're what's needed in certain situations but I like it when the notes are immediate and jump right out at you. If you play a fast, notey passage all the notes need to be clear. If there's some woody growl to the tone...all the better. The bass would also need a good active preamp, preferably 3-band. Or, it would need to be priced at a point where I thought I could buy and install one and still have it be a good value. String spacing would need to be 18mm or less. I prefer 16.5 or 17. Not a fan of "broadnecks". I've never really understood wide spacing preferences. Seems really inefficient to me. If I'm driving to or from work I don't take the long way. I don't really care about neck dive or neck thickness. Neither has ever bothered me. As you can probably tell, my preferences are just about the exact opposite of what's the "in" thing amongst most bass players right now!
  11. I'm having fretless GAS too...and also for a Thumb, but I'd prefer the NT version. I've had a couple of fretless basses in the past but they just didn't quite have the tone I was looking for. One was a German Corvette passive. The other was a Carvin. I actually wish I still had the Vette. I think if I'd just put in a good onboard active preamp I would have been a lot happier with it. I've owned lined and unlined. Lined is probably easier but I was surprised how quickly I adapted to the unlined. I think a lot of it is just how good your ear and muscle memory is.
  12. Set your bass and treble controls flat. Then start by cutting the mids quite a bit. Put the mid freq. selector all the way down and play for a while. Move the freq. selector up in small increments and repeat. Preferably, do this while playing along to a backing track so you can hear what it does to your tone in a mix. Then, set the mid contol to boost and repeat the process. You may need to do this several times over a period of days. The important thing is to try to remember what each setting does to your overall tone. Once you're completely familiar with how the controls affect your tone overall you'll be able to use the tools. In any given situation, think to yourself, "what is my tone missing", or "what do I have to much of in my tone". Then you can make adjustments. The great thing about a good onboard preamp is that you can set your amp controls flat and do all your tone adjustments right on the bass.
  13. I have noticed a difference between different fretboard woods. Maple boards do seem slightly brighter to me. But...what accounts for that perceived brightness? There are a lot of factors that could lead that besides just an increase in "treble" frequencies. If there is less low end or low mids that could do it (that's the explanation my ears are telling me). Or, if the notes have more attack and definition. Ebony is altogether different. It's by far my favorite fretboard material, for several reasons. It seems brighter than rosewood for sure but I think that's strictly due to ebony boards having more definition and being very articulate sounding.
  14. It's interesting how what happens to be the "in" thing varies between modern and vintage every few years. I'm very much aware that Fender or Fender copies are the "in" thing now and it seems like they have for the last 9 or 10 years. However, back in the 90s (when I was first learning bass) it seemed like it was all about modern. Flip through a bass magazine from back then and you'll see one modern bass after another. "Vintage" type basses certainly have their place and ,of course, certainly sound good but because I grew up in the "modern" popularity time period, that's what I'm drawn towards. My favorite basses are Warwick, Roscoe, Modulus, MTD, Spector, and Fodera. I have a Fender Jazz and sometimes it's just what the doctor ordered but I rarely play it.
  15. I've not noticed a difference in clarity between active and passive basses in general. I don't think it's possible to generalize. I think the factors lie more with the individual pieces of equipment and/or how they work together. I'm personally not a fan of passive basses. I prefer to leave my amp fairly flat and adjust my tone at my bass. Works better for me. The controls are within inches of my hand. I can switch between basses that are very different from each other without touching my amp's controls. Also, some active preamps do colour the tone a bit, which I actually like. Gives it a little extra mojo. I also find passive basses tougher to dial in. With a passive tone control, it seems like it's either too bright or too dark. I prefer individual controls for bass, mids, and treble so I can really get it exactly where I want it.
×
×
  • Create New...