mart

I've only heard of problems with the [i]passive[/i] MEC pups in old Fortresses - in particular the passive P pup seems to be particularly disliked. (Having said that, I've recently put one in my Squier P and I love it, but that was upgrading from the orig Squier pup, so it's maybe not saying much!) I hadn't heard of the current MEC active pups being much different from vintage MECs. But if you do want to buy new MECs, you definitely don't want to buy them new cos the prices are really silly. Ask around on here or on the Warwick forum and somebody's bound to have a spare set, since quite a few like changing out the stock pups.

I finally got around to watching this last night, having recorded it when it was broadcast. It was indeed a great show. Dury and the band were fantastic. But I felt Wilko was out of place. I'm probably as much a Feelgoods fan as a Blockheads fan, but I felt that Wilko's stage presence worked much better in the Feelgoods - he got everybody's attention in a way that is bound to annoy the lead singer, and in the Feelgoods part of the act was the tension between Brilleaux and Wilko caused by this. But in the Blockheads the centre of attention always was, and had to be Dury. And he either ignored Wilko or looked like he was feeling sorry for this poor bloke who was trying to upstage him, but didn't stand a chance. So Wilko was left just looking like some upstart guitarist trying to distract attention away from the main star. I guess, I just thought that Dury and Wilko shouldn't share a stage. Each had too big a personality. Anybody feel the same, or am I just losing the plot?

Used to belong to the Wurzels?

[quote name='bremen' post='1260366' date='Jun 7 2011, 10:01 PM']... Someone else is asking about Italtrans here on Asshat: [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=139998&hl="]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=139998&hl=[/url] should they be warned?[/quote] Yes, perhaps the gareth who's posted on this thread should warn the gareth who started that thread to be very wary. Or am I getting my gareths mixed up?

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' post='1260296' date='Jun 7 2011, 09:18 PM']There is nothing right about it and after speaking via eBay again to the seller it appears he now agrees and is going to look at re wording it later. The fact someone from Germany is interested worries me, Surely they are reading it as a pukka neck as cheap ray copies must be available easy enough over there?[/quote] Having read all this thread I've just checked the ad, and now it reads: [quote]THE NECK APPEARS TO BE KOSHER ON FIRST SIGHT BUT IT IS NOT[/quote] (Btw, do I need to point out that I'm not the "mart" who's selling this bass? I hope not, but just in case: It ain't me babe. No, no, no, it ain't me babe.)

Just bought a book and a DVD from Beedster, and all went very smoothly. A pleasure to deal with!

At least he's honest and says it's only 3/4 of a body!

If only it were a fretless - I'd snap it up.

[quote name='mcnach' post='1257242' date='Jun 5 2011, 12:14 PM']Electronics on the bass are as simple as they get. If you can solder... I'd save the hassle and check it myself. ...[/quote] True, and I'm sure this problem will be very easy to fix. But then there's this: [quote name='henry norton' post='1257105' date='Jun 5 2011, 08:50 AM']...If you fix it yourself and ... if something worse happens to the electronics in the near future, such as a pickup dieing, you might find they're reluctant to fix it as it has been 'tampered with'.[/quote] If you solder anything then you'll void the guarantee and I'd bet some (many?) dealers would use that as an excuse to avoid honouring any warranty commitments if you have any other problems.

I'm no Fender expert, but the bridge in that pic looks the same as on my Squier CV '60s, which I've just managed to put a cover on. There were no holes, so I had to drill new ones, so I can't say whether they'd be in the usual place. But the cover went on fine:

[quote name='LawrenceH' post='1257008' date='Jun 5 2011, 12:31 AM']The front/rear placement is not so critical since you will adjust the intonation anyway, as long as it's within the bridge saddle screw range. ...[/quote] This is right, so you have some margin for error. If you've got the bass perfectly set up at the moment (ok action, and correct intonation), then you should be able to use the position of where the saddles are now to show where to put the new bridge, just like you say. I'd stick a couple of bits of masking tape on - one each side of the bridge - and put a pen mark level with the E saddle on the tape on that side and a mark level with the G saddle on the other bit of tape. Then when you swap bridges you can line the new one up by these bits of tape. Before you do this, you should probably also tweak the intonation screws on the new bridge so that each saddle has roughly the same amount of forward/backward space as on your current bridge.

I had to move the bridge on a Rockbass because the strings were out of line with the neck. I put up a thread on the Warwick forum describing what I did: this is where I started talking about the bridge: [url="http://forum.warwick.de/17-rockbass/13065-great-rockbass-renovation-project.html#post201247"]http://forum.warwick.de/17-rockbass/13065-...html#post201247[/url] I'm sure there are others way of doing this, and probably better ones - I was making it up as I went along!

Three 8 ohm loads in parallel is indeed 2.67 ohms: one way to think about this is that the current through each load is inversely proportional to the impedance, so an 8 ohm cab takes 1/8th the current of a 1 ohm load. Now if you've got 3 of those cabs, and you can just add up the current going through each, so that's 3/8ths (1/8 + 1/8 + 1/8). Which is the same as if you had one 8/3rds-ohm cab. And 8/3 is 2.67. And that's why each 4 ohm cab draws 1/4th of the current of a 1 ohm cab, so 2 of them draw 2/4ths, i.e., 1/2 the current, which is the same as a 2 ohm load. So two 4 ohm cabs is a lower impedance than three 8 ohm cabs. My reading of all this stuff about TC cabs is that they know the properties of their cabs, know the tolerances, and know that their heads will cope with the exact current 3 of their cabs will draw. I wouldn't be brave enough to conclude that if TC have confirmed that their head will work with the (notionally 2.67ohm) load of three of their cabs, that it will be ok with a load that is notionally 2ohm (but may be less if these particular speaker cabs behave differently from the TC ones, and less means more in that less ohms means more current means more chance of your head going phut). Your call!

[quote name='stevie' post='1256020' date='Jun 3 2011, 10:19 PM']There was a thread about this a while back. ....[/quote] Here are two threads, and I'm sure there's at least one other - I recall Mark from Bass Direct chipping in with some thoughts. [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=103342&hl=TC+ohm"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=...2&hl=TC+ohm[/url] [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=129239&hl=TC%20ohm&st=0"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=...%20ohm&st=0[/url]

[quote name='alyctes' post='1255166' date='Jun 3 2011, 10:43 AM']I've got a Cirrus BXP 4 with the same issue. I'd be happy to compare notes. I did find a wiring dagram for the Cirrus BXP 5 which might help - PM me an email address and I'll send it to you.[/quote] Or download one from the 4th post here: [url="http://forums.peavey.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=3575"]http://forums.peavey.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=3575[/url]

Sounds like you need to swap the wires on the output socket. I'm not familiar with Peavey basses, but the active basses I am familiar with all have three wires going to the socket: one hot, one earth, and one battery earth. If the two earths are swapped over, then the battery will drain all the time, whereas if they are wired the right way round, then the battery is only drained when a lead is plugged in. From your description it seems very likely that the battery is being drained 24/7, in which case the likely cause is that these wires have been connected wrongly. I don't know what colour wires go to your output socket, but if one of them is white (or red) and the other two are black or blue, then leave the white one alone and swap the other two. Alternatively, show us a photo of the wires attached to your socket, and I'll try and figure it out. Or if you're handy with a multimeter then you might be able to figure it all out yourself.

[quote name='silddx' post='1251677' date='May 31 2011, 04:03 PM']No they don't. Warwick use Warwick Security Locks. The nearest to them is the Dunlop system What you have is the old style Warwick recessed straplocks, there is nothing I'm aware of currently on the market. You may be able to get hold of them somewhere.[/quote] Yes and no. New Warwicks use Warwick Security locks, but the flush-mounted "buttons" that Warwick used were Dunlops. So you need to buy the Dunlops that Lfalex v1.1 recommended. (That's what I did for my '94 Streamer). The very earliest Warwicks had Schallers, then they used these Dunlop recessed ones for a while, and the more recent ones have Warwick straplocks. The Warwick ones are like Dunlop but not quite the same size (so a Dunlop-fitted strap will go in a Warwick-fitted bass, but not as secure as you'd like, and a Warwick-fitted strap simply won't work with a Dunlop-fitted bass).

[quote name='Marvin' post='1248871' date='May 29 2011, 06:44 AM']When I play the C♯ on the E string (ie 9th fret) the string rattles and buzzes on the frets behind that note. If I fret C and C♯ it disappears, hence the string must be buzzing on the lower frets. I don't know whether I need to tweak the truss rod to straighten or put more relief in it. What I have noticed is that on other occasions when I've put more relief in the neck is that notes above the 12th fret start to choke a lot, so that option could be some what limited. Cheers[/quote] I think you could fix this by tweaking the truss rod either way, but it would be better to get the frets dressed. But this sort of buzz should only be audible acoustically - it shouldn't come through the amp. So it might be best to just live with it until you can get the frets properly sorted.

[quote name='KiOgon' post='1248890' date='May 29 2011, 08:13 AM']Looks genuine & original except the strings ...[/quote] Talking of the strings, whats with the B-string (assuming it's tuned EADGBE; I mean the 2nd highest string) - I bet the open string and the first fret don't sound good with all that fluff wrapped round the string!

[quote name='chrisd24' post='1248959' date='May 29 2011, 10:11 AM']A friend of mine recently bought a Roland electric drum kit and I said I would lend him an old powered monitor I had kicking around for when he didn't want to use headphones…that's Shen the problems started! The tweeter is hissing ang crackling like mad at certain frequencies,if I just change the tweeter is this likely to resolve this or is this problem likely to be inside? I have checked all connections and a had a cleanup in there but it's made no difference.[/quote] Try just disconnecting the wires to the tweeter. If that gets rid of the noise then you know where the problem is. You can then decide whether or not you need the tweeter (which I'd guess you probably would for the cymbals), in which case replace it. By the way, [quote name='chrisd24' post='1248959' date='May 29 2011, 10:11 AM']..an old powered monitor I had kicking around[/quote] Kicking your amps around isn't good for them.

[quote name='Ou7shined' post='1249245' date='May 29 2011, 02:55 PM']If it wasn't earthed then you'd have been playing air guitar all this time. [/quote] Any more jokes like that and you're grounded.

[quote name='Johnston' post='1248160' date='May 28 2011, 12:39 PM']+1 His other items link was highlighted so I've been on his auctions before.[/quote] I thought those pub signs looked familiar, and sure enough that link was highlighted for me too. Can anyone be bothered to delve back and find out what dodgy item he was selling last time?

[quote name='Ou7shined' post='1248180' date='May 28 2011, 12:55 PM']I want it to work but I'm still struggling with a workable possibility. Actually I went on to discover that they look similar but are intrinsically different as you've done away with the traditional crossover blend. I had to... ahem... "reverse engineer" a perfectly good blend pot. [/quote] At heart, in series mode, what I wanted was this: Maybe that schematic will help you grasp what I'm trying to do. The variable resistors could be individual volume controls for each pickup, or they could be combined into a blend control (but a 6-tag one, not the 3-tag one-track pot that a simple blend control would use; I certainly can't see how you could have a series blend control based on a simple 3-tag pot, except as an asymmetric control that just attenuates one of the pickups). Of course, if you want the series/parallel switch, then you take the four outputs from the two variable resistors (the two sweeps, and the two "earths" from each pickup, but note that only one of those earths is actually connected to earth), and switch them as if they were the outputs from the pickups. As I mentioned before, if you do that, then in parallel you end up with the problem that if you want to solo one pup you have to short the other, but that shorts both. Which is why I swapped the hot feeds round on the variable resistors. I've now done a bit more testing, and there really isn't much sound drop between playing a solo pickup in parallel mode or in series mode. So wiring in that 250k resistance isn't causing a massive problem. And if you're switching between a solo pickup and a combination of two pickups in series mode, then you're going to get big volume discrepancies (you can't just add another pickup in in series without the volume jumping up). And I've made a recording of the range of sounds. To clarify what is actually going on, I opted for the screwdriver test rather than just recording my playing. (It was also easier to tap a screwdriver and move the blend control, than to do that while playing a note constantly). In series and parallel mode I tapped away at one of the pickups while I turned the blend control. And it does exactly what it should. Attached is an mp3 recorded from the bass direct into a boss mini-recorder. [attachment=81157:PUPTEST2.MP3] There are four sections to the recording: 1) Pickups in series, screwdriver tapped against the bridge pickup. The blend control is steadily rotated from fully clockwise to fully anti-clockwise. You can hear virtually no sound at first, and then it slowly grows in volume until about half way through (the centre detent on the pot). From then on the volume is constant. 2) Pickups in series, screwdriver tapped against the neck pickup. The blend control is steadily rotated from fully anti-clockwise to fully clockwise. Again, you hear almost no sound to begin with, then a steady increase in volume until the mid point, then constant. 3) Pickups in parallel, screwdriver tapped against the neck pickup. The blend control is steadily rotated from fully clockwise to fully anti-clockwise. Now, because I'm tapping the neck pickup, and starting fully clockwise, the volume starts on full. It stays constant until half-way, and then fades steadily to nothing. 4) Pickups in parallel, screwdriver tapped against the bridge pickup. The blend control is steadily rotated from fully anti-clockwise to fully clockwise. Again, the volume starts full (since I'm now tapping the bridge pickup, and the blend is set to solo this pup), stays constant until half-way, then fades steadily.