LukeFRC

[quote name='redstriper' timestamp='1341958925' post='1727200'] His playing is amazing and he can make any bass sound great, but no one sounds better on an expensive bass, so why waste the money? I don't play anything like him, my style is reggae and soul music, for which the Farida is perfect (with a change to flatwounds). I bought a Farida Jazz blind on the strength of that review, not really knowing what to expect and I am genuinely blown away. It easily compares to basses costing far more and it just exudes quality. If it said Lakland (or similar) on the headstock and was priced at £700, it would be perfectly acceptable. I sold my Mexican Fender because this put it to shame and it's better than my Squier CV, which is made in the same factory and is a lovely bass with a gorgeous neck, but the pick ups on the Farida are more powerful and the whole thing feels more solid. The truss rod is adjusted at the heel and the neck is very straight with perfect intonation and excellent tonal balance across the strings. If I was closer I would buy that Farida for £80 (with gig bag and fx box) - you can't really go wrong at that price. But I wouldn't buy it blind just in case there's a major problem with no return option. [/quote] In my jazz bass gas phase I played a couple of Farida, the ash wood model. I was very impressed. But, bah, one day ill admit my warwick will never sound like a jazz bass!

[quote name='Tankdave' timestamp='1341955069' post='1727105'] Jazz = more variations in tone = more nasty tones = be carefull = OK in the end [/quote] I keep selling them but I never once found a tone I would call nasty, theres only 3 knobs!

or am i just getting a bit carried away with his playing and it actually is the guitar? why do I do this? I love the sound of Jazzes, but when I play them I don't!

have a look at some of the other vids by that guy reviewing it, he seems to specialise in making cheap basses sound really really good. bah, my playing is crap init?

well he makes it sound good. jazz gas is back

are there seams at all. It looks good!

the model up from this is a decent bass.

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' timestamp='1341937180' post='1726557'] Fair point, although they used the bullet truss rod from i think '75 on a maple block neck? (Unsure, not big on 70's stuff, but it was around '76/'76?) [/quote] I'm pretty sure a 70's P or Jazz isn't as thin front to back as a 50's P bass. Market had changed a fair bit by then too

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1341902956' post='1725741'] Coming from a guy that can only afford a few really old ones! [/quote] ssh don't tease, he's still saving up for the status king bass [quote name='Rick's Fine '52' timestamp='1341936112' post='1726524'] Nothing sacred about Leo's creation, for example, the truss rod adjustment on a vintage Bass has to be the most ridiculously located thing ever, and this from a guitar inventing genius. Why did it take him decades to change the adjustment to the headstock, where it should always have been?? Personally I hate to see truss adjustments at the headstock, but thats the purist in me again , and I wouldnt touch one with a bargepole, but let's be honest, thats exactly where they should be! [/quote] this on always made sense to me. Most fragile part on almost any guitar is the top of the neck into the headstock. (ask a gibson owner) Now drilling a big hole in this bit of wood makes it even weaker. But if you plug that gap with something else it makes it stronger... and then you can still access the truss from the bottom. viola! Would I be right in thinking that by the time it ended up at the headstock end they were either using rosewood fretboards and putting the truss in from the front, or in many cases (jazzes, Musicman, G&L) the neck wasn't as flat and wide as the early fenders? That's always been my explanation. Might be utter bollocks but makes sense to me!

stingray's a glasgow kiss

cheque in the post?

part of my love/hate with jazzes went like this. I would love playing it, both pups on, one slightly backed off.... if it was something a bit funky and I wanted to sit higher in the mix I would back off the neck a bit. If it was something more rock and I wanted to sit elsewhere in the mix I would back off the bridge a bit. Eventually while playing I would begin to really miss something in the tone, something missing... ahh the mids, and they would come back as I rolled the bridge pickup off. Eventually I had a lovely jazz bass that I only used the neck pickup on, and then I picked up my P bass and sold the jazz. the moral of that story is.... well I'm still probably try and buy a jazz every so often!

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1341874831' post='1725651'] That's why I went for the Walkabout. It's not a monster to lug about. [/quote] to be honest you've sold the walkabout to me on what you've said about it. I love the amp I have, and have no plans to get another so I doubt I'll ever end up with one but you've sold me on it.

[quote name='SlapbassSteve' timestamp='1341857194' post='1725255'] I used to have a Badass MkII on my MIM Precision, thought it was a vast improvement on the tone at the time- however the stock pickups were a pile of rubbish. After putting usable pickups in there I ended up replacing it with a Gotoh 201, and putting the Badass on my Jazz- problem solved! Definitely agree with high mass for jazz, lower mass for precision. [b]Not a massive fan of stock Fender bridges though.[/b] I hate to admit it, but I think Badass II's are a little overrated, Gotoh 201's do the same job for half the money. Only problem is they don't look... well, badass! [/quote] why? I'm pretty sure I've owned basses with most the aftermarket bridges around... what don't stock fender bridges do that some of these other options do do? I think you either go Hi-mass and in effect decouple the strings from the body or you go for a low mass bridge like the BBOT, or something in-between. For Hi-mass.... Peavey T40 takes some beating. Fender works fine otherwise

[quote name='warwickhunt' timestamp='1341859437' post='1725307'] Not wishing to derail Clarky's thread but I will confess that the Tecamp 'Blackcat' class D amp that I had was probably the best class D amp but even that didn't stack up against the TF. [/quote]was blackcap class D? *looks it up* aye so it is, valve front end? my guess that the power amp section is fairly similar/the same... just a different preamp/eq/compressor in a dinky box And back to the main thing in this thread... which is Clarky!

[quote name='warwickhunt' timestamp='1341857455' post='1725261'] It isn't my thread Luke, I'm not the one wanting an amp! I'd not give up the Thunderfunk for anything... regardless of weight. [/quote][quote name='Clarky' timestamp='1341857546' post='1725264'] I am not warwickhunt, although people have often said it of me [/quote] good point... but it is an awesome class D that might be the... er end of lunch? and clarky is miles and miles away down south. Will be going no where near him! (hi clarky!)

[quote name='Prime_BASS' timestamp='1341856941' post='1725249'] I don't know the science but question yourself, why when adding a bass pickup(neck) and treble(bridge) you get get more mids? I think Alex at barefaced goes over this over on his website though. [/quote] you don't. each pickup has an amount of bass and an amount of treble- with both on you get [u]less[/u] mids than with just one or the other. Hence the scooped sound of a jazz bass- and the further apart the pickups the more scooped the signal..... but for the life of me I can't remember why, I think it has to do with the aperture of the pickup.... but can't remember

[quote name='warwickhunt' timestamp='1341853960' post='1725172'] Does the Hartke LH1000 fit the bill? I have to confess that I'm still out to lunch on class D amps for bass but everyone has different needs and wants so the GK may well do the job. [/quote] If I was coming down to newcastle in the next few weeks I would lend you my Puma1000 while I move house, but I'm not going anywhere near. Thunderfunk is pretty lightweight isn't it?

can't stand them. Big old chunky ones are fine as aftermarket items. But why they would make them standard on all fenders I don't know. Also, bug bear of mine- BBOT bridges- described as flimsy. FLIMSY have you ever heard of one being bent out of shape in normal playing? criky, lets ask someone with an old one, Hey Rick's Fine... on all your vintage basses, anything bent out of shape? anything? flimsy my arse!

de ja vue

practice. lots of it. know what things sound like, know your scales.... and practice listening this is quite good http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_jFAhN6V9s

I'm sure that folk will come along with lots of knowledge, and some will suggest nice valve DI boxes.... personally I just use any cheap one as it seems to work fine

[quote name='tonyf' timestamp='1341702309' post='1723090'] Get yourself a bart preamp to go with the pickups? I've always found the bart stuff sounds really good as a complete pickups/preamp ensemble. Alternatively, keep it simple and go passive, vol/vol/tone/tone and see if that does it for you? With you loving the sound of your passive JV, may not be a bad solution as it'd allow the more of the tone of the instrument to come through without a pre colouring it and it'd also match the outputs a little more between the two basses. Just my two cents.... T [/quote] Possibility. I was thinking I like vol/vol a fair bit in other basses I've had.. not as quick and easy as vol/bal but somehow works well. For some reason I find 2 tone controls just a bit annoying. The P bass output is a fair bit hotter than the barts on the warwick, but then that's never been a problem of adjusting gain to suit the bass, I used to do lots of PA stuff and when you have 24 channels of stuff going on to set gain on, and then set again if the band changes adjusting one gain between basses, or trying to get the two similar, never seems like an issue to me!

actually, that is pretty heavy isn't it? my Puma 1000 puts out 1000w at 8 ohm and weighs between a third and half the weight. What they stuck in there thats so heavy?