TRBboy

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1352738967' post='1866794'] Finding a decent five string has been a long term project for me , and it has turned out to be a much longer term project than I ever anticipated. To echo what Shuzznit posts , I have come across very few 5 strings that were any good , regardless of price . I cannot get on with 35 inch scale , so that cuts out about half the market before I start , and an incongruous low B is all too often the final outcome on 34 inch scale fivers , cutting out a whole host more. Music Man do a decent 34 inch scale low B , but the string spacing is too tight for me and , equally significantly , to even achieve that string spacing on a comfortably- dimensioned neck the have to place the top and bottom strings ( B and G) way too close to the edge of the fingerboard , rendering the whole thing useless in my book. Yes , I know you could get the nut recut , but then the already too-close spacing would be even more prohibitive. Fodera do a good 34 inch scale 5 , as do Ken Smith and Sadowsky , but I don't want to spend that much on a bass I probably won't use all the time. So I haven't got a five string. [/quote] Pretty much the same requirements for a 5er as me. You need to try my Sandberg!

Very nice! You must be very pleased with it! Can't wait to get my hands on my new Sandberg........ Dots and blocks are "standard" options, but a chargeable option nevertheless. If you wanted some sort of unusual inlays, that would be a proper custom option. Anything is possible, it just depends how deep your pockets are!

Nice! Not sure that it's brand new though, looks a little battered to me! ;D

I think you're more likely to get a decent 5er if you spend a bit more, but its not a certainty. I've played more expensive 5ers that have disappointed me, and I've played cheaper ones that have impressed me. A case in point is the Yamaha BB605 I picked up recently as a backup bass. It cost pretty much 0% of f-all and has absolutely blown me away! As always, I think its just about finding the right bass for you, one man's Coq Au Vin is another man's chicken in a basket. My first 5er was a Warwick Thumb. Obviously great build quality and sounded great, but in the end I just couldn't get on with the feel of it. A few months ago I played a Lakland Darryl Jones and a 55-64(?), and they just didn't do it for me. Similarly Ibanez SRs, no matter if they're low end or high end, always seem lacking to me. I think people can be a little too focused on the B string when buying a 5er; its just one factor to be considered. As long as the bass fees right for your playing style, and the feel and response of the B suits you that's all that matters. I used to be adamant that the only good 5ers were 35" scale, but I don't really like the increased tension on the other strings (unless you're down tuning). Then I realised that there are some great 34" scale 5ers which have a fantastic B string, and for me feel more comfortable to play. In fact my whole mission this year has been to get my bass as comfortable and easy to play as possible, whilst still having a great sound. I'm really happy with my Sandberg, which is 34" scale, slim neck, low action, and I'm using .040" - .125" gauge strings on it. Sorry for the long reply! Hope it helps

I've made the move to exclusively playing 5ers this year. As others have said, nothing you can play on a 4 that you can't play on a 5, greater positioning flexibility, the low notes, etc. I feel like I'm missing something on a 4 now. I love the fact that I don't have to refine/change bass for songs in drop D now too. I also feel like it allows me to be a bit more creative with fills, runs,etc, and being able to hit 3 octaves in the space of 5 frets is great. Not tempted by a 6 as those higher notes just wouldn't be much use to me. EDIT: I should add that I think it's very important to find the right 5er for you. Try a load and get whatever feels right in your hands. My first 5 was a Warwick Thumb; sounded great but felt like too much hard work to play. Thought I hated 5ers until I realised years later that it was just that bass, the geometry of it just didn't work for me. Now I've found the perfect bass for me, it feels easier and more comfortable to play than most of the 4 strings I've had over the years.

PM is better IMHO. It behaves like a PJ, but the bridge pickup just has a bit more muscle, and doesn't suffer the weaknesses thaa J bridge pup can. What's not to like? Nicer neck, better playability, better build quality, better sound, etc, etc. And they're about the same price aren't they? (or is the 'berg a bit cheaper?). Really can't complain for a hand built bass of this quality.

I owned a California PM4 for a while, and (as with any Sandberg IME) one thing you don't need to worry about I'd it not being gutsy enough! Yes, they can be tamed for jazzy noodling if you so wish, but they do a monster rock sound just great! Snarl, grit, bite, punch whatever you want to call it, it's there. They need to be considered as a PJ on steroids really - you can get a great Duff kinda sound with a pick! The P on its own is perfectly authentic, and when you bypass the pre and use the passive tone control, there's plenty of traditional sounds on offer too. Beats the pants off a USA precision IMO!

Dimarzio Model P would be my choice.

Even so called "un-finished" necks will have had some sort of treatment, even if it's just a sanding sealer or a bit of oil. Oil will protect the neck pretty well and will keep virtually all moisture out, but will allow the wood to breathe more than laquer which I think is probably a good thing. You get woodwork on houses (or other outdoor applications) which is treated with things like Danish Oil to withstand the elements but let the timber breathe, and it works a treat. The only thing with oil is that it will need reapplying periodically. I'm confident your basses will be fine. I wouldn't touch the '63, but if you want to do something to the Squier I would either oil it or buy a spray can of polyurethane laquer. Would I strip the laquer off a neck? Never if I could help it! I don't like a glossy, sticky neck, so my trick is to give it a light but even rub down with 1200 grit paper. I'm not aiming to remove laquer, just lightly abrade the surface, and it gives a lovely silky smooth feel. I used to be a carpenter.

[quote name='iconic' timestamp='1351894796' post='1856800'] Spoke to yamaha UK, really helpful scots ady on service/spares. BB424x chrome control panel ex-stock, pickguard on 4 week delivery....parts inc vat n pnp, 39 quid......, not bad I paid 40 for a pattern pickguard for my fender! Bugger forgot to ask about screws! [/quote] Glad the Scots lady is still there! When I worked in a music shop quite a few years ago she was always in spares! Are you gonna have to wire in some longer shaft pots (and toggle switch) to make it through the plate as well then? It's gonna look great!

[quote name='Sean' timestamp='1351188119' post='1848496'] Now here's a thing... What is a BB? To me a BB is a BB200, BB300, BB400, BB1000, BB1200, BB2000, BB3000 and any Yamaha bass that has the classic BB body shape and headstock and usually a P or reverse P pickup - that's what I like and that's what I expect. IMO even my BB1300 pushes the limits of what a BB is. How is this ever a BB except in name? or this Body shape completely different, headstock totally different! Nathan East's signature model is a BB but it isn't what I think of as a BB. Why don't these completely different basses have a different nomenclature? Anyone know? [/quote] I suspect that around the late nineties, when "modern" basses were (arguably) most popular, Yamaha thought they would breathe some new life into the BB range by modernising them. Combined with the development of the Nathan East model it probably seemed like a great idea (and I personally love 'em!). The BB605 pictured above was produced as a budget version of the NE, and has a NE-1 preamp (i have one in black), and there was later the BB2004/5 which weren't far away from the NE in terms of spec/build quality (i think they were around the £1000 mark). I guess these "modern" BBs didn't work out that well for them because they weren't around for all that long, and as more traditional style basses came back into favour Yamaha returned to the traditional BB design we all know and love.

Lovely mate, congrats! I think a Lakland would definitely be my second choice after a Sandberg. Even the 55-01s are great, I A/B'd one against a 'Ray 5 earlier this year in GG, and for me the 55-01 won hands down. Weirdly though I really didn't like the Darryl Jones or 55-64(?) I tried..... Anyways, good score man, I hope you enjoy it!

[quote name='walbassist' timestamp='1351252648' post='1849263'] Just heard the completion date for my VT5 has been put back two weeks [/quote]oh god, that doesn't bode well for me then! I'm hoping to hear back from Alan at Synergy on Monday with an update on mine. Last time I chased I was told late December, and I was really hoping to use it for the New Years gig.

Well, having owned a California, a couple of Basics, and a Basic Ken Taylor, I think I would probably always plump for the 3-band. That said, I never felt like I was missing anything on the Cali, and the passive tone control was a useful feature. It seems that most people like the Glocks but some don't, I think probably because they are very transparent and natural sounding, so it depends what basses you had experienced previously, but I think some people just feel like the pre isn't "doing" enough or isn't colouring the sound enough. I found the same when I got my first Basic (now residing with Primebass!). I thought that it sounded great, but wasn't "bassy" enough, or full enough sounding, so I cranked the bass up a fair bit. At the first gig with it I had several friends tell me to back the bass off a bit because it was booming through the place and overpowering everything! I adjusted accordingly, and at the end of the night had various people tell me that it sounded incredible, and was the best bass sound I'd ever had! The controls on the Glock preamps interact to a great extent, so you need to use all three in conjunction with each other. It's a very intuitive control system and seems to accomodate a greater and more subtle variation of tones, rather than feeling like you're just boosting or cutting specific frequency bands. In my experience, subtlety is the key with a Sandberg bass, and you just need to let the natural tone and response of the bass and quality of the build and components shine through. I tend to run mine with the blend biased slightly toward the neck pup, treble flat, Mid boosted a little, and bass boosted a little more. One thing I've found with all of these basses is that they sit in a band mix really well, are nice and clear, defined and punchy without being too imposing.