Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

Chiliwailer

⭐Supporting Member⭐
  • Posts

    2,669
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Chiliwailer

  1. Hi folks,

    I’ve got some flats with a bass recently and have no idea what they are. 
    The silks at the tuner end are a burgundy type red, no silks on the bridge end. It’s a very smooth string, but I’ve not heard them on the bass as it came with my preferred TI’s. 
    Any ideas?

    Cheers 

    954E6B8F-3FA0-436B-B991-21B1597FC6A9.jpeg

    810E0BB6-B478-4B29-B130-7D0A75E24173.jpeg

  2. On 16/09/2022 at 17:14, leroydiamond said:

    I have listened to it again but not feeling it. It has more of a 3d soundstage which some might see as sonically better, but as I am so used of the original mix, feel it is exagerated. I see it is available on hi res download, so that might be the way to go. 

    I’m with you there. It’s a great remix, and sure loads of folk will love it. I’m just so used to the warmth of the original that this version spun me out a bit! (Listened on headphones) 

    • Like 1
  3. Years back I did this to a 95 Ray, though I now have it back as a single H. At the time I had a standard EBMM Stingray pickup in the neck. 
     

    IMO the aftermarket MM style pickups are quite different to your original pickup, so they won’t technically be ‘something identical’ as you mentioned. The newer pickups tend to have a different tone and better string to string balance, including the G string pole position being corrected. I now have an Aguilar in mine, which is more compressed than the original, sounds sweeter, and feels ‘tidier’ to me… just my opinion. (It also has flat poles, so not raised on the A and D like the original). 

     

    A potential issue of using 2 different pickups is they may now blend well when on together. This happened when I once tried the Aguilar with the standard MM pickup. It just sounded wrong to me,  compared to a usual MM sound with 2 pickups on. 
     

    Not sure if that helps regarding going traditional or not, that’s about all my experience right there 👍

  4. 13 hours ago, BigRedX said:

     

    What's so special about 59 Les Pauls? What makes them better than ones made in December 58 or January 60?

    It’s the neck profile, or perhaps the myth of it being a more ‘comfortable’ profile if being cynical. But there is a difference between the years, 59 is narrower. 
     

    The next factor in price for a 59 is usually the depth of the flame top, more pronounced flame being more desirable and costly. 
     

    Not sure where the prices are at now, but I remember one hitting £250k about 15ish years ago. That gap of Gibson not producing LP’s for a period during the 60s being to blame. 

  5. A pleasure to start this thread because Seva ( @realmasslove) sold me a bass tonight and made the deal super smooth and easy. 
     

    Bass is just as described and it was nice to have a chat during the meet up too. Buy with confidence folks. 
     

    Definitely wasn’t expecting to get a bass this week, but glad I did now. cheers Seva 🙏

  6. 9 hours ago, Bunion said:

    I was a little dubious putting the 45-105 760fs on I have Fl’s on my p bass 43-104, doesn’t sound like much of a difference but you can feel it in the fingers for sure. 
    But they sound great, can’t wait until they break in. 

     

    Absolutely, I have TI’s on my P Bass too, the tension is so low that the gauge is deceptive. Your Smoothie will be a low end beast when they break in 💪

    And now back to the porn….

    Loving the East preamp on my ‘95 Ray, which was a 2 band. With the middle at centre, the middle gets taken out the circuit so it’s like a 2 band in terms of the depth compared to a 3 band. The high boost switch is very handy too. 

    C685CB6A-2639-42C3-B805-7A6FA7E8FB63.jpeg

    • Like 6
  7. 1 hour ago, Bunion said:

    So I’ve just put some la Bella 760fs on the Old Smoothie and it’s thumping away on the low register but surprisingly still sounds like a stingray on the high strings and still slaps like one too!
     What a cracking bass.

    Also despite the warning on the packet not to use these strings for through body, I spoke to Will (low end lobster) who’s had these on his smoothie for 12 months with no problem. 
    well chuffed 

    They sound great with fists. I’ve had Thonastik, GHS, and EB Group iii and iv on mine, all sounded good but the Group iv have stayed on for ages now. Such a killer bass. 

    • Like 1
  8. Yeah, typical Ray tone is parallel. 
     

    The latest Passive Rays have a high output neodymium pickup. The USA short scale has a 500k volume and 100k tone. The Joe Dart has just a 100k vol pot. 
     

    I put an alnico pickup in my short scale, with 250k (audio) for both (like my  P Bass) - my supposed logic being that the albino is not as bright as the neo, and on the USA short scale 500+100 is 600, so my use of 250 + 250 is near that 600 total but less bright perhaps. It was good, but I found the 100k seemed better for hearing a difference in tone when adjusting through the sweep. For me, the 250k needed to be much near the end of the sweep to be useful. 
     

    Just food for thought rather than advice. 

    • Like 1
  9. 34 minutes ago, marleaux62 said:

    I have an old smoothie myself it sounds almost passive sometimes a truly great bass.

     

    2065395A-FF67-401F-86CC-0AB1B070F8B6.jpeg

    FCEBC7B6-308F-4E39-8357-EBD3DA20CF02.jpeg

    +1 - the depth and breath in each note still astounds me on mine. Quite like that passive vibe, but still with the active clarity and punch. 

    • Like 3
  10. Have you been told it’s original finish? 
     

    Edit - Also, here’s the pots that came on my old one. Note the neater soldering too, which is typical. I wonder if your pot is original and/or desoldered at some point. 
     

    The lacquer line on the back of the neck looks far too neat too, perhaps the head was resprayed and had a new logo?

    P1050761.JPG

    P1050764.JPG

  11. 16 hours ago, molan said:

    I’ve seen lollipops on both a ‘69 and a ‘70. They were sold as original but I guess they could have been aftermarket swaps. 
     

    I’ve certainly seen other 68’s with them. 
     

    As it happens, some of the dated parts on this particular bass are as early as ‘66 but the most recently dated parts, the pickups, are Mar ‘68 from what I remember. The neck has a Feb ‘68 date stamp which probably means it was started in ‘67 and I think the serial number is often quoted as ‘67/‘68. 
     

    Of course, Fender were famous for grabbing whatever parts they had lying around in the bin as part of final completion. This is particularly true of pots with a lot of later basses, right through to early/mid ‘70’s having ‘60’s dated pots in them. I think it was in ‘66 that they bought a huge number 
     

    With all these variances kicking around there’s no really definitive guide to exactly when Fender used different parts, neck profiles, etc. 

     

    In this case, with the pups being dated March ‘68 it seems fair to call it a ‘68, even though some parts are certainly earlier :)

     

    Just for reference - here’s a ‘69 with lollipops. 
     

    25747AF3-C9C5-42EB-90BB-E12F7D980D45.png.f01693261638905aede488043973c6aa.png

    Totally agree with Molan, plus around 68 was when the Fender execs started the real penny pinching stuff - my favourite being using up the old greens and yellow amplifier cloth wires on their instruments wiring. They just wanted all old or discontinued parts used up, and not to be ‘green’ I suppose…

     

    Great looking bass btw 👍

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...