Al Krow

Funny thing is the DHL driver didn't even realise he had to collect the V7 in exchange for the P7 so I could now have been the proud owner of both!

I always did think that RTFM was over-rated, just shortens the shelf-life of kit. Ignorance is bliss, right? 😁

And then you get bored and sell it 😁

Ouch!! That's gutting.

Were you guys playing at Glasto?! What's the band?

Part of me completely agrees with what you're saying. But it doesn't have to be either or does it? Alex Claber was a bass player before he started making Barefaced Cabs so was Doug at Darkglass and the list goes on... Bass is our passion and making great music has gotta be right at the top of what's great about it. Many folk simply drive cars, but car enthusiasts often love understanding the intricacies of what makes a car engine tick. And similarly getting into the detail of sound, frequencies, power, how it all comes to be produced and interacts in making for great tone even if it's only us bassists who can hear it or care about it and even then sometimes only at home and not in a band mix with ear plugs in! If someone finds enjoyment in taking electronic measurements and getting a deeper understanding of their kit that way, it's certainly not for me to tell them that their time could be better spent playing. Why seek to limit how far any of us take our passion for bass and what direction that might take?

Interesting. How so in terms of the difference in tone? I must admit I wouldn't have expected a great deal of difference. If there is, I suspect that any difference in the pups are going to make a bigger difference to tone than the wood treatment. But the bigger factor, if anything, is likely to be wood and construction - you have a solid alder body in the 434/5 but alder /maple/alder laminate in the higher end models. Can't believe you found a 435 which you loved, for just £399 new, and which weighed in at just 9 lbs and have returned it!

They do sound great. The pups are indeed close but not quite the same - a little higher end in the more expensive basses. YGD V5 (Alnico V) in the 434/5 YGD V7 (Alnico V) in the 734A/5A & P34/5

Thanks Stew - not quite identical to the HB Iso5 Pro, which I'm using, which has all its outputs on one side and greater flexibility on voltages but with fewer outputs overall. The one you have listed is, however, definitely a clone of the HB Iso1 Pro. However if that Ammoon hits the spot (and my instinct is that I would only be able to use one set of outputs if I had it under my board and I was fine with just 5 outputs overall which the Iso5 provides for my mini board) then there's an even cheaper one on eBay

That is serious praise indeed. I sensed that these gen 2 Sires were punching well above their price point and that comment certainly confirms it!

Hardly a thread hijack. More like a good point! Only hesitation is aren't you going to knock a chunk of value off by making the mod, purely from the aesthetics, or will judicious use of PGs provide 'cover' should you wish to resale (obviously whilst not hiding the fact from a purchaser). Or is this a non point 'cos you're not planning on selling the bass ever 'cos it's such a good one. 2 days in I'm still liking mine - lol!

Pulling you on to the Yammy thread if I may: Fyi Yamaha certainly had the AlNiCo pups with their higher end 1024/5 and 2024/5 basses in 2010 when these were brought out; the more budget end of the range retained the ceramic pups. Not sure what the pups were in the previous top end basses (e.g. BB1200, 2000, 3000, 5000) - need @AndyTravis or another BC'er with greater Yammy history than me to jump in to confirm that. The current series which came out in 2017 saw the the AlNiCos being extended to the whole range, with 'higher end' AlNiCos for the 734A/5A and P34/5 than the 434/5s and only the 234/5 still having ceramic. My experience is that the ceramics are indeed higher output / more punchy but 'flatter', and the AlNiCos more harmonically rich, which I personally prefer.

The resultant tone on my "slap patch" (which is essentially a tailored EQ) on my cheap-as-chips Zoom multifx is definitely impacted by the addition of a dual band compressor effect in the patch. In layman's terms the sound is noticeably crisper / less muffled on both the slap and pop. Is this what you would expect or could it simply arise from the fact that this is a digital effects patch and not necessarily particularly transparent?

With due respect to the Sire P7, it's not meant to be a passive bass IMHO. Stick with your excellent Yammy BBs if you just want passive. A P7 in passive mode is like a bike stuck in first gear.

You can put your Becos on at the same time. What else will it have on it? Mind you if you end up with a P7 bass, you won't be needing the MXR thump, you'll have all that tone shaping available on your bass.

Well must admit - it's given a new lease of life to my multifx having them as the centre piece of my two boards. Loving having the the Zoom paired with the Boss LS2 which allows me to parallel clean blend - something you can do internally on a Helix but not on the Zoom. The clean blend adds tonal authenticity and preserves low end and although cleverer folk than me have mentioned the risk of "comb filtering" when you put a digital pedal in a parallel loop as I have done with Zoom in the LS2's loop, it's not been at all noticeable in the fx patches I have got set up. And I can by-pass the Zoom altogether should I want, with the LS2, thereby further eliminating a layer of pedal noise (not that the board is noisy at all given the isolated PSU from the Iso5). Having the Smoothhound for wireless and Mosaic for octave up (which the Zoom, bless it, is pants at) gives me access to pretty much all the fx I'm going to be using live (other than perhaps a decent synth - but hey this is supposed to be a 'budget board'!) Might be compact but it's definitely brought a smile to my face

Seriously, they are very good e.g. twice the power of the market leading Ciocks DC5 for less than half the price, and even smaller. What's not completely clear from the pic is that if you want to use the long ends of the PSU leads i.e. the middle three in my pic above, you need to angle the HB Iso5 just a tad. Easily done with a bit of felt pad or similar, and frankly it angles / rests fine on the long ends anyway. Not an issue if you're happy using the short J ends (the end two in my pic) - but most of the time you'll want that for the pedal board above it, which in my case looks like this - and all powered by the HB Iso5 with a polarity reverse for the Smoothhound: PS the board itself is also a Harley Benton Thomann own brand - the HB 50M. Ideal for having the B1X-4 on it as it's just that little bit deeper at 17cm than the PT Nano+ or Nano

There is actually a technical reason for this I believe (although you'll need someone a few levels above my pay grade to explain the precise details!) - when combining pups whether it's P+J on the Sire or J+J on my Ibby you often seem to get a mid scooping effect, which can result in a sweeter tone (certainly the case on the Ibby - less so on the Sire) but is less punchy for the same reason. Have to agree it's not an issue on the Yammy PJ pups - but maybe that's 'cos they're pretty hot?

Interesting - you'll have noted that my initial impression was of the P+J together sounding a little 'insipid' which seems to be a variation (but obviously not exactly the same) of what you were getting. But the P pup by itself is just great and doesn't need a blended J in the way a lot of us do as 'standard' on our Yammy PJs.

Was just wanting a reminder about what the fault was on your P7 - to make sure I don't have the same on mine!

Nah - it's going to be a really nice alternative to my other couple of regular gigging basses. And it has the honour of being least expensive of my herd which makes it just perfect for CV laden East London pubs. Remind me what the issue was on yours, that meant that it didn't last more than one gig?

P7 arrived today! First impressions - very positive. A shade under 10 lbs (4.5kg = 9.9 lbs) which is fine and comfortable to 'wear'. The EQ is very versatile. Having a tone knob in addition to a 3 band EQ allows you to dial in a lot of variety. My preference is for the tone knob to be at around 8/10 which gives quite a sweet tone. The treble has a decent range from cut to boost. The bass EQ is just huge and needs, if anything, to be cut slightly otherwise it's going to dominate (and not in a good way!). Will need to get my head around the mids with a semi para range of 80 Hz to 2 kHz. Key annoyance for me are the two stacked pots which are 'sticky' with each other and dialling the bottom also moves the top - another excuse to replace these as well as their slightly cheap plastic appearance. In terms of the pups, I sense this bass is going to be mainly used in solo P, which I really like btw, occasionally J and hardly ever P+J blend, which feels a little insipid. So this bass provides a very nice set of complementary options to my purely passive Yammy PJ, which I typically use in either P+J or solo J these days. The active P on the Sire cuts through on the low B really well and won't, I suspect, require me to switch to the solo J which I do on my Yammy. As a PJ bass, it is in many ways a better stable mate to have alongside my Yammy BB1025 rather than it's sibling BB735A, which whilst active had many similarities tonally / pups / feel etc. So overall a big thumbs up in terms of very initial impressions and this will, when they start happening again(!), likely be a regular feature at our gigs.

HEALTH (WALLET) WARNING ABOUT STARTING THREADS LIKE THIS (note to self) If you scroll back to the OP a year back I had neither of the two cabs I was asking for your views on.

I'll do you a deal - I'll gig it the very next time you decide to come to hear us play and don't pull out at the last minute 😁 You can then report back what the audience is hearing and also how crap I am on bass!

The F112 is a more articulate, balanced and capable cab than my BF SC, but it is double the weight despite being approx the same size. The BB2 is nearer the F112 in terms of hitting the mark sonically but closer to the SC in weight, so potentially a really good compromise. So, yes, primarily portability in terms of why the SC, which is still a very good cab indeed and an undoubted step up from my predecessor Markbass cab it replaced, has hung around so long in my set up. And it's plenty 'good enough' for rehearsals and gigs.