Osiris

Cheers @Cuzzie Yes, it has to work in a band context or it's no good to me. I couldn't get the BDDI to work at all with the band for some reason - and I'm quite happy to accept that the reason is me I'm more than happy to give it a good going over (ooh err) but I do like gear that's quick and easy to use so that problem solving and EQ'ing to the room on a gig is a quick and painless as possible. Too much faffing about on stage invariably results in getting the look from Liberace in Keyboard Corner.

A question for all you guys using the dug pedal; when the eq is flat and it's on the clean channel only with the compression backed right off, is the inherent tone more compressed than when the pedal is bypassed? The reason I ask is that although I like what I've heard of the pedal on YouTube clips, having previously owned the BDDI and VT bass I found that they both had way too much baked in compression. The fundamental tone of each was great but no matter what I did with them the sound was just too squashed for my tastes*. I'm curious to know if this also applies to the dug pedal? *I use compression as an integral part of my sound but even with my comp out of the signal path the sound was still too heavily compressed to my ear. I appreciate that drive adds compression but I've used other drive units that do not squash like this. Blending in more dry signal didn't seem to help either with the BDDI. Obviously the dug has its own built in compressor but I don't want it adding further squash to an already flattened signal. But hopefully this is not the case? I'm hopefully soon ditching my backline and moving over to IEM's and am looking for something like this to use as a pre-amp, tuner and compressor as it's everything I need in one box. What are your guys thoughts and experience of the inherent compression (or not) of the pedal?

If you find a more aesthetically appealing cover and want shot of the current monstrosity beauty then please give me a shout

The FretFX look great on the Thunderbird I recently picked up a new Mustang PJ which is a cracking little bass, but the top edge fret markers are the usual small white dots, but on this bass they straddle the maple neck wood the pale Pau Ferro fretboard wood. The trouble is that the Pau Ferro, although darker then the maple, is still more pale than rosewood. The result being that the fret markers are really difficult to see unless there is plenty of ambient light, which there rarely is on a gig. So something like the FretFX would be a great solution for me. It's Either that or taking a black marker pen to it, which is something I'd rather not do just in case I ever move the bass on in the future. Or ask @Happy Jack if he'd cut out some of the magic roundabout style flowers from his table cloth so I can use those as fret markers instead. No chance of missing those on the gig

Another vote for the Magellan 800. If you want a silky smooth, mid rich, valve like drive - rather than modern scooped clanky distortion, the Magellan delivers it to perfection. I'v been gigging mine for about 18 months now and can attest that it works brilliantly in the mix too, you don't lose the bottom end and don't get the top end fizz either (and I have a cab with a high frequency horn). And the clean channel is simply huge too

I've got the Battalion too. As a clean pre-amp and DI box I think it's great. The EQ points are more sensibly voiced for gigging that the specs might have you believe, the bass shelf cuts off at 200 Hz giving you control over the bass you can hear frequencies, rather than the bass you can feel lows. Likewise the top at 2 Khz end is good for brightening things up without getting too shrill. But if you want those ultra highs that slappists like you might be struggling. The mid frequencies also give a good level of control at useful frequency centres. The drive doesn't really wow me personally, it's more of a distortion than overdrive to my ear, even at lower gain settings. But drive is a very personal thing so you may well love it especially as you say you want a gnarly distortion - it does that easily enough. There's plenty of control available for the drive section to find what works for you. The compressor doesn't wow me either. I'm a bit of a stickler for compression and although I don't generally have an issue with 1 knob compressors like some of my more esteemed brethren do, I find it very dark sounding and it takes some serious EQ'ing to add the brightness back. But from what I'd read on Talkbass according to one of the EHX engineers who posts on there, the compressor is voiced to work with the drive section, and together they do seem to complement one another even if the sound isn't for me. I also have an LMB-3 and that is on the board alongside the battalion (plus a tuner) as I much prefer it for compression duties than the built in EHX one. Despite these gripes I do rate it highly. With the EQ set flat it is completely transparent on the clean channel, no colouration or tone changes, you get out what you put in. The DI is noiseless too. I've no personal experience of the Hartke but I know @Cuzzie rates his highly, but it's worth bearing in mind that he and I like different bass sounds, he favours a more bright mid scoop, which I believe the Hartke does very well, whereas I'm more into more vintage mid rich sounds - which the battalion excels at.

Sounds like it was crazy ride at the time! Unfortunately my rig was nowhere near as capable as yours proved to be. After that I had a Marshall silver jubilee monster rig with a 2x15 cab and matching 400 watt (I think?) head, which was absolutely phenomenal. With the silver/grey tolex it looked like it was straight out of stonehenge, albeit it a touch taller than 18 inches

That's the same amp model that I had but my rig was forever farting out at any band level volume. I had different cabs, a 1x15 and 4x10, both with the same Laney blue stripe log that yours have in this shot, so maybe it was those that were the weak link?

My first proper rig was a Laney, back in the late 80's, it was the first thing that I bought once I was earning my own money. It was a 150 watt Trace Elliot clone with a 12 (?) band graphic and various other bells and whistles plus matching 4x10 and 1x15 cabs. Unfortunately it was utter crap and would fart out at any serious volume which has put me off them ever since. But from the amount of positive comments above I really ought to give them another go some time.

@nonkel26 The Genzler Magellan 800 sounds like it will fit your needs perfectly. It's powerful, loud, versatile and punchy. I've been gigging one for more than a year now and cannot fault it. See my review here and to see how it compared to some of its rivals, including the DarkGlass and Tone Hammer here. And if weight is becoming an issue it might be wise to consider downsizing from your 4x12 cab too to a neodymium loaded cab, which will significantly reduce the weight but not the volume.

It certainly is, the wood grain is stunning.

I'm a bit late to the party after having played 34" scales for the past 30 years or so. I've got a dodgy nerve in my left wrist that makes playing 34's in the lower register uncomfortable after a while so I've picked up a couple of shorties and find them so much more comfortable to play. The top one is an Ibanez Talman. They're cheap and cheerful but are a massive amount of bass for the money. I bought this one from @Thunderbird who had swapped out the pups for Kent Armstrong Vintage Hots, put some decent pots in it, replaced the jack and shielded it and with these extra tweaks it is a seriously giggable bass. I replaced the bridge myself as the stock one was a bent bit of tin foil jobbie - seriously it was really flimsy. It's been wired with a pickup blend pot instead of the stock vol/vol/tone arrangement as I much prefer the convenience of a blend. The inlays are stickers off eBay, not that you can tell from any distance, and just help to make it look more classy than it really is The Mustang P/J is my new toy. Classic Fender styling and tone in a short scale package. I found the 3 way pickup selector switch to be too tonally limiting so I've had it re-wired to include a volume and pickup blend by the jack socket and a tone pot where the pickup switch was on the bottom horn, I only ever leave the tone wide open so I was quite happy to have it out of the way! I've stuck a cream coloured pot on it to help camouflage it as it looked a bit odd at first, but I'm really starting to dig the look now. There is a touch of lateral moment on the E string bridge saddle, entirely down to my ham-fisted playing style, so the bridge may be upgraded to something like a Fender Hi-mass or Gotoh 201 at some point, but I can live with it for now.

Here's a couple of mine, The TT was an impulse buy purely on the aesthetics, I just love the red and black combination and I think the ebony fingerboard just adds to the looks. It's all passive with Hausell (can't find the umlaut key) pickups and it sounds utterly immense. The neck pup has a more P like mid range punch that you usually get with a J style single coil. The VM is a swamp ash body with 'Berg own brand pups and a Glockenklang pre-amp. The poor thing is currently looking for a new home

Thanks for the clarification

Should that read "Dynamic speakers tend to develop a lot more bass than armatures"? Or is it the other way round? Not trying to be a smart-derrière, just trying to get to grips with it all

There's a really helpful article on scale length here; http://www.studybass.com/gear/bass-guitar-buying-guide/bass-scale-length/ For your Ibanez with its 35.2" scale, according to this article you will need extra long scale strings - which matches up with what Rotosound are saying in the link you posted in your message. Some string manufacturers state the scale length that that particular set of strings is suitable on the back of the packaging that the strings come in, so take a quick look before buying some new strings to make sure they fit if you can. And if you are buying online, a Google images search may find the packaging of the strings you want so you can read what it says that way. I recently did something similar when buying some short scale strings!

Not a tribute band as such but I've always thought my mates band name was superb, but you have to say it with a Yorkshire accent;

I have Bartolini humbuckers in my Ibanez SR1000, although off the top of my head I cannot remember exactly which model they are. The stock pre-amp died years ago and was replaced by a 2 band Glockenklang. Everything works fine and there was no issue connecting everything up. One thing to consider before doing anything is that the Bartolini pickups sound very different to Jazz single coils. I'm somewhat ambivalent to the sound of the Barts, they slice through the mix brilliantly and are tonally consistent from the low E to the high G on my 4 sting, 2 octave neck. But when it's just the bass in isolation, I personally find the tone to be somewhat bland and unexciting - they don't have the classic passive single coil punch. But they may well be exactly what you are looking for.

I think you're right to be cautious. Nail varnish will contain some sort of solvent in which the acrylic is dissolved, so when the solvent evaporates it leaves behind the acrylic layer. There is a possibility that whatever solvent is used in the nail polish could interact with the acrylic used on the IEM - it is a solvent that can dissolve at least some acrylic materials after all. It may not affect it at all, of course, but there is still a risk no matter how small.

Thanks @KiOgon. What would the best thing to do with the wires that are all soldered to the back of the tone pot in that diagram? Can they be soldered to the back of the volume? Does that make sense to you @Thunderbird seeing as you'll be wiring it up for me

I've just acquired a Fender Mustang P/J. The control layout is master volume and tone knobs with a 3 way pickup selector switch. As I only ever leave passive tone controls fully open, I want to know if it is possible to rewire the bass so that it can have a pickup blend pot instead of the tone? For me, a blend pot would be far more useful than the tone control. The little metal control plate only has holes for 2 knobs and I don't want to go at it with a drill to make room for a third pot. Ideally I can just swap the tone for a blend and not have a tone control at all. If it is possible to do, would there still need to be a capacitor wired into the circuit somewhere? I seem to recall having a passive bass rewired years ago to bypass the tone control and there was excessive top end in the signal, and I seem to think at the time that I was told that it was because there was no capacitor (possibly the tone pot too) in the signal and that these naturally remove these ultra-high frequencies from the signal. The pickup selector switch can be left in place but not wired in. Can it be done? Does anyone have a suitable wiring diagram? Are there any reasons why it would be a bad idea?