Baloney Balderdash

Some say it makes a huge difference, some say it makes absolutely no difference, both opinions sometimes seen from people having actual experience with doing that kind of mod to their bass. Personally I got no experience with it, but I am kind on leaning towards the opinion that the difference will properly be fairly minimal. Beside, how long do you really need your notes to sustain? I mean when I strike a note on my bass, which is equipped with a relatively standard mass bridge, and with the strings not going through the body, it will sustain for much much longer than I will ever need it to do, unless I deliberately mute it (just listen to for how long that overtone I strike at the end of the track linked to in my signature sustains (just took time, spot on whole 17 seconds before it has completely died out, and that with a relatively soft pick attack, also actually I think I even faded it out slowly in that mix, so it actually likely sustained for even longer). No harm in trying it out I guess, beside possibly being a waste of your money, but I wouldn't expect too much of a noticeable change if I were you.

Here's a demo, where the guy, beside also demonstrating the clean boost mode of the Behringer SF300 Super Fuzz, also demonstrates how the pedal sound when boosting both the treble and bass in fuzz Mode 1 (around the 03:55 mark) and cutting both the treble and bass in fuzz Mode 2 (around the 07:01 mark), to cancel out some of the very mids heavy effect of Mode 1 and some of the very mids scooped effect of Mode 2, making for a more flat response sounding fuzz tone. His clean tone though does appear to be somewhat mids scooped to begin with, unlike the clean tone of the bass in the demos of this pedal linked to in the OP.

Well it is definitely a quite high gain fuzz, even with the gain set low, and it is one of the more "artificially" sounding fuzzes too, which I guess is due to it being an octave fuzz, actually adding an analog fuzzed out octave up to your signal. So it is possible the effect just wasn't for you, though I guess it is possible it wasn't happy about your active bass too, some fuzzes aren't in general.

Catch on a bit slowly but then... Wauh!

I am about to make my bass rig mobile, and I have pondered on at some point buying an active PA speaker, just to have something in place of an amp. The one I have in sight is the ralatively cheap The Box PA 502 A. Judging from the specs at least it ought to be be able to handle bass fairly well. 15" 300W woofer and 100W tweeter, with a frequency response that claims to be 35Hz to 20kHz (-10dB)/40Hz to 18kHz (-3dB), which should mean that as long as you will not need to go lower than the low E of a standard tuned 4 string bass, it should reproduce it quite well. That's in theory though. But if these numbers are legit some dedicated bass cabs in existence got worse low end response. Here's a link to it from Thomann: https://www.thomann.de/gb/the_box_pa502a_aktives_fullrangesystem.htm?ref=intl&shp=eyJjb3VudHJ5IjoiZ2IiLCJjdXJyZW5jeSI6IjQiLCJsYW5ndWFnZSI6ImVuIn0%3D And here's a link to the manual: https://images.static-thomann.de/pics/atg/atgdata/document/manual/160815_c_160815_r2_en_online.pdf

Have been wanting one of these for a long while, and I can't really excuse not doing something about it by not being able to afford it, cause it is dirt cheap, about as cheap as guitar pedal effects come. Finally though I pulled the tricker, and I just picked my new Behringer SF300 Super Fuzz pedal up from the shop where it was delivered to by the postal service for pick up a couple of days ago. Man, this pedal is amazing. Might even be the #1 greatest deal there is on effect pedals for bass guitar. It just sounds absolutely astonishing great. And the one I got seemingly have no issues whatsoever, well, beside from the obviously fact of it being in a plastic housing as all these dirt cheap Behringer pedals happens to be. Doesn't bother me the slightest though. This got to be one the absolute greatest fuzz pedals for use with bass in existence, regardless of price, no short of sublime. For those of you who do not know this cheap Behringer fuzz is a pretty accurate clone of the now discontinued Boss FZ-2, which again was a take on the circuit from the legendary Univox Super Fuzz octave fuzz (Boss basically just added a 2 band active EQ section, and then threw in a bonus clean boost function mode). Here's a picture of my exact unit, and the settings I so far have settled for (possibly hard to see on this picture, but I am using Fuzz Mode 1. Fuzz Mode 1 being quite mids heavy, but me partially making up for that by boosting both the bass and treble, and Fuzz Mode 2 being heavily mids scooped, exactly as the 2 modes on the original Univox units. Also the reason why the picture looks a bit gritty is because I didn't bother taking a separate close up shot of the pedal, but just cropped it out from a shoot of my entire bass effect pedals setup): I use it in one of the parallel effect loops of my Boss LS-2, and it sounds awesome both when mixed with the clean signal, coming from the other parallel effects loop of the LS-2, for a more regular classic kind of high gain fuzz tone with the added articulation and low end from the clean signal, as well as with my high gain distortion setup, which happens to also reside in the opposite effects loop of the LS-2, engaged, consisting of a a vintage style relatively high gain Rat distortion stacked into the fairly dark sounding medium kind of gain overdrive, delivered by my Joyo California Sound, parallelly mixed together with the fuzz in about equal measures resulting in a massively thick, monstrously heavy and ballsy, but at the same time gnarly, blistering, crackling and spluttering, super high gain, earth, or at least ear, shattering, fuzz eruption of vulcanic proportions. Love it! Seriously spanks butts! Instant stoner/doom rock in a plastic box! Here's a great demonstration from YouTube by someone else of the SF300 Super Fuzz pedal's capabilities as a bass fuzz :

The differences are extremely minuscule, for sure there would be no possible way to tell the difference in a mix with those two basses. Though the maple neck one does sound ever so slightly brighter and more lively to me and the rosewood neck one ever so slightly darker and duller, but honestly that could just be the strings, and I actually kind of suspects it very likely might be just exactly that in this case. Also some playing styles, amps and eventual microphones and other gear used for recording do lend them self more to bring out the differences in different basses than others, and some styles of playing paired with some gear/recording gear would make more or less everything sound more or less the same, without any doubt, for instance I couldn't tell any tonal difference whatsoever in the slapping parts of your video. And of course the audio quality of the video, once it's been through the converter to YouTube format, doesn't make it any easier to tell tonal differences when they are so subtle as happens to be the case between the sound samples you recorded of those two basses.

Sure, that too. Some strings will be more flexible than others at the same amount of tension, which again will also partly be influenced by other factors specific for the individual instrument, like for instance, just to name one, the breaking angle of the strings at the bridge. As well as at a certain point thicker gauge strings will start to feel stiffer and less flexible on a shorter scale length instrument than they would on an instrument with a longer scale length, tuned to the same note, even if actually naturally being under less tension on the shorter scale. Which is also true the other way around, thinner gauged strings will at a certain point start to feel more floppy and flexible on a longer scale length instrument than on a shorter scale length instrument, tuned to the same note, even if actually being under more tension from the longer scale. Just think about playing a standard 34" scale bass with strings that was picked to have the same kind of tension as the strings on a regular electric guitar typically will have (like try to compare the tension of the individual strings between, let's say, to pick 1 typical set of strings for the 2 instruments respectively that seems to be a very popular choice, a .046 to .010 string set on an electric guitar and then a .105 to .045 set on a 4 string bass, both tuned in E standard tuning, as is most common, but of course an octave apart). It would be an absolute floppy mess.

Except not everyone play the same scale length instrument and in the same tuning. Tension will change according to that you know.

They are truly great units, and not just for the money, if you happens to be into that mid scooped Tech 21 Bass Driver scooped tone. I'm not though and attempted to do the above mod on mine. But the way this is put together with super tiny solder joint makes it difficulty and I ended up frying a component with my soldering Iron and ruined it, trying to do the above mentioned mod, instructed in the video. Not a big loss though, as these units are dirt cheap. Currently I actually use a Behringer Tube Mic100 Ultra Gain tube preamp as my preamp, running after firs my Zoom MS CDR70, which I use for EQ'ing, utilizing a couple of the 2 band the bass specific full parametric equalizer effects, then into my EHX Black Finger, tube driven optical compressor, and then the Behringer into the Effects Return loop of my Peavey Solo Special 112, 160W solid state guitar combo with it's build in 12" guitar speaker unit disconnected and instead hooked up to a 400W SWR Triad I bass cab. Works really well, the 2 preamp tubes in the Black finger run at proper high 300V voltage, whereas the Behringer Mic100 starve it's preamp preamp tube, but I still actually really like how it sounds, and replacing the cheap Chinese tube that it came with an EHX preamp tube did help a lot. Also the Behringer Mic100, if it is anything like the slightly more exspensive Art Tube MP, that it is supposed to be a clone of, doesn't actually run the preamp tube at just 9 volt, as some claim, but have the 9 volts from the power supply is ramped up internally to 60V (still fair deal lower than what preamp tubes are typically designed to run optimally at, but I would think considerably better than if it had really just been 9v), and as said I think it actually sounds great, even with the gain run at breakup slightly overdriven levels, if you just make sure to change the cheap fizzy stock tube for something more decent. I also use one of these, likewise with an EHX tube in it, as my go to microphone and instrument preamp, as the last stage before going into my audio interface when recording, much better than just the preamps build into my audio interface, even if that is a relatively high end interface. In my bass setup I run the gain of the Mic100 up to just before any kind of breakup happens. The plan is to later this month getting a NUX Solid Studio IR and Poweramp Simulator pedal, that can run 3rd part IRs, and at 32 Bit, 88,2kHz, 2048 samples of 50ms, resolution (about the double of what you typically get in that price range (the HoTone Binary Can or Mooer Radar for example), and should also be higher than even for example what the Line 6 Helix units run IRs at too), and with a latency of just 0,7ms, and then find a proper 3rd party IR file, I already got a couple in mind, to replace my current amp and cab. But with the Behringer Mic100 Ultar Gain filling out the role of my preamp in this setup, though the EHX Black Finger in front of it, beside acting as a fairly moderate compression effect actually also filling out some tube preamp duties, and the Zoom CDR70 Multi Stomp right before that acting as my EQ section.

Guess I will have to accept that (referring to the content of the post linked to in the second quote), if this is really the typical culture of this community, though that was just not the expression I have gotten so far, even if I have generally enjoyed the more lighthearted attitude there have seemed to be here compared to the TalkBass forum. Still I think it's a shame and a bit of a mockery that the majority, bar a few more serious responses, apparently saw this topic as just the perfect opportunity to turn this thread into an open stand up comedy stage, when it was intended as a serious one, that I had hoped would spur debate about some of Victor's points in that video, as well as I also sort of expected a few comments stating opinions, be it negative or positive, about him as a person as a bass players. I guess then some saw my objection to change the topic into a stand up comedy show as a legit reason to go full on with the stand up comedy concept. I suppose I should have realized me trying to prevent that happening would provoke some people to go all in with it, but alas, here we are. I genuinely really don't know how to take this, I think it's a big mess, I think it's a shame, and I am honestly a bit disappointed. Not really angry or holding any grudges, just disappointed. I'm not saying I did, but Victor Wooten and that interview really deserved better as far as I am concerned. Seems a bit childish (in the worst possible sense of the word) to me honestly, which on the other hand also makes me feel like an old grumpy bitter man ruining the kids trying to have fun, shushing angrily at them, insisting on them to not break into the adults conversation, even if I bet some of you are older than me. And believe me I am not usually all that uptight or in any way have a no fun allowed agenda, just genuinely think this wasn't the right thread for going all in with that sort of thing, despite the somewhat silly video thumbnail headline.

Seems to be the case, since you seems to have missed the humorous aspect of the conclusion you quote me for there. Then again some people do have a strange sense of humor and would swear they just beat you up for the sake of having a laugh. But maybe that is a special charming quirk about British humor, that I just don't get, being from Denmark. You sure do have a humorous sense though when it comes to choice of prime minister. A shame that will have consequences for you. Who could possibly blame anyone for doing something in the name of having a laugh.

Am not aware of that, and can only speak for the impression I got from what I saw of him. Can't really pass any kind of judgement based simply on what you say, but I doubt that video would have changed my look at him as a great human being anyway. In my book being a great human being doesn't mean that you never make mistakes or is flawless, but that you learn from you mistakes and do an effort for contributing positively to this world. Even the best of persons can be jerks sometimes, but unlike people who turn it into a lifestyle they are usually not very proud of those moments, which is probably also why the video in question was taken down.

I did say a great human being, never said anything about him being a god. As far as bass playing goes though he is unquestionable one of the most talented, if not the most talented bass player currently in existence. Also we seem to disagree about education being considerably more important and valuable than fast food, but guess you really must love cheeseburgers, or just hate schooling and would rather see it completely removed than improved.

Or one of use look father out than merely our acquaintances when we judge the general state of the world, and have human interactions that goes beyond the inner circles.

Well, he always appear to me as a really polite but at the same time genuine warm and friendly down to earth insightful human being, who seems to try do his share to make the world a bit better place to live in. That is more what you can say about most other people. Sad, but unfortunately also true. In my book that qualifies him for being called a truly great human being, in contrary to the majority, in my book. Now of course I don't know him personally, but it would surprise me much if he wasn't pretty much as great as guy as he always comes through as to me in just about every interview or speech I've seen/heard with him. Also seems to me that I wasn't wrong calling out people apparently, for some strange reason, feeling an incredible urge to ridicule this topic. I truly don't get it, but suppose that will be another fact for people to have a laugh over at my expense.

That's at least is a fair opinion to have, and even something that would be valid to post, even if you didn't bother to watch the video. At least it is still somewhat on topic. Just making fun of the video thumbnail, which with in all likelihood neither Victor Wooten or the interviewer had any say in, and which has nothing to do with the actual content, without even bothering watching the actual video interview isn't exactly really anything that can create any constructive debate whatsoever. That's just filling the thread up with poop, at least as far as I am concerned. It would very much be the same as a thread filled up with snarky remarks about some spelling error I made in my OP, but no one actually bothering reading it through and replying to it. 1 post like that I guess would be fine and nothing to worry about, but 3 posts from 3 different users in a row as the top replies, evolving around the same lame joke, it's beginning to look like a pattern and a tendency, to me at least. Do I have bad breath or something, anyone?

It was actually G in this context, but yeah as I mentioned it was not really the catchy sensational headline of the video thumbnail I intended this thread to be about, and though he actually does say exact what's put in that headline in the video, it is kind of completely taken out of a context where it actually makes sense and isn't actually some new dogme he claims everyone ought to stick to, his point just basically being that for filling the role of a bass player in a band rhythm and grove is far more important than notes, as in that should be where the focus it and one of the first things to learn. I know it is a long interview, an interview which is actually nice and respectful, and which I think the very young female interviewer actually handles extremely well, so can we please stop discussing the video thumbnail sensational misleading click bait headline that Thomann decided to go with for this video, which I think most would agree comes off as rather silly, and focus on the actual content, which in my opinion is actually great and respectful? It really ought to be obvious that this thread is meant for discussing the actual video interview and not whatever silly title some a bit too smart PR person at Thomann decided to stick on it, if it was I would have just left the tittle, and there would have been no point in me linking to the video. So yes, as I already insinuated in the OP I do think that video thumbnail headline is rather silly too, but can we please not have this whole thread be about that, and instead be about the actual video and the interview that it contains. I bet neither of you would like to have a whole thread you posted with a topic you found valid and saw as potentially being the starting point for an interesting debate turn out to exclusively be about ridiculing your silly username or some such of similar essentially totally irrelevant detail, that had very little to do with the actual content you had posted. I do understand why you would judge the video on that thumbnail headline, but believe me it is actually a good interview, and I don't think it's fair to judge the actual content on a silly label decision likely taken by some PR guy at Thomann that actually otherwise had nothing to do with the actual video. All you do is really trolling and derailing as far as I see it. It would be like going to an amazing concert with some band you loved, but then having the fact that the lead singer was wearing 2 different socks get all your attention.

I don have any personal experience with it. but judging from the demos I wanted the Norstrand Big BladeMan, Music Man style pickup, seems like a truly great pickup. Here's a nice demo featuring it, demonstrating both pick, finger play and slap style, as well as using different tone settings:

Word! (more to the whole interview as such than specifically the very headline like headline of the video thumbnail though)

So I stumbled upon this super cheap pickup that from what I could read up from people on the internet should be extremely aggressive and high output, wasn't able to find any YouTube demos though. So anyone with any first experience with that pickup who can give me at least some idea of what I possibly could expect, output and tone wise, if I swapped out the current DiMarzio Model P P pickup installed in my bass, wired directly to it's output jack socket with an Alan Entwistle PBXN Neodymium P pickup? Also anyone with audio clips that actually demos this pickup would be very welcome as well. Now, I actually really like the tone I get from my DiMarzio Model P, but at the low prize of the Entwistle PBXN it is tempting to at least just try it out and see if I possibly would like that even better. One thing I'd definitely wouldn't want is scooped out mids, and I'd like a fair share of high end frequency content to be reproduced by the pickup too, as you might be able to figure out by me having the DiMarzio Model P wired directly to the jack output socket of my bass.

I actually kind of like how it looks, despite usually thinking most whale hump basses are being despicably ugly, and really never would buy any kind of single cut guitar or bass myself. This one is consequently bulgy baroque and grotesquely bloated though, which I guess does give it a more, relatively speaking, harmonic and wholesome look, compared to most other whale hump bass abominations, and that I for some reason can respect and appreciate. Kind of the complementary exact opposite of the aesthetics of pointy instruments like as an example B.C Rich perfected, being equally extreme, but kind of in the exact opposite end of the spectrum.

I can only agree, as I said in an earlier post, I bought the 1969 model of the B-15S amp, used obviously, about 25 years ago, and for the 10 years forward that I owned it all I did to it, beside ignorantly abusing it brutally, driving it at it's absolute max for 2 times 4 hours weekly at band rehearsals, plus the occasional gigs and jams, was having the tubes changed once, and in all those 10 years it never as much as just once threw any fits, or even just subtle hints, whatsoever, of malfunctioning at me in retaliation to my blatantly ignorant barbaric abuse, also might I add that it would still sound ever so sweet on the occasions where it was handled more gently and respectfully in the company of less furiously berserkering jam partners, and I'll even bet with quite high probability that it still plays on just as flawlessly warm and beautiful, or blistering aggressively grunting, depending on how it's current owner use or abuse it, as ever, somewhere out there. Something in me wishes that it still rages on in some furious avantgarde free jazz trio's company, as it once being responsible for driving the lead bass in an equally furious hard hitting, 2 bassists, 1 drummer, 1 guitarist/screamer, hardcore and noise rock influenced math rock band, now receiving it's final blessings in the form of a perpetual exploding firework of flashbacks from passed sonic wars fought as it's veteran award and recognition, ascended as it now has from punk to fine arts torture.

I am one of those people who actually really like most of the modeled modulation, delay and reverb effects that the Zoom products offers, the distortion and amp modeling not so much, and I own a Zoom G1Xon and a MS CDR70 multi effect myself, and have owned the B3, which I kind of regret letting go of, and I'll probably end up buying the newer B1X Four, with allegedly better and more advanced modeling quality of it's effects, though, a bit disappointing, having much lesser twekability than the old effects, in terms of available adjustable parameters and fine tuning of the effect models. In fact prefer i prefer the Zoom effect to the ones featured in the more expensive similar Boss products. They certainly came an amazingly long way since the awful sounding digital multi effects they made around the 90's, that definitely didn't hold up to Boss quality.. But yeah, if I am getting one of the higher quality modeling units I know for sure it isn't going to be the that spanking new G11 monstrum, quite disappointed in fact. I'd rather pay slightly more and get at least as high modeling quality, but with improved tweakability, at least in terms of number of parameters it'll allow you to adjust to fine tune the effects, and much more advanced and expanded routing capabilities ,and get the Line 6 Helix Effect nit instead, and that without having to really pay that noticeable more. Especially because I plan soon to get a preamp that should handle all my amp modeling and cab IR simulations needs, since I won't ever really be needing to be able to swap between 10 or more amps and cabs on the fly at any point, but just need one basic great tone in a box, and then have the rest of my needs for different tone flavors come from my effects and how I chose to route those. I'd even honestly would prefer the new Line 6 POD GO over the Zoom G11, which as far as I can see is both quite similarly priced and quite similar as far as features goes. If the Zoom G11 had been able to compete with the Line 6 Helix products in functionality, but with a price tag similar to the POD GO I'd definitely still be very interested, but as it is now the POD GO just seems like the better alternative for something with similar functionality and similar price, or by just paying slightly more get the advanced functionality of the Helix line with the Helix Stomp, even if admittedly that would be at the price of less on the fly ability to control the unit, and sadly for Zoom I believe that is what most people in need for something like that is also going to think. I don't foresee the G11 it to have much of a chance on the market honestly. Sadly, cause I liked the idea of Zoom offering similar great quality and functionality, but for less the price than their competitors, as they have pretty much manged up until now, starting from their B/G3/5(X) and B/G1(X)on line of multi effects. The G11 though I just can't see offering anything that makes it an attractive alternative to similar products on the market with a much similar price tag, perhaps even on the contrary, all except perhaps for it's, admittedly seemingly relatively superior (for anything just remotely near it's price tag at least), on the fly knob adjustments/foot controlled features capabilities. If they had made it cross compatible with the effects of their older products, made it possible to, via a software editor, download and store whichever effects from Zoom back catalog of digital multi effect pedals, bass as well as guitar focused (at least from all their multi stomp boxes and the newer B/G(X)3/5n and B/G1(X) Four, mulri effects), plus offering a bunch of constantly updated all new improved effect and amp models, and those being just as tweakability as the effects in their multi stomp box series typically are in terms of adjustable parameters, perhaps then even being able to take a small fee for that service, and it having the same advanced routing options as you get with the Line 6 Helix products, but still had been able to keep it at the same kind of price tag as it got now, then I have no doubt it would had a huge potential to become a huge success, I know at least that I wouldn't had any second thoughts about choosing that over any other multi effect on the market. But what do I know, perhaps that would have made it impossible for Zoom to actually earn anything noteworthy on the units, but on the other hand if that is in fact not the case, then I have no doubt they should have taken the risk involved, maybe earning a bit less on each unit, but on the other hand having a real and, I believe, even big chance to potentially making it the dominating multi effect on the whole market, all for except in the relatively small niche of really high end digital multi effects, instead of, as I see it, now having something with very little to offer as an alternative over similar products, with a similar price, and a similar quality, made by other digital multi effect companies with generally better reputation for quality, and, as I see it, something that has a big potential for becoming a huge gigantic flop. As it is now all I can see it really has to offer over it's competitors is just it's, as I mentioned previously, admittedly seemingly relatively superior (for anything just remotely near it's price tag at least), on the fly knob adjustments/foot controlled features capabilities.