Munurmunuh

Stolen from TB

A sliver of me wants to say Mike Glozier.... ....but the rest of me knows what a chastening experience it would be

I would like to hear a BB1200, say, strung with flats and played through a mid-to-late 50s Fender Bassman. (PS As for the Strats and Teles....if only Leo Fender had thought of the humbucker before Gibson patented it )

The Electro Hippies

Operators

I wonder if the Saltire on the 12th fret is a clue?

Nickels to Chromes made me much happier with my TRBX, too

RAB - Racing Blue, says THIS

I remember that video....and remember finding it odd that he didn't specify whether the P and Reverse P were series or parallel, since he gave that info for all the others. In the picked rounds section (6'39") the Reverse gives a slightly tighter more focused sound, which I guess is exactly as you would expect?

How much lighter than the stock tuners on my 424 would ultralites be? And how straightforward a swap would they (not) be?

Did you? 😛

I think I've read that not having the patent on the humbucker was the cause

When you reverse a split pick up either (a) the EA half moves a lot or (b) the DG half moves a lot or (c) both halves move a bit. Which of these is snake oil? They're all going to affect the tone to a degree.

You're right, but it isn't at the right price point for ebony

I was going to ask why the Reverse P has come and gone from the BB, but then thought it perhaps needed it's own thread.... Reverse P - when good? when not?

I was reading about a recent Jackson Dave Ellefson signature model. Mr E said this "I went back in time with the P/J setup. The very first Jackson basses that I got back in the day had that configuration, because I noticed that if you flipped the P pickup to the reverse position it got rid of an annoying low-mid frequency that just doesn’t work in a metal setting, because it gets the bass right down inside the kick drum." Which sounds very much like a good thing; when, then, would a reverse P not be wanted? From what he's saying I'm guessing that when a P is reversed, the two halves swap positions on the string. Is this always the case, or are there instances when one half stays in place and the other half gets moved to the other side of it? (True fact: Dave Ellefson was born and raised in a town called Jackson)

In that photo, its looking quite 1½"-ish, too

I've only just realised where they got the model names from. Ugh, I'm so ashamed. 😳

This makes me feel like I've been failing to pull my weight. Apologises, and please accept this hastily taken photo as a token of my intent to become more diligent in this matter

Someone has to ask.....is it 🔴 ?

The "salmon pink" looks rather more interesting in your photo than in the stock photo! Does it have, as advertised, "an authentic growling tone"? 😊

I wish this approach would be taken to its logical conclusion: if all that is wanted is an easy smooth line, then a 6-string bass tuned in major 3rds would give the same range as a 5-string tuned in 4ths (B-E-A-D-G -> B-D#-G-B-D#-G) and would let the full chromatic range lie under the four fingers without any movement up and down the neck. A two octave range without having to move the hand at all! Can't think why it doesn't catch on....

An SB-1 (I didn't want to send the thread down a G&L sidetrack again!)

Btw, the other day I was complaining about the blend knob on my TRBX being of limited utility. Since then I've read - and again the technical details went miles over my head - that blend knobs work much better on active basses. My opinion had been based solely from using it on passive. And now I think about it, I've noticed that Yamaha have Vol-Blend on active basses (eg BB734, TRBX604) and Vol-Vol on passive (eg BBP34, BB434, TRBX174)