JTUK

If they did that I would expect someone to have flagged it as a power soak, tbh. I recently got mine out of storage and found I liked it a lot.after I crossed ref'd it with my current choice I even though about putting the TH in front of the new amp...but decided this was silly overkill and and i just worked through the bass and EQ again. This was caused by a new bass addition to the 'quiver' and it is asking quite a few different questions now.. Sometimes it is good to have to rethink a whole lot of stuff... rather than stay comfy..? I also demo'd the amp for someone else and found this new 'perspective' useful as I had to find what 'they' wanted as oppsoed to knowing what I wanted. I still think they are very good amps at their pricepoint tho... and you need to spend quite a bit more to see much better returns..

It depends if you want the sound to be there..or 'there'. A low rumble that sits underneath is easy to achieve.. a distinct and clean sound is something different. There is a whole lot more to sound than whatever stat you care to quote and measure by, IMO.

[quote name='LewisK1975' timestamp='1452514683' post='2950612'] ^This - There's always loads of debate on youtube comments for these isolated bass tracks. Quote 'Thats not Steve Harris / Geddy / etc etc, he would never be that sloppy' - People always forget that they're listening to the bass track in isolation, and that would never happen during the recording process.. [/quote] Actually, I can believe that..as both have hard aggressive styles.which isn't likely to be the cleanest.. Everyone has run the gauntlet of an engr isolating your tracks whereby you can sound crap. It depends how much you are indulged.. It they are paying, they expect the signal to be good and clean as it saves on time later...(and their money) if you are paying, it is more money to them... If you are seriously paying, then of course, they'll wipe your backside and say 'yes sir'.. It depends who you can afford to upset...

I don't think it REALLY matters...the track is great and he will have had to learn it live... Whether he triple tracked it ...at any point (which I think they favoured or ran a sequence under it -as L42 would do) is just tricks of the trade... The isolation mix is scrappy but the finished mix..which is what it is alway about, really drives the track. In that live track example... when John Taylor signs off the bass riff before the chorus..he hits it so hard the bass track goes out of tune..??? If you aren't sure you have the energy/technique to do that all the way thru the track..you might have a little insurance with backup parts... My feeling is that the track is easy with pick and less so than fingers...other than that, it is what it is.

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1452450999' post='2950064'] Not trying to be funny, but are you really going to save that much time? I don't find threading the strings through a hole in the bridge particularly time-consuming when stringing a bass, it's the winding the strings on to the tuner posts, fettling the saddles and getting the bass in tune! Or have I missed something again? [/quote] It isn't..for a new set of strings but if you put cleaned up strings on then it is a pita threading coiled strings..so it is definitely a factor for me. I'm looking at a swap out for a Am deluxe bridge and Hipshot look the best bet in that regard. I like ABM but I don't want to re-drill.

That track from that time has a sequence behind it.

Another thing that was prevalent if recording at that time was that engrs liked the cleanest track and this meant they wanted pick parts if they could get them. John Taylor never had a classic slap style then either so the pulls could have been off a pick part. Whether DD had the 'clout' at that time or experience to go against a call/suggestion to play it with a pick might have been a factor. I guess we will never know...

I've got John East's in Jazz basses but I want something different and my choice...atm....are between Audere and Aguilar. The plate will be 4 knob and side jack thru the body and I'll want a mid control plus a passive option. Suggestions for a simple swap that is reversible if need be so the Retro config but OB3 or JZ3D are are in my thinking. If you have an alternative, please describe the sound palate if poss. TIA

[quote name='Cosmo Valdemar' timestamp='1452366242' post='2949343'] Sounds like fingers to me. [/quote] I don't think he'd have been able to play that line with fingers at the time. It is an easier pick line and also the sound. I'd be very surprised if the core part was fingers at the recording. It is pretty scrappy in places as it is, but it isn't an easy line either. He may play it fingers now to a track tho.

Good talent to have..and maybe this has saved you having to learn alternatives ways...but I can see this adding time to the project myself, but if yoiu have time, then that is less a problem. I value being able to play a track to an audience and it sound seemless having never heard it before as very valuable too tho.

Agree, and the advantage of this place is that we are doing our dirty washing benind closed doors, so to speak which is one reason why you (I) tend to be a bit blunt. It is not as though no one can learn anything new or get another spin but after 40 years or so, you'd hope you've picked up stuff and can pass it on. I've far more time for people who ask questions, log it, and weigh it up with what they have accumulated ..not assuming that all advice is good advice or applicable, rather than remain clueless and need to take photos of the amp settings in order to be able to get sound from it... and be totally lost with out that aid which is something that really shows that that person doesn't understand how his kit works....even after 5-6 of owning that kit.. But hey..people use what they use they way they use it...and are 'judged' on that.

I made mine passive as I got Kent Armstrrong to make me a custom wind with coil taps. I'd just tired of the MM sound but liked the bass itself. I kept all the old bits for when I sold it. Might be the same for a Fender as rate the pickups but not the pre amp. So interested in pre amp options

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1452345661' post='2949081'] I sold my Dynacord because I needed a louder rig. I sold the Boogie because of weight related injury. So in my experience there are valid reasons for selling the best gear you've ever owned. [/quote] Not for me...yet. But I do have two rigs to cater for all my needs so I'm not looking to carry larger cabs up a flight of stairs... but if I thought the gig warranted it I would. It wouldn't be a massive obstacle.. but sure I'd spec the gig before deciding. What makes is a best rig..?? carry..? weight..? Not for me. They are considerations, that is all. The best rig is the best rig soundwise which includes tone and volume.requirements

The only thing I'd try and do is keep the EQ backed off. Lozz suggests bring in the TnB which might work..you'll have to play around but my thinking is not to try and equalise the sound with another opposite equalistion. I probably haven't explained that very well..but the way to get into all sorts of trouble EQ is to blot out a tone charateristic with another.. This is why people like to start from flat. (whatever that is on the amp) as then you are tuning the sound with sutble tweaks.. as opposed to..in an extreme example, turning up the mids..not liking them and drowning them out with bass. Or, running onboard EQ contrary to your amp sound.. This is a sure way to confuse and get in all sorts of trouble soundwise. IMO. Also, when I'm trying a new sound.. the changes I make might evolve over a few weeks... so little and often, in my case.

[quote name='Beer of the Bass' timestamp='1452287183' post='2948631'] I would feel a little cheeky trying to build a straight rip-off of a currently available product from a small company, and even more so documenting it publicly, but on the other hand looking at what they do and taking some hints from it seems OK to me. It's quite possible that some of my guesses would be wrong anyway! So, more work-alike than clone is what I'm going for. Mine will almost certainly be a little heavier as I'm using birch and not poplar, but it's a small 1x12" so they won't be outrageously heavy. [/quote] Yes, see the point and you're building your own anyway, so you're going to step on someones toes.. I assume you can keep internal Dims...which the chassis dictates to a degree anyway and just increase the lenght, height etc and compensate elsewhere. I'm not sure what the 'trick' is... maybe it is a very happy accident to arrive at the sound of these boxes in quite the way they do, but to my mind, they have a very agreeable mid without it is being harsh in anyway. On a popular theme and generally, NEO's do this but it is a harsher mid to my ears and the bottom is 'fake' so all round the sound is plastic. If you tune out the mid, you are left with too much bass which takes away the character, IMO. I'm sure we've had these debates elsewhere but this is why I always think of NEO as a bit 'meh' Now, of course, you don't have to worry about NEO being the solution to weight issues as the cab we are talking about is lighter anyway than any NEO cab I know of the same chassis size. I haven't found the downside there yet.

[quote name='bassman7755' timestamp='1452287576' post='2948633'] So here as with many of the discussions you contribute to, your starting assumption is that people with problem are crap players and/or don't know what they are doing with their gear. Now while that may even be true in some cases, throwing around these casual dismissals of everyone else's ability doesn't make for a particular constructive and useful discussion. [/quote] I was asked for my take on it. I tried to back off of a lot of what I really would have to say, but yes, you are right. I don't know the players in question here but these comments are formed because I see and hear this all the time... so it may be reasonable to assume it applies here sometimes. It may or may not, but at least I'm commenting on a real situation. In any number of cases, I'll see locally limitations that we all have to some degree and sound and technique is something that I can generally analyse pretty acutely. Is that a good or bad thing..?? well, I'm harder on myself that I am on others.

This is a problem with many many amps. They don't amp up well...which means (IMO) that they can't retain the character as you turn the volume up. Aguilar ToneHammers adjust very well when you turn them up, for example, but a lot of amps lose it. My general feeling is that this is more prevalent on cheaper amps as it is likely a design/pricepoint issue. What also doesn't help... IME.. is unresponsive strings..altho for others, this is a core sound. For me, I try and make the signal as clean as possible, knowing that at some point in the chain, that is likely to 'degrade' ... The good things seems to be that you get the spound you want/like ..so all you have to do is get the amp to amplify it better. Maybe a better amp with do this... or start with the low volume sound, and as you turn up.. back off the EQ controls a tad.. You might have to adjust all of them.. depending how the amps 'controls' increases in volumes with regards to the rest of the pots

[quote name='lo-freq' timestamp='1452287731' post='2948635'] I think Jim Bergantino was responding to a genuine market demand (lightness of the CN's combined with the sonic depth of the HD's). I haven't heard the cabs, so I can't comment on how well he has succeeded. In general, technology progresses - if businesses don't progress as well, they might find themselves out of a client base. [/quote] He probably is... but it says something about wanting to make the NEO sound more like a ceramic. Many have tried and it doesn't work..IMO. I've always had problems with the 'NEO' sound but others don't hear it..or like what they've got. My thinking is that this is quite an 'ackowledgent' from one of the premier cab makers out there which is what I suggested at the top of the thread.

I've just bought a new bass (SH) and I knew it wasn't an immediate bass but I liked the sound and thought I could work with setting it up. It's been about 2 weeks now and I've played it every day but the sound is now too whimsical. I think the pre amp is very average, the pickups decent and the bridge not to my liking I'm not going to 'mod' it but might replace a few parts and be able to retro fit the original parts back. The problem is it is not a patch on my current basses,,, and I kind of knew that would be the case anyway. Unsure what to do atm.. but the first thing is probably to swap out the bridge for a Hipshot top loaded bidge. Also research pre amps. I have two East's already so would like to try something different. I've given is a basic set-up but need to work on it more... Current thinking is to keep it until my commision comes off..

Quite a few of those examples would have disqualified it as best ever

Observation of a few gigs I've seen recently.. Bass players who can busk and bass players who can't. The vast majority weren't able to in the cross section I'm referring to. Many will learn the song exactly and do a decent job.. but fall apart when they have to create lines or fills on the fly. So these guys can only take gigs that they know...and have rehearsed up but there is no plan B which makes the whole thing fraught.

I still own it...if it was the best ever, why would I have sold it?

I never thought it was him at that time but hearing the line in isolation which is played with a plectrum, I think he'd have been able to that. Fingers, ..no..!!

I think you could do a lot worse..... a LOT worse, IMO. I would rip the box myself but I doubt you'll get it as light ...but anyway the design rip is a tone monster, IMO, and I think I've heard most of its competition.

[quote name='lo-freq' timestamp='1452237051' post='2947840'] The HDN cabs are Neo's. [/quote] Yep, but the CN has been superceded within about 2 years..?