LawrenceH

It's a bit trite but tone is indeed in the mids. Monitors can do a fine job of bass reproduction often using identical drivers to many bass cabs but usually with better crossover/tweeter implementations for a given price. As always though, you get what you pay for. If you want really heavy bass then you need dedicated high-excursion woofers...but look around and most of these are actually designed as PA drivers. Alternatively acres of speaker or a more exotic speaker design will do it! Again, the latter at least is more often seen in PA. Main disadvantage of angled monitors for bass IMO is that they reduce cab internal volume for a given footprint. Often worth it to hear yourself clearly though

[quote name='brensabre79' timestamp='1326895020' post='1503328'] something that disperses sweat would be required on the coarser grades of steel because a cloth won't get into the microscopic nooks and crannies... [/quote] I suspect that's right, which is why I wondered about a solvent perhaps followed by a lubricant like fast fret to fill the holes and help prevent the sweat getting in in the first place. FF definitely leaves the strings coated in something. I guess, if you find strings are helped by boiling/soaking in solvent, then gunk physically impeding the strings plays as big a part as actual corrosion. If you used a coating agent then it'd have to have appropriate viscosity etc not to do this.

[quote name='brensabre79' timestamp='1326880601' post='1503039'] I think for those who have corrosive sweat (like I do) the preference for the more expensive strings is also that they last longer - this is likely because the surface of the steel/nickel is smoother, so less sweat can get itself in there and start the corroding process. [/quote] If corrosion rather than physical deformation is the main factor ageing your strings, doesn't something that coats them (like fast fret? don't know what's in that tbh) help extend their life? Or just wiping them down with isopropyl wipes after playing, rather than waiting for them to corrode before soaking them in it?

Not familiar with Gibson-type stuff but If it sounds good as is, what about potting the pickup?

I still much prefer condensers/back electrets on 'difficult' vocals, particularly female. The extra clarity is very noticeable IME, bizarrely especially through cheaper speakers - I suppose all the distortion is additive. You do get more feedback to start with but this is partly just beacuse the mics are a lot more sensitive, particularly at the high end. You can roll off a lot of treble on a condenser before it becomes problematic, the clarity is maintained better. Don't worry where the EQ is, use your ears (most mics don't give anything like flat responses anyway). Just like dynamics though, there are condensers out there that are much better or worse than others in terms of polar plots/feedback rejection. The main issue I've found is that some desks that don't have a pad will struggle to cope with the hot signal off certain condenser mics.

[quote name='redstriper' timestamp='1326672208' post='1500421'] It's interesting how every Jazz bass sounds different depending on the pick ups and electrics, yet they all still sound like a Jazz bass somehow. [/quote] Yup indeed they do, I'd attribute a lot of that to the characteristic comb-filtering created by the pickup spacing/position.

That's ~1V RMS as opposed to the Crown's 1.4V, a lot better than some...if that's a nominal output level (not maximum) which it implies then as long as the BC1 has some headroom on top of this you should be fine I'd have thought?

[quote name='Ant' timestamp='1326707729' post='1500620'] my preamps offer jack output but would it be as simple as getting jack to XLR instrument cable to go between pre/power amps? [/quote] The basic answer is yes. The complicated answer is that Crown amps have relatively high voltage requirements on the inputs if you want to get the full wattage out. Make sure your pre is powerful enough to drive it adequately, otherwise a different pre or a different amp with more sensitive inputs would be a better choice.

I was surprised to see that there were no reviews of the Model Js already posted on here. There are plenty of reviews out there already, but I thought it might be worth doing one focusing on the wiring/passive electronics side of things. There is a techy bit in the middle for those that like that... I recently installed these in an ash CIJ 75RI with maple fretboard. Previously this bass was ok but despite the alleged US pickups the tone somehow lacked authority across the spectrum, with neither the solid bottom nor the aggressive growl and upper-mid clank of a really good jazz bass. Swapping the originals with some MIM 'vintage' alnicos as used in the HWY1 and 'Classic' series improved things somewhat (I think these are great trad-sounding pickups), but I still felt it was a little lacking compared to the snappy acoustic tone of the bass. Throughout all the changes, the strings remained the same rather ancient (2 years now?) DR Black Beauties. Not the toppiest string to start with and now very very worn. I much prefer old strings when auditioning basses, makes it easier to judge the contribution of the bass/pickups etc. I went for the 'creme' option, the adjustable matte-black pole pieces make this extra retro snazzy, or a horrendous eyesore, depending on your taste. As other users have noted, the large ceramic magnets on the base of these pickups make them stand a good deal taller than alnico equivalents. At first I was worried they wouldn't fit at all, but after removing the Fender pickup foam and replacing this with a thin sliver of the foam the DiMarzios were supplied in (as recommended in the installation instructions) they dropped in just far enough to allow me room to adjust the height to taste. The DiMarzios are split-coil 4-wire pickups, allowing you the option of series or parallel wiring each pickup [i]separately[/i]. This is different from the jazz 'S1 mod' where a [i]pair[/i] of pickups are giving series/parallel wiring between them. I initially chose parallel wiring, and the tone of the bass was far more 'solid' with more bottom end and low-mids in particular. However, I still wasn't completely satisfied as I like that jazz top-end bite, so last week I set about making more mods. Before going any further, here is a link to a very good explanation of how pickups shape tone (mainly focusing on the high end) and how the different electronics options interact with this: [url="http://buildyourguitar.com/resources/lemme/"]http://buildyourguit...esources/lemme/[/url] The take-home messages in relation to this review are: -That [b]pickups have a resonant peak before cut-off[/b], ie they emphasise characteristic frequencies in the upper-mid/treble range. -Pickup inductance determines the frequency/Q of the peak. You can adjust the [b]frequency[/b] [b]downward[/b] by increasing capacitive load or by [b]switching the wiring from parallel to series[/b]. This latter will [b]halve[/b] the resonant frequency of the pickup as well as boost overall output. -Adjusting the resistive load by changing [b]pot values[/b] alters the [b]height[/b] of the peak (Q). DiMarzio's 'standard' wiring, as far as I can tell, is series, and their standard recommended pots are 500k whereas those in my Fender are 250k. My parallel wiring will give a higher peak frequency than the standard but the Fender pots will reduce the peak height. So I decided to install 500k pots to raise the height (not frequency) of the resonant peak, and decided that if I was going to bother I may as well use push-pull (DPDT) volume pots so I could switch each pickup independently between series and parallel. Rather than the fantastically expensive DiMarzio push-pull pots, I used cheaper alpha pots from StewMac in the US (since I was ordering some other bits and bobs anyway). DiMarzio helpfully have lots of wiring diagrams for various configurations, I used this one but altered it so series engaged with the pot out rather than in: [url="http://www.dimarzio.com/sites/default/files/diagrams/pj_2ppdualsndv1t.pdf"]http://www.dimarzio....pdualsndv1t.pdf[/url] Anyway...the most important thing from my perspective is that increasing the pot values to 500k gave me exactly the effect I was after. The treble 'bite' is much more prominent while the low end authority of the bass is preserved. Tbh I was surprised how much of a subjective difference it made, that peculiar effect where the bass just feels easier to play. With both pickups on full I get a classic 70s and 80s-style jazz bass tone - more Larry than Marcus, with tons of character and aggressive enough to cut through a mix when I dig in hard. It doesn't quite have the airy extended top end of the real US Fender Vintage 75 pickups (which I have on another bass) but is very good and sounds like a Fender jazz nonetheless. Soloing each pickup gives very useable versions of the classic JB single-pickup tones. Switching each pickup into series mode, the most obvious effects with both pickups on full is an increase in volume. Compensating for this you can hear the shift in resonant peak, giving a more 'middy' sound with a bit more oomph in the bass. Where it really comes into its own is with each pickup solo'd or combining series/parallel. The neck pickup in series is instant 'Precision', while the bridge has a handy low-end boost making that 'Jaco-esque' sound useable in a wider range of situations at the expense of a little treble. The tone control also has a very obviously different character when the pickups are in series versus parallel. Overall, I think if you bother to install DiMarzios at all it's worth spending the extra at least on 500k pots, ideally on the push-pull variants. You could even use a third on the tone knob either to mimic the Fender s1 mod or give phase-reverse options, though I am happy enough as is. I may at some point try a 1Meg pot on the tone for a further small increase in brightness, but right now this is at last giving me the sounds that I've been after for a very long time. It's extremely versatile, if I had to choose one setting it would be all parallel, everything on full. But I don't have to choose, woo! Playing with combinations of series-parallel/varying volume whilst playing along with various funk, pop etc tracks, I've found it fairly easy to get a tone that's a reasonable match to whatever I'm listening to, even (to an extent) with records that use a Stingray. I am now very happy indeed with these pickups.

Rubber band around the headstock is my cheapskate, bodge suggestion!

[quote name='far0n' timestamp='1326646034' post='1499878'] See now, at 8 ohms each channel only puts out 450W. So I'm not really getting anywhere near the full load. [/quote] 'Only'?! Didn't you say you were running 2 8-ohm cabs, ie 900 watts total? I have a similar PLX2450 for PA work, even into 8 ohms it is enough to shake down walls. The 1300 watts you'd get running the amp at 4 ohm bridged (ie two 8 ohm cabs run in parallel) won't actually make it significantly louder compared to 900 watts (two 8 ohm cabs, one on each channel), especially when speaker limitations/power compression is taken into account. Before looking at new pre-amps do you have access to any mixing desks? Easiest way to check whether it's the amp or the pre that is limiting things is to DI into a desk that outputs around +4dB sensitivity, ie the correct sensitivity to drive your amp, and play through that. Even the cheap little Behringer numbers have enough to juice for your purposes (+/-18V supply on the one in front of me, for example). Problem with a lot of guitar and bass pre-amps/pedals is that they don't operate at 'professional' standard output levels. PA stuff does, so to drive a PA amp properly you need the gear to match it.

[quote name='far0n' timestamp='1326636113' post='1499740'] But I'm finding this isn't loud enough, I'm at least having to turn the rig up full whack. [/quote] 900 watts should normally be more than loud enough for anything, unless you're running tiny cabs, in which case it'll normally be more than enough to fry them! What are you using as a pre-amp to drive this? The QSC has an input sensitivity of 1.23V, it's possibly worth mentioning that a lot of bass pre-amps on the market can't actually supply this adequately. If you don't have an appropriate pre-amp then you are not getting full power out of the QSC.

Not sure of the value I'm afraid but it looks like it has the S1 switch. It's also IMO one of the more desirable models because it has the 4+1 tuner config.

The modern Vox AC4 with quarter watt setting is pretty handy for home use. The 4 watt setting sounds about loud enough for small gigs too - personally, I'd like that when doing sound. Can always mic a cab and get better dispersion to boot.

The CV Squiers are well built, don't worry about where they're made. Though the pickup is a weak spot you can change this at a later date. Personally, if I were a general in charge of an army of bassists, standard issue for new recruits would be a Yamaha, either BB414 or RBX374, and a Roland Cube of some description. The Yamahas are not only fantastic value for money, they are good basses full stop. The Cube amp is more versatile than anything else in that price range. A lot of cheap amps I've played through just destroy the timbre of the bass - worst was an Ashdown Perfect 10, sounded like playing through a duvet. The EB range are miles better - but the Cube has been the best I've tried so far. As per above, secondhand is the smart way.

Good to see the best thread on BC still going strong! [quote name='M-N-Y' timestamp='1326311976' post='1495395'] Not someone you would normally associate with funk,but this track and the album it comes from 'Aliens Ate My Buick' is a blinder. [/quote] I dunno, Dolby was a bit of an 80s UK funk-master on the quiet. Check out Magic's Wand, one of his: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9fjN5lUgYo[/media] Or with his own band, strangely familiar The bass tone in this is to die for IMO [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEjpTxF2-NY[/media]

[quote name='Skezza' timestamp='1326283018' post='1494828'] Im sure you correct but is it ?? skez [/quote] Yup. Look at the spec sheet from a typical 8 ohm bass guitar driver from Eminence, B&C etc. The nominal impedance will be listed as 8 ohms. Re, which is the DC resistance, will be in the T/S specs and typically somewhere between 5 and 7 ohms. This is what you are measuring with your multimeter. The impedance plot on the driver datasheet will be a complex curve with a peak at resonance, falling to a mimimum slightly below 8 ohms around a few hundred Hz, then rising again. The actual measured impedence in a cab will be different again according to cab size and design. Despite all that, the Markbass will be fine driving a pair of these drivers in parallel in a typical vented box.

I do wonder with these roadworns what else is going on. They always seem to be light weight, and with cracking tone. The 'classic' series which is the nominal equivalent is quite good (I have one and have tried others) but not so uniformly incredible...I wonder if they are using select light bodies, or if they are thinner, or something. I've actually wondered about getting a RW just for the tone/playability, and refinishing it!

Just a thought...my default playing style is quite syncopated, I listen to a lot of funk and latin stuff and as a result push a lot of beats by a 16th or so. If I do this with some drummers who don't usually play those styles it f*&^s them RIGHT up. But funk drummers have no problem at all. Could your playing style, or someone else that the drummer is trying to lock with, messing him up? Another suggestion, practising with a click will probably be more effective if you do it in the context of recording....listening back to a recording done to a click track can be pretty brutal and speed up the learning a bit!

Maybe interesting to people wondering how much of a difference these might make... At a NYE gig where I was doing sound, the speakers were sat straight on the stage, which was contributing a lot to a boomy sound. Ringing out the monitors I found corresponding feedback centred around ~300Hz. Sitting the speakers on 2" thick stiff structural foam pads which we'd brought along 'just in case', gave greater than 6dB extra headroom before feedback. The sound tightened up very noticeably too, to the extent that I had to put some low mids back in having previously cut a broad swathe from ~200-600Hz. So mechanical decoupling can definitely be worthwhile, and I thought it's nice to have an example where you can roughly quantify the extent.

[quote name='ead' timestamp='1326288576' post='1494927'] ...assuming friction had been banned [/quote] Nope, wouldn't matter - if the energy from the string resonates the wood without altering the string's vibration then it is a self-amplifying system, so some of that magically generated energy can be used to re-trigger the string every so often to compensate for frictional losses. [quote name='Muzz' timestamp='1326293753' post='1495036'] Now we can all have a nice big row about the relative proportions of the above - I'm going for 50/25/20/5. I'm prepared to negotiate on the first three... [/quote] Depends on the limits you set though. I'd say with certain combinations the difference would be 1% or less (what is the % measuring though? Not straightforward). OTOH I choose to compare 1/2" thick soft pine cut across the grain, so that it's[i] just[/i] stiff/strong enough not to snap when you pluck the string. Versus carbon fibre.

[quote name='gafbass02' timestamp='1326269698' post='1494589'] Brilliant. All so sadly true ! Fbooked [/quote] Me too, thanks to the OP for posting this!

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1326045703' post='1491538'] Acoustics would be different would they not . Do they not need the wood to vibrate to create the sound [/quote] Wood makes a big contribution to the tone of an acoustic instrument, but apparently a skilled luthier 'compensates' for different wood types by using thicker or thinner sheets with more or less bracing to manipulate the variables independently. The most prized wood is sitka spruce, a type of pine, because it has a very high stiffness:weight ratio. [quote name='ead' timestamp='1326285716' post='1494885'] I think that's about right. In terms of physics, an electric bass uses the generator effect by moving a conductor (the string) in a magnetic field (the pickup) to generate an electric current. It is possibly the case that the bridge and the fret are [b]not "fixed points"[/b] so to speak and that [b]vibrations in the wood will cause tiny variations in their relative position[/b]. These variations may manifest themselves as small tonal differences that could be attributed to the construction of the bass. IMHO obviously [/quote] If the body of the instrument is resonant enough that you can hear this significantly when you tap it, then that is resonance that will transfer when the string vibrates. If energy is transferred to the body/neck of the guitar then it affects the string vibration, these are just inescapable physical facts. What matters is whether significant resonances are present in the bandwidth of the string harmonics. Construction could make a difference by increasing the stiffness/altering damping elements as with the acoustic, though generally I think there's less to play with in solid bodied instruments. Laminates will all be pretty stiff and I'd bet that a lot of guitars built by luthiers that use exotic wood combinations will be very stiff, with the pickups/pre dictating the tone more precisely as a result. But a simple maple-neck bolt-on will not be anything like as stiff, and resonances will be lower - more in the range of significant harmonic output. That talkbass thread uses a great thick lump of lumber. It's going to be pretty stiff (and coincidentally it's made of pine - like those acoustic guitar tops!). As I've said before, if wood didn't contribute to tone then dead spots wouldn't happen. Also physics would be wrong and we'd have a form of perpetual motion machine based on plucking a string. Which would be nice.