LawrenceH

Tonewood definitely matters. Though by how much will depend on how clean your signal chain and how flat the output from the pickups is. Certainly with my basses the acoustic tone of each instrument is reflected in the amplified sound. Of course it's possible to compensate for or exaggerate various aspects of this sound in the pickups/electronics. And pickup position makes a big difference but the bottom line is a pickup can only amplify what's there. One thing that is confusing the issue is the issue of uniformity or lack of it within a particular wood type. Different examples of the same species tree may have different resonant properties, Nonetheless each will have an 'average' sonic signature or characteristic tone even though individual basses may differ from this. I expect different wood species will exhibit differing variability as well - e.g. the vastly different densities of ash. I also suspect that multi-ply construction on the necks will make a big difference to tone, having come to the conclusion that a single piece, all-maple (which is quite resonant acoustically) is what I prefer. One final thing is, although I think tonewood matters I doubt there are any exotic species that could give you a sound you couldn't find within the spectrum of more typical varieties.

[quote name='Phaedrus' post='717191' date='Jan 18 2010, 09:43 PM']I noticed a similar post of yours over on TB. What is it about this vertically stacked format that's preferrable to a single 4x10 cab? I've read about close-coupling PA subs to increase perceived bass, and I think I understand it, but I'm not clear on how 4 vertical 10s will be that much different to 2 pairs of 10s? The idea interests me - I'm currently considering a Peavey 4x10, but with our typical "stage" being pretty tight, the smaller footprint of a 2x10 on its end would be a great advantage over the bigger 4x10. That flies in the face of the ubiquitous 4x10 on top of a 1x15. What gives? I doubt many of those rigs were/are bi-amped. You mean like a bi- or tri-amped PA system, where everything below 100Hz (or whatever) goes to the subs (designed for those frequencies), and everything above goes to the mains (again, designed for [i]those[/i] frequencies)? Should the "perfect" bass be bi-amped? Mark[/quote] Vertical stacking drivers gives better horizontal dispersion and reduced vertical dispersion which is advantageous in typical gig spaces where your audience are spread out in front of you on a roughly flat plane. 4x10s arranged in a square will have a more inconsistent off-axis response than vertical stacked. Plus as mentioned you get the top cab up at head height, which is useful for those of us that don't have ears in our arses. Technically for hi-fi reproduction you shouldn't mix different drivers as each will have a different characteristic group delay causing cancellations and reinforcement at various frequencies. In actual fact in practice it's often not a problem for bass guitar as many of us aren't after a 'hi-fi' sound anyway. The bass guitar's sound is in any case inherently 'artificial'. If you want to have a flat frequency response with multiple cabs then bi- or triamping is good. It also has the advantage that you can get better clean headroom for the high-frequency transients, and active crossovers are typically better than cheap passive designs. The downside is if you're playing close to the cabs you can end up hearing a disproportionate amount of just one of the outputs. Also the added cost/complexity of the set-up. Personally I don't think it's worth it in most cases for bass, though obviously for PA systems it's a different story.

[quote name='Phaedrus' post='716003' date='Jan 17 2010, 08:56 PM']Thing is, if they're moving from 100w valve power & 4x12s to under 50w and 1x12, a fair question to me would be "then why are you moving to 450w & 4x10s?" I think know the answers: 1. Valve power is very different to solid-state power. 2. Although low frequencies are less directional than higher frequencies, they don't travel as well as them, so as the frequencies being amplified go lower, the power required to do the job has to increase. Witness the common PA practice of 2/3 of a system's power going to the subs and 1/3 going to the mains - that's what we're doing: 3000w to four 1x18" subs and 1500w going to the two 2x15" mains. 3. The footprint of the TVX410 isn't hugely bigger than a 1x12 guitar combo. If you guys can add anything that I've left out, please do. On the stage cloth, where do I go to read more? Sounds interesting. Mark[/quote] The main reason is just that bass requires more power to reach the same perceived volume level! I'm off to bed so won't elaborate now, but that's just that and way more important than 'valve v ss'. Re this and lots more (e.g. absorption coefficients of different materials), I think the Yamaha sound reinforcement handbook is a good starting point if you're serious about understanding how to get a good sound without going crazy into the physics. Well worth getting hold of a copy.

[quote name='Phaedrus' post='715357' date='Jan 17 2010, 12:40 AM']On the points in bold italics - I may be misunderstanding you here, but is that just a statement, or are you perceiveing from my posts that it's my intent to "just keep adding more and more volume from different sources to balance things out"? The whole crux of this thread is that I want to [i]lower[/i] our on-stage volume, not [i]raise[/i] it. No deficiencies - they both just like to play loud. IMO, this pretty commom with some guys: when you start playing as a kid, you typically have crap cheap gear, and you aspire to getting what your heroes use (till you realise the cost), even if it's unsuitable for your application. You don't even consider that you'll be availing of PA support, so you play louder and use louder gear so you can be heard. It's basically down to you to make sure your amp is at the best level. And that sticks and persists into later projects. I agree about bass getting a more powerful amp - LF saps more amp power than HF. Mark[/quote] No I really just meant the first post implied this to me and made me giggle - since in it you are asking what amp you need to match the band, but also say you won't ask the guitarist to downsize, yet you don't want guitar amp to dominate FoH! Other posters had talked about reducing the volume and you'd taken that on board. Implementing it is the tricky bit especially if you have to convince people to change the way they approach something, I was trying to make clear that it would be absolutely necessary they do this to to achieve what you're after. The number of guitarists who harp on about the tiny nuances of their tone as if that mattered more than the fact they're so loud that the mix is screwed and people's ears are shutting down! Grrrr Regarding hearing damage...anyone who has played drums or guitar loudly without protection for an extended period (i.e. several years) will have hearing deficiencies. It is inescapable, the 'safe' threshold limits are easily exceeded by these instruments and will likely occur at the highest frequencies first and those where there's a real load of energy they've been exposed to. This hearing loss typically first manifest noticeably as difficulty deciphering multiple noise sources, e.g. a particular person's talking against a background of other conversations. Worryingly, it's only later on when the damage becomes more severe that a standard hearing test will pick it up. These tests rely on single tones (which limits their diagnostic sensitivity) and top out at 8kHz, whereas theoretical human limit is average 20kHz at least for children and adults who REALLY look after their ears. Because the loss is gradual it's not noticeable to the individual in question at the early stages either, but it will be there. I played bass for 2 years or so in a weekly jam house band. We were playing mainly funk and jazz, not loud at all compared to typical pub-rockers (I kept up fine with 130w SS 1x12") and my hearing is now a couple of dB down on where it used to be at the highest frequencies. I don't notice it day-to-day but it's there. I now have moulded ear plugs and to be honest they're not ideal but there's not much more you can do sadly. If you have the possibility of using hung stage-cloth like I suggested, then seriously give it a go - it is really good for solving or at least minimising a lot of common problems with bad acoustics that otherwise screw gigs right up. It's a bit alien to our normal way of thinking which seems to like buying exciting new electronic toys, but in many cases it's actually the single most effective thing you can do to correct the sound of a band and at a couple of hundred quid or so it's miles cheaper than most alternatives too. It's especially great for taking some of the crazy killer edge of cymbals and snares, there is so much early reflection from these in a typical small room and getting rid of it improves perception of mix clarity no end. You find things have to be up less loud in the monitoring which also contributes to improved FoH.

[quote name='mikebass78' post='715771' date='Jan 17 2010, 04:28 PM']bump, getting worried about it now[/quote] I am an ignorant buffoon compared to many people here, but this sounds like it might be a capacitor failure somewhere? Since it's affecting the input level monitoring it's almost certainly in the preamp stage, possibly in the circuitry that feeds the input level lights themselves. Almost certainly repairable by someone who knows what they're doing. But that's not me sadly!

Hi there, I've just had a tape measure on my Jap 75 reissue with 5 screws. The distance from the outer screw centres to the middle screw centre is 35 mm. Hope that helps Lawrence

I have to say I laughed out loud when I read the first post in this thread. You want a well-balanced tone, without dominant guitars, and you want a good stage sound, without bleed into FoH, and you're using 4x12" guitar cabs with a loud drummer and you're gigging in pubs...you want the moon on a stick! Or else a magic box which sucks sound out of the air... Even if you're playing awkward, long rooms full of obstructions then a better set-up would be to use delay lines or an array. Seriously, you can't just keep adding more and more volume from different sources to balance things out. People's ears just start shutting down at a certain threshold, the more sound you add the worse it gets. Less volume and you will hear yourselves better and your ear damage will also be less severe. If, as seems likely given the kit they're using, some band members already have deficiency in their hearing, then they need to get used to using in ears. Too late to save their hearing but it'll save everyone else's and you'll get a better sound. Ironically the one rig that I consider worth having a bit more power for is the bass (and maybe kick drum monitor) simply because those frequencies require such a lot more power and physical space to produce. With your set-up I'd say you'd have trouble getting enough bottom end even with a 500w 4x10", but that would be the least of the band's problems. If all else fails in terms of persuasion, then if you can lug around some heavy stage cloth and hang it in loose folds behind the drummer it will help absorb a lot of the early reflections which will make things significantly less dreadful. For the guitarists, powersoaks on the amps so they can crank them to get the tone. If they just want the sheer volume, then in ears again are the only way they can have this without absolutely ruining front of house sound at 9 out of 10 gigs. As an aside I just can't understand drummers with bad technique (and if they can't play quietly they don't have good technique) who then buy loud drums, WHY??? You sit RIGHT NEXT TO THEM when you're playing them, how loud do you think they need to be?! I sometimes wonder if they understand the concept of the microphone-amplifier-loudspeaker system.

[quote name='Musicman20' post='714948' date='Jan 16 2010, 04:00 PM']Thanks for all the info guys. Im thinking MAYBE a Spector...but I dont know what their string spacing and necks are like. [/quote] For a Fender vintage jazz tone? I'd have thought a Fender jazz might do that better...

+1 to the S1 switch. Reversible, simple, cheap, awesome. Do you mind modding the bass? I put Nordy Big Singles in my Ibanez and the bottom off them is very solid indeed with a lot of definition. You could go for the fat stacks, but you'd have to route larger cavities. Otherwise given the shape of J-bass pups, you probably want noiseless with overwinding.

[quote name='BassBunny' post='712841' date='Jan 14 2010, 06:16 PM']That's interesting. the SB 300 series Bass I bought last week has now turned out to be an SB405. I only found out when doing a Clean Up/Set-Up/Re String and needed to shim the neck. When I detached it there is a Lot Number and SB405 stamped in the neck pocket. I guess that is the definative way to identify the model, take the neck off. I will have a look for the switch, but I am going to have to replace the pre-amp, (yes I know it's heresy, but I will keep the original in case i ever decide to sell. Very unlikely). The Bass/Treble controls do very little and when panned to the rear pick-up, there is very little output. I suspected it might be a pick-up problem so to attampt to prove it i metered them and they are identical. I then swopped the pick-up wires around on the Blend board and it behaves in exactly the same way, ie the blend seems to have a mind of it's own. Anyway before I remove it, i will try and figure out what it does. Is there any way you could take a picture of all the connections on the board with the serial number? Mine has definately had some "re-wiring" and that may explain the problems i am experiencing. The other bonus is a beautiful Brass Nut. Not sure if that is normal.[/quote] As I think I mentioned before, there is a little trim pot on the pre-amp which solved exactly this problem for me

Each to their own, but the body and scratchplate look like they were cut out by a five-year-old using special child-friendly plastic scissors. Fine if that's your look though.

[quote name='OutToPlayJazz' post='694683' date='Dec 28 2009, 08:49 AM']I had one when they first came out. As Alex mentioned, the stock pickups aren't up to a deal, but that's an easy one to solve. The newer Classic Vibe Jazz is a much better proposition all round, though. It has tons of output & the quality is up there with the best.[/quote] Do the pickups make it sound more like a jazz though? Because acoustically, the one I tried just didn't have the warmth of the VMJ, which in the case of the latter definitely translated to the plugged-in tone. (Didn't get to try the CV plugged in) [quote]Art Digital MPA tube pre-amp[/quote] This will make a noticeable difference

[quote name='umph' post='694528' date='Dec 27 2009, 09:14 PM']you had a v6 for your kick drum rig? wow[/quote] Evidently so...I had to look up the amp because it was a fair while back but the v6 looks about right. It was the bass rig as well, of course, and we just whacked the kick through it as an experiment to see if we could get a bit more oomph. But I can confidently say that headroom was NOT an issue with that amp! The sound was, in technical parlance, phat.

I am going to disagree with everyone here and say it is sometimes worth putting the bass drum through the bass rig. We used to do this with a 4x12" 300w valve Trace Elliot way back in my first band. Punched better than any PA I've tried that didn't have separate subs, and better than many smaller subs too. We didn't try and exaggerate the click of the beater or anything but we got a solid, well-damped thump that really helped lay a groove. You might try putting a bit of the LOW end of the snare through as well, it's surprising how important sub-500Hz region can be for giving punch in certain styles. It doesn't need much, or it indeed starts to have undesirable effects. But in my experience putting drums through inadequate PA tops will compromise vocals much more than you'll compromise bass in this method. 450w is a decent amount of headroom to be working with. Plus if you and the drummer are tight, having the kick from the same sound source really helps create a solid sound, almost like the beat of the kick is the beginning of your bass note. And yes, before I get piled into for saying this, I HAVE done a fair bit of live sound with a fair few different small and medium systems, inc off the top of my head JBL, EV, Nexo, Martin Audio, RCF etc so although I'm by no means a pro I am at least able to make a meaningful comparison.

[quote name='jezzaboy' post='694458' date='Dec 27 2009, 07:06 PM']I want a Jazz. Don`t bloomin need one but the yearning is there. I`ve had a few Mexican ones and while they are okay, I always fancied a 75 re-issue. Now, not having the spondoolies for one, I was thinking of getting one of the Squires (not much differance eh?). I just like the natural finish. Could someone whose got one tell me what it`s like? Is it gigable the way it is? If I keep it for a while I might upgrade it. Cheers for any info. Jez[/quote] Tried one in Mansons the other day...way better than the Classic Vibe acoustically but the pickups are a little lo-fi sounding, lacking bandwidth. Frets were not very well dressed and the neck was a bit chipped on the binding I'd say they're very decent if you can choose a good one, can spend the extra to swap out the pickups and can put up with the extra weight...they're not light.

[quote name='Paul S' post='692374' date='Dec 23 2009, 03:02 PM']I was secretly hoping for a Squier of some sort but every single one (I tried about 6 of various sorts) fell short of the mark compared to a USA jazz or, what I ended up with, my MIJ Jaguar. Since then I have acquired a Squier VMJ fretless and it is really good... but still not as good as the Jag. But then it is a lot cheaper.[/quote] I'm not really getting the Squier CV love - they look pretty cool, but the two I've tried in shops have been badly set up and sounded rubbish acoustically compared to a US or the Mex Classic 70s jazz. I know that's not the whole story but I do think when looking for a classic jazz bass sound the wood is an important contributor, and basswood or agathis don't really do it. I think these are alright basses but no better than budget offerings from Yamaha, Ibanez etc. The VM 70s, though, sounded much more like it. Tone plugged in was nice and growly but rather restricted in bandwidth, so my conclusion was that with a pickup upgrade it could be a very good sounding bass. However, again I tried two and both suffered nasty fret buzz and had poor finishing on the necks, though the bookmatching on the body was lovely. If you can live with the weight (heavy) and find one with a decent neck, then these are the most 'jazzy' sounding budget basses I've heard - and therefore IMO the best! *But not as good as a US.

[quote name='bigfatbass' post='681635' date='Dec 11 2009, 07:33 PM']I am sure he has. I am not sure he has played an Ampeg SVT/8x10 in real life Real life has a habit of mucking up computer models and measurements in acoustically neutral environments. I always gig with 2 basses, 3 if I want to make a pig of myself (fretless, flats, halfs). They all have similar outputs but at real gigs one will be louder than the other, but not always the same one. You cant model that ![/quote] But if you take that exact argument and apply it to cabs, rather than basses, then you end up saying that you can't make a meaningful comparison between two cabs that isn't specific to a given context. That's not really very useful and it's clearly not true in the majority of cases. I think one of the problems in discussions of these types is the issue of vocabulary. 'Volume' means different things to different people. Perceived volume, which differs depending on so many factors - an individual's hearing across the frequency range, whether a sound is heard in isolation or with others, distortion etc etc. Then there's more easily measurable values like SPL which behave consistently and predictably, and THAT's what an engineer like Alex is talking about. The idea that all this stuff is theoretical is ignoring the fact that published driver parameters are derived from measurement. Assuming a cab is sufficiently stiff and not an awful shape then the cab only really contributes based on it's volume and the port tuning, which govern low frequency extension. And that is accurately predictable. Perceived loudness variations above a couple of hundred Hz or so are going to depend on the driver frequency response curve (e.g. peaks or troughs in key regions for bass guitar) and the dispersion characteristics which as far as I understand are largely governed by the cone diameter and number/spacing arrangement of cones. The dispersion characteristics of e.g. an 8x10 are going to be quite different from a 2x12. In a way that will cause big differences in perceived volume in different environments, but it is STILL something that can be modelled - this is what loudspeaker systems designers for large PA work do all the time. Btw I see where Alex says he hasn't gigged an SVT/8x10 on the post linked by EBS. But I'm pretty sure he'll have heard them along with most people who've been to a gig ever! And probably played them, since old forum posts indicate he seemed to spend ages obsessively searching for the Ultimate cab before getting narked off and building one! The real issue with BF cabs is going to be whether the tone of the Eminence drivers suits a particular bass voicing.

[quote name='bigfatbass' post='679729' date='Dec 9 2009, 11:29 PM']Dont you mean: The vast majority of Compact owners are using a single cab as with the right amp my cab modelling software predicts it'll play as loud as most 4x10"s and 2x12"s. My cab modelling software predicts a pair will be SVT/810 loud.[/quote] I'd have thought Mr Claber has built enough compacts by now to have an idea of how loud they'll go in real life. I've ordered a Deltalite II, bought some 12mm poplar ply and am going to have a go at a BFM Jack 110 over the Christmas period. Ideally I'll also try the driver in a conventional ported box for comparison. I'll let people know how it performs.

[quote name='Néal Zheimer' post='679993' date='Dec 10 2009, 10:32 AM']I didn't take it for rehearsal because the action is REALLY low it's buzzing way too much for me and I need to get used to the extra string. The jack outlet cracks a little when the jack moves (I don't know what I can do about it) and I have yet to found what all the pots are for... If someone could give me a clue about the function of the pots (I think I found the volume ), it would be greatly appreciated.[/quote] Hi Neal, Lovely looking bass! I have an SB330. The pots on that from L-R as you look down at the bass when playing are volume, pickup balance, bass, treble - I guess yours is the same. I had to replace the jack socket on mine when I bought it (secondhand) as the connection was intermittent, it is a barrel-type unit where all the connections are contained. Doesn't cost too much. Some contact cleaner might do the job for you though.

I started off with a Yamaha RB170, as bog-standard as you can get. It was a GREAT bass to learn on, with a P/J pickup combination that gives you a good basic understanding of 'trad' bass tones. I've never played a yamaha that felt bad, in my opinion these or the Ibanez ranges are the safest options for beginners. I tried some Squiers the other day and was seriously unimpressed with the normal range, though the Vintage Modified sounded good. Not as nicely finished on the neck as a Yamaha though and twice the price. I wouldn't spend any more than you need to on a first bass, so you can get to grips with the instrument and learn more about what you're after before sinking £300 plus into something you may find doesn't match your developing tastes. My view on active v passive: at the LOW end of the market, I find I feel more 'connected' to my instrument with a passive, it seems to respond more to my fingers where a lot of cheap pre-amps choke the sound. This helps develop good technique where your fingers do the work rather than dialling in a tone with EQ and is a good thing for the future. Once you know how to control your tone with your fingers, THEN active basses become useful. Good luck

[quote name='parker_muse' post='674526' date='Dec 4 2009, 09:48 PM']They're 12.99 big ones, i can't really tell you more then that! So is it probably the headphones not the amp?[/quote] Hi parker_muse Short answer: it is probably both the headphones and the amp, but don't worry, it's not a fault. Long answer: I don't know if you saw my reply to this in the other superfly thread. But if you are trying to drive headphones from a line-level output that is not designed to double as a headphone amp then you can expect clipping. The line-out is designed to drive a line-level desk input, which will typically 'show' a very high impedance to the line-out on your amp in comparison to a pair of headphones. Looking at the manual, your superfly has an output impedance of 600ohms. A typical desk input is about 10-50 thousand ohms. Typical headphone impedances are 150 ohms or less. Broadly speaking, driving a low impedance input with a higher impedance output results in signal degradation. This is what is likely happening here. Apart from the sound quality I would also be wary of doing this in case it put too much stress on the superfly and you end up knackering the line out (someone else correct me if in practice this is not going to be a problem?). The other aspect is the headphones. It is really difficulty to get cheap headphones that will accurately reproduce the raw sound of a bass guitar at a high level without distorting/generally sounding horrible. You'd need to run the bass through EQ and a compressor to get a more controlled signal level like that you hear on a decent recording. A cheap headphone amp is probably the solution for you, Behringer do one that runs off a line out for about £25 or you could get one that has a dedicated guitar input, though you'd probably want to avoid those which have amp modelling/distortion built in. Alternatively if you have a hi-fi with a spare input (tape, CD or aux) then just buy a cable that connects the line-out of your superfly to that and use the headphone out from the hi-fi. If you do this and it still sounds crap, that is the point at which new headphones with better bass handling become necessary. You're probably looking at £50 there. Hope that helps! Lawrence

My ibby sr500 sounds very thick - have had to work hard to get away from that, even with single coils it has a monstrous lower midrange! Much 'fatter' than a Fender. I think it's the wood combinations used. Consider trying some basses made of that asian mahogany as it seems to have the tone you're after. Lots of the Jap actives have a thicker lower-mid punch than the trad Fender tones.

[quote name='parker_muse' post='674412' date='Dec 4 2009, 06:17 PM']I've just taken delivery of a superfly too, infact my laptop is on it now as i type! I'm playing through headphones from the line out and it's clipping quite a bit - is this normal? i'm a total noob with amps i'm afraid.[/quote] Unless a line-out is designed to double as a headphone out then this is normal - it's a different signal level/impedance.

[quote name='xverminate2' post='674372' date='Dec 4 2009, 05:38 PM']Many thanks for this help pete, I tend to use only 3 of my collection , Fender PB OR Jazz + Status s1, It's the status I'm using tonight. Any custom settings would be of help Thinking about the editing, It seems pointless to have the laptop to edit when it's only benifit is to alter the para and comp?I would eq to the gig, Am I right Greg[/quote] I don't have the Superfly but a 7-band should be pretty handy on its own. I'd say parametrics can be really useful for a particular bass/amp/cab combo regardless of room, e.g. I nearly always like a broad boost centred around 2.5k on my Nordstrand-fitted Ibanez to bring out the single coil tone, and often a particular cab will boom at a characteristic frequency that will be more or less extreme depending on the room. I would expect that you could make 3 separate presets, each with a couple of bands devoted to the bass' raw tone, another one or two for particular cab combinations and spread the rest around a la a conventional 3-way EQ.