Prime_BASS

I agree. If you get it right people will notice. It's just that making small advances in sound require big expensive steps. To the OP the thing with ray34s is the quality, I'd played two in a store and one was great, the other had bad frets and even worse setup and just sounded off, so I think the marketing drabble about them all being inspected in the US is BS. But they both had that "toyish" feel you get from something that's made to a budget.

Used to work as a chief in a pub chain. Long days sometime 16 hours a day plays havoc with gigs and rehearsing. Also the usual tiny cuts or burns are a pain. Worst was the cleaning chemicals and constant water softening callouses.

[quote name='Rumble' post='1259485' date='Jun 7 2011, 11:27 AM']I've played 5 strings for many years, but recently got hold of a Fender Jazz 4 string which I'm really growing to love (tone and feel). However, playing in a church, I could do with the low B sometimes so could probably do with getting another 5'er. I've narrowed down my choices to either a Jazz 5 (preferably a Lakland JO or DJ) or a Stingray 5. I should probably also add that I think I'm probably a 'jazz bass' guy at heart, but I like the bite and aggression of the Stingray for a bit of something different. The options and issues are: 1) Keep my jazz 4 and get a Lakland jazz 5 - is there any point in having essentially the same bass, just with an extra string? Doesn't really provide and variety either. 2) Keep the jazz 4 and get a Stingray 5 - introduces options and variety, but might end up playing the Stingray more simply for the extra string at the expense of the jazz tone which I love so much. 3) Sell / trade jazz 4 for a jazz 5 and get a Stingray 4 - in truth I probably prefer the Stingray 4 tone, but this means getting rid of my new love, jazz 4! HELP!![/quote] You do need help, you can't decide weather you prefer one over the other. Thus creating a tear in the space/time continuum causing you to be forever plagued by the terrible desease known as GAS.... Anyways, I vote stingray. But you will need to decide what you actually need and what you prefer, I feel you might end up wasting lots of money.

[quote name='Ou7shined' post='1260325' date='Jun 7 2011, 09:33 PM']The L-2000 doesn't do Stingray... not even close in fact. Even the Sandberg PM or JMs can't nail it as the MM pup is a good bit away from the sweet spot. This is a bit more like it. P neck and MM pickup placement accurate to the mm. [/quote] +1 You could do some saving for a pukka ray, you wont regret it. A used one doesn't cost too much. If not you could go for a used SBMM Ray 34. L-2000 does have that middy and treble bite but it doesn't sound like a ray, and I've played 1 or 2 with quite thin necks.

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1257984' date='Jun 6 2011, 01:00 AM']That's how I used to think of jazz basses Now I love them though I doubt the Big Al will have the same future for me. Every new Big Poppa promotion of a new color or whatever will have a big fanboy rush shortly followed by the eBay flood of those models. Currently on US eBay there are 15 Big Al's, most brand new. If you search for ones that sold there's 3. With EBMM if you can resist the marketing for a little while you can save a bunch of money.[/quote] Most are all from one "store" if you go into any music shop you'll see the same intruments on the wall for months.

I think I could have explained it better. I'm not talking about impersonating a sound as identifiable as Jaco. I'm just simply stating that I prefer to use a bass that with simple playing technique changes can fit into a wide variety of mixes. I dont need a lot of different precise settings to achieve different sounds as that kind of thing doesn't interest me, but things like technique do. Anyway, I fear we have deviated off topic a little, lol. The big al is a great bass and neck is a joy to play, for mahogany it's very light, however it does have a darker sound with deeper lows than my stingray which is quite bright and "bouncy" sounding.

Fair point, however I don't think a lot of people will be disgruntled that I don't use a jazz bass with burpy mids while playing some strange progressive jazz, or that it's not woody and wooly and undefined when I Beatles-come together. I have one setting for "my sound" then I change playing technique to fit in better with certain music styles, which in my opinion gives a dramatic enough change that's noticeable. And doesn't require fiddling. By changing the setting for different sounds you are only limiting your own ability IMO. All be it if I play reggae, and you solo the bass sound there will still be quie a bit of crispy high end but in a mix it would be negligible. But I think we are diverting and getting lost. There is a difference in tweaking to gain a better on stage sound and totally changing the sound to fit in with what ever genres stereotypical sound. I wouldn't say I never change the settings however usually it's a dial down on the bass knob on the bass in particularly boomy rooms.

[quote name='JTUK' post='1256369' date='Jun 4 2011, 12:07 PM']kind of.... but you turn up on a gig and the sound needs a little tweaking, strings have just gone off or whatever and you just don't get the time in sound-check that you wanted and you are searching... Now, the adjustment is never huge..or need be, and you can easily live with what you've got ... but that mid sweep is so powerful so I go centred and middle...the bass is boost only, AFAIR..but it doesn't matter as that is easy anyway. It is the mid sweep that can throw you off...when all hell is breaking loose and you don't have time to twiddle. I know where my default start is all the time... but rooms and stuff change...you really don't want multiple taps all over the place as well. I rate the Retro and that is about as variable as I want it. If I need another sound completely, I'll use a another bass that can do it. I have 3 basic sounds anyway.. finger-funk off the rear pup, full song fingers and slap, and you want to be able to go to all 3..IMO..with a flick of a switch and dial down the presence/tone on a jazz...ie mid solo, if you have to.[/quote] I'd prefer to just one sound that covers all the bases.

[quote name='dave_bass5' post='1255249' date='Jun 3 2011, 11:45 AM']Ive always hated the look of the Jag. My singer had the guitar version for a while last year and i thought it looked like a toy. For some strange reason though im now quite intrigued by them now. other than all those switches and dials, plus the funny shape, they do seem like they would be my ideal bass. Be sure to let us know how it goes Wayne.[/quote] Other than the whole bass it's perfect? It's great for anyone who wants a light weight jazz that looks different from the pack. But now even munk is starting to think the charm is going after playing his Rick live.

Handlaid jewels??? Looks like sequins to me, I didn't know fender hired primary school children.

[quote name='gjones' post='1256083' date='Jun 3 2011, 11:50 PM']Ha, Ha, as I said above, there's no mystery! The original Jazz Basses had this screw because Mr Fender obviously though it was needed to keep the scratchplate down. In the eighties they realised it was unnecessry and from then on the scratchplates had no screw in the middle. In Japan they continued to fit the screw in the middle of the scratchplate and if you buy a reissue US Jazz, for that authentic look, they have a screw in the middle of the scratchplate too. Right! Now that that's settled, let's all go back to arguing whether Musicmans are better than Fenders (it's been a while).[/quote] Musicman hands down..... I've seen this hole on 60's Japanese reissues, but then those come with the earth strip most of the time.

At the minute I'm GASing a lot for a lot of basses, as I'm unemployed and poor I can't really go out and buy anything, the big al remains unused as I use my stingray for the band stuff so ideally I need to hear it's sound when trying stuff out, so it only really gets used when I'm fooling around with crazy funk/jazz fusion crap in my room. I can't quite put my finger on it, I do really like the big al it sounds huge and amazing no matter what I do with it, some really great sweet spot sounds. I think I just prefer the more vintage sound of the stingray and the fatter neck coupled with wider string spacing.

I've just got home from doing a battle of the bands in hucknall Nottingham, and all in all it was a great experience. There was a wide range of talent on show, the sound guys were very professional and efficient (considering the short time scale) This is the best gig I've done in this band in regards to compliments bring received, which means a lot to me as I'm sure we all understand we put a lot of time,effort and energy into our sounds. One guy even said he is going to buy a stingray after he heard me and mine. Overall we came third, and after a sneaky chat with the judge and promoter he told us we lost put of audience votes.... Which I saw coming due to what I've read here, and we only had 7 people in total supporting us, and some of the others had at least 20. "it's not how good you are, it's how many people you bring" is what I remember reading, and its true. The good thing is that the promoter/judge promised us regular gigs which to me is a bonus!! I thought I would share this relatively good experience with you guys considering how many bad stories ive read of them.

Seems strange. You asked him of it's origins etc...

Fair enough. Unlike me then, I'd rather have one set up that can cover all my needs.

Both great but with the rh450 you get alot more do the monies. For example phones out for silent practice and the DI isn't going to be too hot like OTB's.