.. a flabby bottom(neck p/up query)...

[zigmondo]

Am rather in love with my recently-acquired Vintage "Jaco-esque" fretless jazz 4: this is my first single-coil bass and for me the tones are pure gold.
Textures and tones are clearly defined, yet the neck p/up has a bit of a wooly and flabby bottom end..rather like one can sometimes get with the stock neck p/up of a Gibson Les Paul, is the best way I can describe it.
Now, given that I've given the archives here several trawls and researched widely, could anyone recommend a neck p/pup that is in every way a "stock vintage" number but with a tighter and more defined(but still rich and low) bottom end, please? I've of course experimented with pickup height, and adjustments have not rectified matters.
I realise that the "what pickups" enquiries have been very thoroughly dealt with here, so am not asking when I could merely be reading what has been written already! I love the vintage s/c-ness, have no wish to go active or down a stacked 'bucker route: just something a tad more defined in terms of low-end frequencies on the neck.
My "gut-feeling" perhaps suggests Wizard 64s, DM Area Js or yer actual Fenders...yet I confess I have little knowledge of the various flavours of Fender jazz p/ups, along with no knowledge of how the neck p/ups in particular sound in the others I've mentioned.
I'd be grateful for any of your experience or guesswork!

Edited December 1, 2010 by zigmondo

[willyf87]

Alright Shaun!!!! I was the opposite with this bass I wasn't hugely keen on the bridge pick up! I've tried an area J neck pickup in a squier fretless and it was nice and deep with a lot of output, ultra jazzes would probably be too bright for what you want. I've heard good things about wizards so they maybe worth a go?? If I were you though I'd probably change both pickups so you have a matched pair. I was also planning on changing the electronics to 250k pots as they are 500k at the moment, maybe that might define the lows a bit more?? I still have the pots, wire, cap etc all brand new actually if you wanna give them a try chuck me a PM.

[zigmondo]

Eyup Will: that's very useful, thank you. There I was, making the assumption that the pots were 250k...hmm, I may well have to think again. I'd guess that given the p/ups are already sounding on the tastefully dark side, I've something like a .47 cap...but I'll PM you in a mo.
Am I right, everyone, in thinking that "vintage jazz bass" spec is generally 250k pots with .47 cap? I'm at the outer extremities of my understanding and experience here.

[umph]

go for the wizards!

[zigmondo]

Thank you Umph, I may well do...!

Meanwhile, strangeness abounds in the pot department...not a worry, merely odd:

Both my volume pots are 500k: labelled B which of course I understand as linear...and yet they are pleasingly smooth in swell and aural graduation. Oddness being of course that not only are they linear, they actually sound like A/audio/log.
My tone pot is labelled as A(audio/log)and of course apart from the surprise at seeing it here instead of a linear B, it does behave as I'd expect as a tone pot with all the tone roll-off pushed into a small space around 1. The value is obscured by solder, but there is a normal enough darker roll-off with the .047 cap across the tone pot.

So: B pots where there "should" be A's...but sounding like A's; A pots instead of Bs for the tone; and the oddly high value of 500k for at least both vol pots.

In a sense, this is not problematical...but is a mystery as to why the unexpected values have been used.
And I have no idea how or why a pair of 500k linear B's ahould either be there on volume, let alone how on earth they are behaving like A/logs are supposed to aurally.
Yep: if it broke, don't fix it...just curious. If anyone's got anything to throw in the mix here I'm all ears.