Show your Wals... Appreciation Thread

[barend]

Hi,

I have had 4 Wals. Two fretted Mk1's and two fretless Pro's with one bridge pickup. Still own one Mk1 and one fretless Pro. The sound is almost the same as the bridge pickup of an Mk1, but with a little more bottom. With the little switch you can have more bottom but it will also get more muddy. Not sure though what that switch actualy does electronically. I never use the little switch and prefer the normal sound. The bass has the typical Wal sound. And I like the simplicity. Just one volume and one treble knob. You never have to dial in the right tone (like on an Mk1) it's already there.
Here is a clip of me playing it. There are more clips if you go to my youtube channel. Hope this helps:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kw0ltIsRvI[/media]

Edited October 2, 2012 by barend

[mikeswals]

Thanks, that helps.
Yeah I've been listening to all of your youtube videos as well as Wombatboter's videos.

[oli@bass]

[quote name='barend' timestamp='1349214783' post='1823556']
Here is a clip of me playing it. There are more clips if you go to my youtube channel. Hope this helps:
[/quote]

Way cool, great groovy fretless playing and tone to die for. Thanks!

BTW, Mike, I'm also digging the tone in Wombatboter's video where he sits on the sofa playing a Mk1 fretless ... that took a part in convincing me that I need a fretless Wal

[barend]

Thanks. Maybe this will help you even more. 1,5 year ago I made a Wal Mk1 and Pro comparison video. I wasn't too happy with the playing so I didn't put it online. Was watching it today after reading this topic and thought 'what the hell just put it on youtube'. I play the same piece twice with the same amp and settings so you can hear how they both sound and compare them.
The wenge has 040 Rotosound stainless strings and the Pro 045 D'addario Nickel strings. These strings sound different. Also the Mk1 has a rosewood and the Pro an ebony fingerboard.
anyway, here it is:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UK7cSVxgBeA[/media]

Edited October 4, 2012 by barend

[Dingus]

I used to play Wal Custom basses back in the 80s/90s and can remember playing a few Pro Basses with the single rear pickup. If you have got a Custom ( as I know you have) I can really see very little point in owning a single pickup Pro bass as well. The rear pickup on a Custom will do most everything that this Pro bass will, and a lot more besides. If you have got you're heart set on a vintage Pro then be my guest, of course , but I can tell you that in effect it will be an expensive ( and inferior) way of duplicating what you have already got. The fact that you can run the Custom active/passive , with or without the attack boost and use the variable e.q means that your existing Wal can outperform the Pro in practical terms. Put simply, whatever sound you would get from the Pro, you can get a similar or indeed better version of it from the Custom. Don't get me wrong, the Pros were great basses in their own right, but the Customs are so powerful and so flexible in terms of sound that if you've got one of those then you've already got an instrument with the definitive Wal sound.

[mikeswals]

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1349367703' post='1825393']
If you have got a Custom ( as I know you have) I can really see very little point in owning a single pickup Pro bass as well.
[/quote]

The Pro I was considering is fretless, where all my Customs are fretted basses. My very first MkI was fretless, but no longer, and I do miss having that sound. So that's the reason.

[Dingus]

[quote name='mikeswals' timestamp='1349372042' post='1825457']
The Pro I was considering is fretless, where all my Customs are fretted basses. My very first MkI was fretless, but no longer, and I do miss having that sound. So that's the reason.
[/quote]

O.K , fair enough, but just a word of caution ; find out if it was a factory fretless or a subsequent fretless conversion . Because Wal basses became synonymous with excellent fretless basses during the 1980s, a lot of fretted Wals got converted to fretless by people wishing join the trend for fretless basses. The drawback to this is that a converted fretted Wal is in ultimate terms a second-rate fretless compared to the real deal. Pete and Wal had special stash of exceptionally dense mahogany for the core wood on the full- spec fretlesses, and used ebony for the fingerboards whereas a converted bass will have a rosewood board . They also recommended the softer top woods such as walnut and paduak for fretless Customs . A defretted Pro could still be an excellent fretless compared to most other basses so I'm not neccesarilly trying to put you off , but won't give the complete Wal fretless experience. A factory fretless Pro would be a very nice fretless bass indeed, though , and if you can get one at a reasonable price I would say go for it.

[mikeswals]

Thanks Dingus. Yes it is a factory unmarked freltess. But since it's a Pro, I thought they only used ash on them, no? The price is very reasonable to me.

But while pondering over that bass, someone just offered me back a former fretted MkI I used to own that I wished I never let go.
Ahhh, decions-decions!

[barend]

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1349367703' post='1825393']
but I can tell you that in effect it will be an expensive ( and inferior) way of duplicating what you have already got. The fact that you can run the Custom active/passive ,
[/quote]

There are no active/passive controls on Mk1's. Also they have made fretless Wal basses with rosewood boards, not only ebony as you say.
Also I don't consider a one pickup Pro inferior to a Mk1. If you only use the bridge pickup of the Mk1 the sound is almost the same. A Mk1 has a bit more bite and a Pro a bit more low end but the tonal character is very close. Just check the last video I have posted. If you like simplicty you might even prefer the tone controls of the Pro.
If you need a second pickup than a Mk1 is obviously a better choice. But if you only use the bridge pickup they are very close.

Edited October 4, 2012 by barend

[oli@bass]

[quote name='mikeswals' timestamp='1349381841' post='1825662']
But while pondering over that bass, someone just offered me back a former fretted MkI I used to own that I wished I never let go.
Ahhh, decions-decions!
[/quote]

Yeah... and then a green one popped up

[mikeswals]

[quote name='oli@bass' timestamp='1349420863' post='1826012']
Yeah... and then a green one popped up
[/quote]

Yeah, tell me about it! That green MkII came out of nowhere, and in the States too! If only it had popped up a day or two sooner.
I just agreed to a trade+cash deal for my old violet MkI back. So a fretless is going to have to wait.

[Dingus]

[quote name='barend' timestamp='1349388705' post='1825837']
There are no active/passive controls on Mk1's. Also they have made fretless Wal basses with rosewood boards, not only ebony as you say.
Also I don't consider a one pickup Pro inferior to a Mk1. If you only use the bridge pickup of the Mk1 the sound is almost the same. A Mk1 has a bit more bite and a Pro a bit more low end but the tonal character is very close. Just check the last video I have posted. If you like simplicty you might even prefer the tone controls of the Pro.
If you need a second pickup than a Mk1 is obviously a better choice. But if you only use the bridge pickup they are very close.
[/quote]

I had three MK1 Wals and they were all switchable from active/passive. With all the control knobs clicked in the downward position the bass is in passive mode, and the e.q knobs operate as passive tone controls. It may be that there were a few fretless Wals made with rosewood boards -Pete was very open to special requests to accomodate players individual preferences- but the preferred standard wood for the fingerboard on a fretless Wal Custom was always ebony, and the vast majority were made that way. Regarding the Pro being inferior , It is certainly not my intention to give the impression that I think these basses are second-rate in any way- I think they are fantastic basses in their own right and I would love to own one myself nowadays - but in practical terms , if you have got a Custom you can replicate most of the sounds the a Pro can produce. You are right that the two basses can sound very close , and I think a lot of that is to do with the unique Wal pickup design that plays such a big part in giving all these basses such a distinctive tone.

[Dingus]

[quote name='mikeswals' timestamp='1349381841' post='1825662']
Thanks Dingus. Yes it is a factory unmarked freltess. But since it's a Pro, I thought they only used ash on them, no? The price is very reasonable to me.

But while pondering over that bass, someone just offered me back a former fretted MkI I used to own that I wished I never let go.
Ahhh, decions-decions!
[/quote]

A factory fretless Pro at a decent price would be a very good proposition . Regarding cutting through in a rock band context, in my experience it a bit harder to get a fretless heard over loud guitars because of the somewhat more muted tone they produce compared to a fretted bass ( same problem with flatwound strings on a fretted bass with loud guitars), but all I can say is that generally speaking, if a Wal bass can't cut through a mix then nothing can. The consistantly strong mids on a Wal make it more clearly audible than most other basses. You are right that Pro bodies were ash, and that is a great sounding body wood for these basses. I have seen one or two Customs with solid ash bodies over the years , and I know that Wal offered solid single-wood bodies as an option for the Custom basses if the customer requested it. I remember a well known session player in London called Rob Burns who had a solid schedua body Mk1 , and I think Geddy Lee's black Wal has a solid lightweight alder body. Have you considerd the option of buying back your old MK1 and buying a new fretless neck for it from Wal ? Paul could make you one , lined or unlined according to your preference, and send it to you and if neccesary you could have someone local like Mike Lull fit it for you. Back in the day plenty of people bought fretted Wal basses with an additional fretless neck to swap between the two whenever it suited them.

Edited October 7, 2012 by Dingus

[barend]

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1349440131' post='1826335']
I had three MK1 Wals and they were all switchable from active/passive. With all the control knobs clicked in the downward position the bass is in passive mode, and the e.q knobs operate as passive tone controls.
[/quote]

No that is not true. With the knobs in the down position the bass is not passive. The knobs in the up position are there just to enhance the frequencies you dial in. In the the down position the electronics are still active. There are no MK1's that are passive. Only the one that is for sale on basschat but that one is an exeption or custom design or something. All are other Mk1's are active.

Edited October 5, 2012 by barend

[Dingus]

[quote name='barend' timestamp='1349441407' post='1826376']
No that is not true. With the knobs in the down position the bass is not passive. The knobs in the up position are there just to enhance the frequencies you dial in. In the the down position the electronics are still active. There are no MK1's that are passive. Only the one that is for sale on basschat but that one is an exeption or custom design or something. All are other Mk1's are active.
[/quote]

It all depends on your definition of passive. It may be that , nominally at least, the preamp is still engaged in some capacity when all the controls are clicked down, but the e.q controls in effect operate to replicate the sound of passive tone controls with the bass in this mode. It may not be what is referred to as "true passive" but it is essentially passive in apparent operation to all intents and purposes . As you quite rightly point out, clicking up the e.q contol engages the quasi-parametric boost at that given frequency point on the control , which in effect gives access to the active e.q . Wal designed it like this so players could choose between more traditional passive sounds and the more modern active tones that were becoming increasingly popular. With the controls in the clicked-down position you can use the bass as if it were passive, even if it is , technically speaking , still an active bass. I suppose it all depends on how you envisage the practical use of the tonal options available on these basses.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Dingus

[barend]

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1349445688' post='1826453']
It all depends on your definition of passive. It may be that , nominally at least, the preamp is still engaged in some capacity when all the controls are clicked down, but the e.q controls in effect operate to replicate the sound of passive tone controls with the bass in this mode. It may not be what is referred to as "true passive" but it is essentially passive in apparent operation to all intents and purposes .
[/quote]

Yes you are right that the down position sounds more passive then the up position. But the bass/electronics is still active. The filter controls are more complicated then the controls on a passive bass. And also the bass won't sound without a battery. I feel that with the knobs in the up position a Wal doesn't sound like a 'normal' active bass.
I have experimented a lot with the filter knobs but I never use the knobs in up position because those frequencies don't sound very natural or useful to me. So always down position for the filter knobs on an Mk1 for me.

Edited October 5, 2012 by barend

[Dingus]

[quote name='barend' timestamp='1349447630' post='1826495']
Yes you are right that the down position sounds more passive then the up position. But the bass/electronics is still active. The filter controls are more complicated then a passive bass. And also the bass won't sound without a battery. I feel that with the knobs in the up position a Wal doesn't sound like a 'normal' active bass. I never use the knobs in up position because it those frequencies don't sound very natural or useful to me. So always down position on an Mk1 for me.
[/quote]

I take your point. I know from experience that with a dead battery a Wal is out of action. What Wal has done is design an active bass that can effectively mimic a passive one, if you see what I mean. I only meant to point out to the o.p that if you have got a Custom that you can get it to sound passive, similar to a Pro bass. Whereas a Pro bass might sound slightly different in some way, it's potentially a lot of money to spend on another bass when his existing Wal will do a very similar job ( fretless neck not withstanding) .

[barend]

ok, no offence taken whatsoever. I was just trying to avoid confusion. Also I am curious for what purpose you guys use the up position of the filter knobs. Because to me it doesn't sound good or useful with the knobs in up position. Maybe someone has some sample settings?

[Dingus]

[quote name='barend' timestamp='1349448845' post='1826512']
ok, no offence taken whatsoever. I was just trying to avoid confusion. Also I am curious for what purpose you guys use the up position of the filter knobs. Because to me it doesn't sound good or useful with the knobs in up position. Maybe someone has some sample settings?
[/quote]

For useful sounds with the knobs in the up position, I used to love the sound of my Wals with the rear pickup knob set at 3 and the front pickup on 7 or 8 with the attack boost engaged and the pickup pan pot set with both pickups on full. I found this setting gave a great version of a kind of Gibson EBO bass sound like Jack Bruce or Felix Pappalardi - rubbery and deep but with a slightly nasal edge. Alternatively, just the neck pickup on 3 with the attack boost on gave an amazingly good deep reggae bass sound.

[mikeswals]

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1349441287' post='1826371']
Have you considerd the option of buying back your old MK1 and buying a new fretless neck for it from Wal ? Paul could make you one , lined or unlined according to your preference, and send it to you and if neccesary you could have someone local like Mike Lull fit it for you.[/quote]

That's what I'm thinking of doing now. I have priced just a neck, but it still may take up to a year for Paul to deliver.
My white Wal in my profile pic used to be a fretless, and Mike Lull did the fretted conversion on it. But it cost more than an arm and leg to have it done, so I won't have that neck defretted, but I may just put a feeler out for a used spare fretless neck to swap on that bass.

[Dingus]

[quote name='mikeswals' timestamp='1349456061' post='1826626']
That's what I'm thinking of doing now. I have priced just a neck, but it still may take up to a year for Paul to deliver.
My white Wal in my profile pic used to be a fretless, and Mike Lull did the fretted conversion on it. But it cost more than an arm and leg to have it done, so I won't have that neck defretted, but I may just put a feeler out for a used spare fretless neck to swap on that bass.
[/quote]

Sounds like a good idea if it will take Paul a year to come up with a fretless neck It just shows you the amount of orders he must be having to deal with at the moment. I know that there are plenty of fretless necks out there, and it might well be worth asking on Basschat if anyone knows of one that might be available. I have seen plenty of ads over the years for Wal basses with spare fretless necks. It's probably not what you want to hear, but here in the U.K up to the end of the 90s/ early 2000s you could pick up a used mk 1 Wal bass for £600-800 pounds and they were relatively difficult to sell ; people were glad to get that kind of money for them. There will be plenty of folks who have got a spare fretless neck who will be glad to cash in on Wal basses resurgence in popularity.

If the Wal bass in your profile is white from the factory then that makes it very rare indeed. The only other white one I can remember seeing was used by ( if my memory serves me correctly) John Illesly of Dire Straits back in the 1980s. In my dim and distant memory I think I can remember seeing a picture of him with a white Wal on the wall in the old Wal workshop in High Wycombe when I went there to have one of my basses serviced. It sticks in my mind because I think it's the only white Wal I have ever seen, up to now that is.

Edited October 6, 2012 by Dingus

[WalMan]

I may have mentioned it elsewhere, but my Wal started lie as a passive Pro1 with the pup in the middle rather than back at the bridge.

Pete converted it to active in 96 - I hadn't actually planned for it just took it up for an overhaul and saw another one being converted. IIRC he told me at the time that the idea with the passive Pro's was to have a cheaper passive option the could be retrofitted with the custom electrics later if required.

Pics & story [url="http://www4.cs.fau.de/~koesters/Privat/Wal/walpics/PB1680-1.jpg"]HERE[/url] (as an active) & [url="http://www4.cs.fau.de/~koesters/Privat/Wal/walnotes.html#PB1680"]HERE[/url] plus as a passive (and sorry to sully this with other basses)

This is two/three tracks recorded with it last year

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cXmuH8699Q

[warriorbass05]

That was awesome....well played!

[WalMan]

[quote name='warriorbass05' timestamp='1349662968' post='1828859']
That was awesome....well played!
[/quote]Thanks, though to be clear / fair it was a cheat & three seperate tracks of bass recorded onto the multitracker and then patched onto the video not a single pass for the video

[warriorbass05]

Yep, I knew that but the composition and note choices were nice.