Clear B string

[HazBeen]

There is a reason why brands like MTD and Pedulla (just 2 worth noting) use Barts for all their basses. But they may not work for all situations, all technique styles (a softer touch imo brings out the best in Barts) and defo need to be matched with the right preamp.

[BreadBin]

That explains it then!

[Pinball]

10 minutes ago, dmccombe7 said:

Did the Ibanez basses have Bartolini pick ups too ? 

The MIJ ones that I played had Bartolini printed across them so I assume so.  They also used some Bart designed ones like Cort do now

[Guest]

I have an early 2000s SR3006e with USA passive Bartolini pickups and the stock varimid eq. This bass sounds fabulous on neck, mixed or bridge. I’ve also owned a good few basses with both Bart pickups and preamp and don’t ever remember them sounding sterile. Funnily enough this is exactly what has put me off Dingwall basses in the past - try as I might I’ve never been able to get on with the tone, and I’ve played an ABZ, AB1, AB2, Z3 and Prima Artist (and the nicest one of the lot was the cheapest ABZ!). Maybe it’s the pickup selector, but I found the basic tone didn’t speak to me at all, flat and uninspiring. I also found that despite the very long B string, although it feels very tight and the sound is very clear, it just doesn’t sound “right” as a package. Maybe I just need to find the right one. YMMV etc...

[Dan Dare]

The bass/pickups/strings are only part of the picture. If you want a clear fundamental with a low B, you are pretty close to the lower limit of what most drivers and cabs are capable of reproducing, certainly at any volume. Low B is around 31 hz. Have a look at the spec sheets. Most cab designers get round it with clever porting and rely on harmonics and overtones that fool us into thinking we hear low B, but there are limits to this. You need power and enough drive unit surface area, too. You won't get a clean, powerful low B from a 200w combo. It's the laws of physics, Jim.

[Woodinblack]

On 19/02/2019 at 07:01, rsint said:

Since nobody has said it yet.......buy a Dingwall.

I’ve never heard such a true low B.

I did. I didn't notice any great advantage of the B string over any of my ibanezes really. I liked the neck, it was nice to play but not for any tonal reason 

On 19/02/2019 at 20:10, White Cloud said:

I found the newtone strings to be far too high tension for me. Sounded good though

I got newtones on a messinger short scale I had (they were the only ones to do short scale 5s that I could find). I found them high tension too. They sounded ok, but it was hard to tell as the bass itself didn't really have a great tone.

 

1 hour ago, Graham said:

I also found the 37" low B no better than other basses with 34 or 35" scale lengths.

Fully agree with all of that. And I never really got the 1" of a difference (or 3" in this case) making that much of a difference in the context of string scaling.

35 minutes ago, Pinball said:

The prestige SR's have custon designed Barts and if you sind an old SR MIJ with barts it is worth a look. I have tried a SR1300, SE1000 and SR805 in the past and all sounded good ro my ear. I also had a prestige SR3005 that raised the bar to a whole new level. I found the controls a little over complicated for my needs, otherwise I would still have it.

The barts in the 5005 prestige are completely different compared to the barts in the 505 and those sort of models, like night and day.

18 minutes ago, Dan Dare said:

The bass/pickups/strings are only part of the picture. If you want a clear fundamental with a low B, you are pretty close to the lower limit of what most drivers and cabs are capable of reproducing, certainly at any volume. 

That was the one thing I wasn't hearing mentioned. Are you sure it is your bass that doesn't have a good tone? The B string in just below 31hz, even at the point that your ears frequency response is dropping off. You need a hell of an amp speaker combo to be able to accurately transfer that to the same level as the higher frequencies - even speakers renowned for good frequency ranges don't do that well, most of the barefaced cabinets for instance say 'useable range' down to 37Hz and they are one of the few manufacturers with non made up specs

[Bobthedog]

My Roscoe (35') and Dingwall (37") both have a wonderful B, the best of the few guitars I have played. The Roscoe has Aquilar electronics, the Dingwall, Super Fatty pickups / Dingwall. There is, however, a significant difference when played via my BF BT2 / Glock Blue Rock and my Markbass CMD121P.

PS my AB1 has a completely different sound to my old Combustion, the tone on the former being capable of being much warmer than my Combustion ever was. On the other hand we each hear sound differently.

[Woodinblack]

4 minutes ago, Bobthedog said:

PS my AB1 has a completely different sound to my old Combustion, the tone on the former being capable of being much warmer than my Combustion ever was. On the other hand we each hear sound differently.

I certainly want to hear another Dingwall at some point, I love the neck of those things, and would love one but I wouldn't want to pay all that money and it to sound like the combustion.

[Bobthedog]

Just now, Woodinblack said:

I certainly want to hear another Dingwall at some point, I love the neck of those things, and would love one but I wouldn't want to pay all that money and it to sound like the combustion.

Agreed, hence me getting rid of the Combustion; I never could get the sound I wanted. When I played the AB1 it was worlds apart, I suspect down to the pick ups and perhaps the pau ferro fret board?

[lemmywinks]

2 hours ago, Pinball said:

Those are the cheaper series 1 "made under licence" jobbies. They are cheap basses. You should try something like a Ibanez SR5000 or even some of the older MIJ Ibanez...great sound

The problem with the licensed Bart MkI pickups in Cort/Ibanez basses is that they're either married to the MkI preamp or an in house cheapy, neither of which seem to sit right with the pickup particularly the Bart pre which is a struggle to get a workable sound out of IME. Even though they aren't the full Bart experience they sound much better either wired passive or with a more musical sounding preamp. I've read plenty of threads where people go on expensive pickup swaps trying to improve these basses when the problem is the preamp and shoving a £30 Artec in there improves things massively.

 

I had full fat Barts in a Squier Jazz many moons ago and it was a brilliant sounding instrument, would have them again in a heartbeat.

[miles'tone]

On 18/02/2019 at 22:38, BigRedX said:

Not at all. When you look at the tensions of the strings a 135 low B is woefully under tension compared with the others. I'd be looking at that gauge B with a 40 - 100 G- E.

I have a P bass tuned BEAD. I buy my sets as singles from Strings Direct - .135 .100 .075 .055

Makes for a perfectly balanced tension and tone set. 

I've found EB Slinkys and Roto 66 to work well. Chromes too but that B is .132

 

[bubinga5]

The way you fit the strings can give you a better definition. Before you cut the length bend the string and then cut the string after the bend. Especially with round core strings as the core will slip inside the outside wind or become less tensionised (no that's not a word). Just a tip that I use.

[Woodinblack]

16 minutes ago, bubinga5 said:

The way you fit the strings can give you a better definition. Before you cut the length bend the string and then cut the string after the bend.

I have just started doing that as aparently it stops the risk of dead strings, where the core slips. I can't say I have noticed much of a difference yet but it is easy to do and it logically makes sense, and I have only been doing it for the last 3 sets or so.

[Hellzero]

5 hours ago, Woodinblack said:

5 hours ago, Dan Dare said:

The bass/pickups/strings are only part of the picture. If you want a clear fundamental with a low B, you are pretty close to the lower limit of what most drivers and cabs are capable of reproducing, certainly at any volume. 

That was the one thing I wasn't hearing mentioned. Are you sure it is your bass that doesn't have a good tone? The B string in just below 31hz, even at the point that your ears frequency response is dropping off. You need a hell of an amp speaker combo to be able to accurately transfer that to the same level as the higher frequencies - even speakers renowned for good frequency ranges don't do that well, most of the barefaced cabinets for instance say 'useable range' down to 37Hz and they are one of the few manufacturers with non made up specs

Urm, I mentioned it at the beginning of the thread. 😉

 

[bubinga5]

3 minutes ago, Woodinblack said:

I have just started doing that as aparently it stops the risk of dead strings, where the core slips. I can't say I have noticed much of a difference yet but it is easy to do and it logically makes sense, and I have only been doing it for the last 3 sets or so.

There is a slight problem. When you bend a B string, it can be difficult to get that bended string width into the tuner,(depending on the hole size of your tuner shaft). But its doable 

[Woodinblack]

5 minutes ago, Hellzero said:

Urm, I mentioned it at the beginning of the thread. 😉

Sorry - didn't see that, although I don't agree that it has much to do with watts, you can hear it very clearly with a 1W amplifier and a very clear speaker and not hear it with a 500w amp. In fact, probably easier to hear in headphones. But yes, you are more likely to hear it with more power everything else being equal.

1 minute ago, bubinga5 said:

There is a slight problem. When you bend a B string, it can be difficult to get that bended string width into the tuner,(depending on the hole size of your tuner shaft). But its doable 

It can be, I have been lucky in that the tuners in the G&L and Ibanez that I have done are quite large, plus I do it very near to the bend so it will go in ok, but it makes it harder.

Actually, it was even harder on the G&L, as that was flatwounds, and I had to do it again, as with the B string strung through the body, it was too much of a bend to get the string over the bridge and it didn't quite make the nut, so I had to take it out and put it through the back. luckily that gave me a bit more room!

 

[bubinga5]

I think we might all agree there is no one defining thing that gives you a clear defined B string. Nothing to do with any amp imo. Its a combination of bass, pickups, neck construction, scale length, string choice. I will say that a stock Lakland 55-02 has the best B string that I've ever played/heard. LH3 pickups/preamp DR Fat Beams were used on the instrument. The B note was fantastic. 

[dmccombe7]

1 hour ago, bubinga5 said:

The way you fit the strings can give you a better definition. Before you cut the length bend the string and then cut the string after the bend. Especially with round core strings as the core will slip inside the outside wind or become less tensionised (no that's not a word). Just a tip that I use.

That's how i was told to fit them when i started playing in 1976 and i've always done it that way.

[Bobthedog]

1 hour ago, dmccombe7 said:

That's how i was told to fit them when i started playing in 1976 and i've always done it that way.

Ditto, albeit a somewhat later start date.

[Dan Dare]

3 hours ago, Hellzero said:

Urm, I mentioned it at the beginning of the thread. 😉

 

I know you did. But quite a few started pitching in, suggesting buying this or that bass, strings, etc, so I thought it would do no harm to re-iterate it.

[Dan Dare]

3 hours ago, bubinga5 said:

I think we might all agree there is no one defining thing that gives you a clear defined B string. Nothing to do with any amp imo. Its a combination of bass, pickups, neck construction, scale length, string choice. I will say that a stock Lakland 55-02 has the best B string that I've ever played/heard. LH3 pickups/preamp DR Fat Beams were used on the instrument. The B note was fantastic. 

Afraid it is pretty well all to do with the amp/speakers. As someone else points out, even Barefaced only claim a lower frequency extreme of 37 hz, whilst low B comes out at 31. It may sound good on headphones or at practice levels, but reproducing those kinds of frequencies at any kind of volume is a big ask.

[bubinga5]

19 hours ago, Dan Dare said:

Afraid it is pretty well all to do with the amp/speakers. As someone else points out, even Barefaced only claim a lower frequency extreme of 37 hz, whilst low B comes out at 31. It may sound good on headphones or at practice levels, but reproducing those kinds of frequencies at any kind of volume is a big ask.

With all respect. I had two basses a while back. One was a  Fender 5 string jazz and the other was Lakland 5502. Same Aguilar amp, same 212 speaker. Same eq settings. The Fender B string was awful. Floppy no definition. The Lakland 5502 was the best B string ive ever heard. Just sayin.

[chris_b]

Sorry guys, but you don't need cabs that reproduce 31hz in order to get a great sound out of a 5 string bass. An SVT 810 only goes down to 40hz and it doesn't blow up when a 5 string bass is plugged in.

[4000]

On 19/02/2019 at 19:47, Hellzero said:

Headless basses tend to have better low B's, better intonation and better string to string balance, just because of the construction as @BigRedX mentioned.

 

My Sei Flamboyant 6 headless had the best B I've ever played. 

[Woodinblack]

2 hours ago, chris_b said:

Sorry guys, but you don't need cabs that reproduce 31hz in order to get a great sound out of a 5 string bass. An SVT 810 only goes down to 40hz and it doesn't blow up when a 5 string bass is plugged in.

No one mentioned great sound, and why would anything blow up??