New Ibanez Headless basses

[therealting]

@dave_bass5 They are optimised for playing in the money zone, so the top register does take a little adjustment. 

[dave_bass5]

11 minutes ago, therealting said:

@dave_bass5 They are optimised for playing in the money zone, so the top register does take a little adjustment. 

Yeah, as i found out. Ive played a whole set with it  before, no issues, but i dont often wander past the 12th fret expect for that song. 

[Woodinblack]

1 hour ago, bnt said:

 New video review of the EHB1005, Standard and Multiscale: has some answers to the question about weight. No numbers, but “freakin’ light” and “the neck weighs more than the body”. It is chambered basswood, so I’m not surprised. The reviewer, once he settles down, plays it through an unspecified but good amp, and it sounds huge, I have to say.

Wow - that guy is painful to listen to. The bass sounds ok, but a bit barty for me, at least that answers the 'should I save myself a few (hundred) quid and get the barts instead of the nords' question fairly well. No, get the nords. Or maybe get the bart one and stick some nords in it

 

[Al Krow]

16 minutes ago, Woodinblack said:

Wow - that guy is painful to listen to. The bass sounds ok, but a bit barty for me, at least that answers the 'should I save myself a few (hundred) quid and get the barts instead of the nords' question fairly well. No, get the nords. Or maybe get the bart one and stick some nords in it

Seems those of us who prefer Nords, definitely prefer Nords 😉

Must admit I've been pleasantly surprised by the Barts Mk1 on my GVB36 and goes against all my accumulated Nords bias - did they not cut it for you Woody when you had your GVB36?

Edited January 23, 2020 by Al Krow

[Woodinblack]

1 hour ago, Al Krow said:

Seems those of us who prefer Nords, definitely prefer Nords 😉

Must admit I've been pleasantly surprised by the Barts Mk1 on my GVB36 and goes against all my accumulated Nords bias - did they not cut it for you Woody when you had your GVB36?

They were ok, its hard to remember, it wasn't a favourite bass of mine.

I don't have a bart issue specifically. The Barts on the SR5005 are very good pickups, easily the match for the nords on my 1605 and better than the ones on my 2605  (which is odd as they are exactly the same). But they aren't the same barts as were fitted to other things. But the ones on the 805 were not nice at all, they were 'stand at the back and dont make a fuss' sort of pickups. 

One of the small things I managed to get from that video between his attempts at jokes was him saying that it was very much a 'stand at the bank and blend in' sort of tone. I can get a fender if I wanted that

 

[Al Krow]

Yeah, for sure - no risk of fading into the background with the Ibby big single Nords! 😎 

[4000]

22 hours ago, therealting said:

@dave_bass5 They are optimised for playing in the money zone, so the top register does take a little adjustment. 

That’d be no use at all for me. I’m at the dusty end at least as much as anywhere else. 😉

[therealting]

1 hour ago, 4000 said:

That’d be no use at all for me. I’m at the dusty end at least as much as anywhere else. 😉

You’d just need a period of adjustment is all. I’m fine up the dusty end now, in fact many things are easier. 

[therealting]

Not all Barts are created equal, the same way not all Fenders are created equal. 

[dave_bass5]

I had Bart's in my old Lakland 55-01. Pretty sure they were MK1's. Quite boring pups, although very much usable. 

[Al Krow]

@Woodinblack question for you:

I really quite like the 3 band EQ on Ibby basses - seems to hit the mark very well in terms of cutting and boosting at the right frequencies. With the mids we have a selector switch to choose from 250Hz (my default), 450Hz and 700Hz on the SR range and a variable mid range on the new headless basses.

Do you have the electronic equipment to work out the centre frequencies on the bass and treble dials?

Edited January 25, 2020 by Al Krow

[Woodinblack]

4 hours ago, Al Krow said:

@Woodinblack question for you:

I really quite like the 3 band EQ on Ibby basses - seems to hit the mark very well in terms of cutting and boosting at the right frequencies. With the mids we have a selector switch to choose from 250Hz (my default), 450Hz and 700Hz on the SR range and a variable mid range on the new headless basses.

Do you have the electronic equipment to work out the centre frequencies on the bass and treble dials?

Well, yes I could do, but seeing as how ibanez put the specs on their website, where would be the need?

Like this: https://www.ibanez.com/usa/products/detail/sr1705b_1p_02.html

I must admit I don't really use the centre frequencies much on my ibbys live. In fact I rarely use the tone at all, except the 2605 is a bit harsh and I knock a bit of treble off with that. 

It is very unusual that I would use a tone control on a bass.

[Al Krow]

32 minutes ago, Woodinblack said:

Well, yes I could do, but seeing as how ibanez put the specs on their website, where would be the need?

Like this: https://www.ibanez.com/usa/products/detail/sr1705b_1p_02.html

I must admit I don't really use the centre frequencies much on my ibbys live. In fact I rarely use the tone at all, except the 2605 is a bit harsh and I knock a bit of treble off with that. 

It is very unusual that I would use a tone control on a bass.

Ah yes I have seen those - I'll have to admit, I couldn't easily work out what the centre frequencies for the bass and treble controls were from the charts. All assistance gratefully received! 

[Woodinblack]

A low pass and high pass filter can't have a 'centre' frequency, they are from a frequency down or up. In common discussion of filters we tend to use a frequency when some effect occurs, so often the frequncy is quoted when the signal is changed by 3dB. So for that chart on that link, if the numbers are accurate they seem to both cross the 3dB range at 600Hz, and also would appear to be around 5dB per octave. 

Edited January 25, 2020 by Woodinblack

[Al Krow]

12 minutes ago, Woodinblack said:

A low pass and high pass filter can't have a 'centre' frequency, they are from a frequency down or up. In common discussion of filters we tend to use a frequency when some effect occurs, so often the frequncy is quoted when the signal is changed by 3dB. So for that chart on that link, if the numbers are accurate they seem to both cross the 3dB range at 600Hz, and also would appear to be around 5dB per octave. 

Woody are we talking at cross purposes here? I'm referring to the bass dial and the treble dial on the 3 band EQ. Won't they operate in the same way as the bass and treble EQ dials on an amp for which the centre frequencies will almost always be provided? 

[Woodinblack]

2 hours ago, Al Krow said:

Woody are we talking at cross purposes here? I'm referring to the bass dial and the treble dial on the 3 band EQ. 

No cross purposes - a bass and treble dial don't have a centre frequency, a bass control goes from some frequency to zero, and a treble goes from some frequency to the highest the amplifier can do (or the highest you can hear) - there is no 'centre' to that. If you have a parametric control, or mid control, it has a centre frequency, which is the centre of the range of frequencies above and below where the largest effect has.

If you write a frequency on a bass or treble control you have made an arbitrary decision what the frequency is and how you measure it. For instance if it is a bass control, maybe it starts at say 600Hz, you certainly can't hear that, but the lower it gets the more noticable it gets. So do you call it 600Hz where you can't here it, but it actually starts, or do you call it 400 by which time it is down 3dB (so its half of what it was), or do you say it is 200Hz by the time it is 10dB down (like really reduced), or maybe at 100 by the time it is 20db down? There is almost nothing of it then.

So you make a decision and say 'we are going to call this 400Hz, which is the point that the output has been reduced by half', and that is what the bottom and top knobs do on an amplifier.

[Al Krow]

So Woody continuing in the vein of displaying my lack of expertise on this stuff(!), I thought hpf and lpf, being filters, only cut below / above certain frequencies respectively and didn't have the ability to boost? Whereas the bass and treble (and mid) dials on both an active bass EQ and an amp have the ability to both boost and cut?

[dave_bass5]

3 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

So Woody continuing in the vein of displaying my lack of expertise on this stuff(!), I thought hpf and lpf, being filters, only cut below / above certain frequencies respectively and didn't have the ability to boost? Whereas the bass and treble (and mid) dials on both an active bass EQ and an amp have the ability to both boost and cut?

I think some Low and high knobs on amps are shelving filters. Not sure if that adds anything to the discussion though. 

[Woodinblack]

3 hours ago, Al Krow said:

So Woody continuing in the vein of displaying my lack of expertise on this stuff(!), I thought hpf and lpf, being filters, only cut below / above certain frequencies respectively and didn't have the ability to boost?

A filter in this case is just a term for anything that changes the level of different frequencies of a signal. High and low pass filters are types of filters that cut either lower or higher frequencies.

Technically, although this is what they do, the point of their name is the pass - a high pass filter is a type of filter that allows high frequency signals to go through, but not low frequencies. A low pass is the opposite. 

Where you would have a high pass filter for instance is to get rid of problematic bass frequencies, and it would be a fast filter, such as 12dB/Octave or 24dB per octave, aimed at removing all the frequencies as fast as possible. it wouldn't really be a 'musical' bass control, you couldn't 'turn the bass down a notch'.

3 hours ago, Al Krow said:

Whereas the bass and treble (and mid) dials on both an active bass EQ and an amp have the ability to both boost and cut?

A bass and treble control on an amplifier is a type of filter that can cut or boost its range. it is still a filter though.

[Wilco]

On 19/01/2020 at 12:50, Al Krow said:

@Wilco agree that perseverance may be the order of the day - kinda feeling a fair bit of this may be "all in the mind" particularly if 16.5 mm is comfortable in the first place.

 

Bas, I will now have to admit to a perseverance fail!! Temptation was thrown at me in the guise of a used SR2405W (with 18mm spacing) & I succumbed to GAS!! The 1805 below will now have to be sold to pay for it!

 

[Al Krow]

Congrats on the new Ibby, Paul! Was that the one in the FS? Looked to be on for a very good price. 

Must admit I'm tempted to offer you a straight swap for my newer 1825, which should in theory be worth more, as I prefer the finish on your 1805! Please PM me if that doesn't sound too much of a faff! 

[dave_bass5]

15 minutes ago, Wilco said:

Bas, I will now have to admit to a perseverance fail!! Temptation was thrown at me in the guise of a used SR2405W (with 18mm spacing)

 

 

Thats the bass i was thinking about getting. Looks great on paper but i wanted to try one first.

[Wilco]

41 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

Congrats on the new Ibby, Paul! Was that the one in the FS? Looked to be on for a very good price. 

Must admit I'm tempted to offer you a straight swap for my newer 1825, which should in theory be worth more, as I prefer the finish on your 1805! Please PM me if that doesn't sound too much of a faff! 

Thanks Bas & yes it was. Tempted by the swap idea, but alas I need to generate funds to balance the books on the new acquisition sadly. 

30 minutes ago, dave_bass5 said:

Thats the bass i was thinking about getting. Looks great on paper but i wanted to try one first.

First impressions are excellent, but that’s really all I can say after less than a days ownership! 😆

[Al Krow]

2 hours ago, Wilco said:

Thanks Bas & yes it was. Tempted by the swap idea, but alas I need to generate funds to balance the books on the new acquisition sadly. 

First impressions are excellent, but that’s really all I can say after less than a days ownership! 😆

The swap idea was partly to put you in possession of a newer model which should theoretically fetch more, but there's probably little in it. 

What I'm really interested to hear is how the Aguilar pups compare with the much loved Nord big singles? 

[Wilco]

30 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

What I'm really interested to hear is how the Aguilar pups compare with the much loved Nord big singles? 

I’m not sure that’s any easy comparison to make. Why? Well I’ve got Nords in the 1805 & the 2600 but the basses have a different tone even with same pups in. The 2600 is quite a bright sounding bass, & the 1805 sounds deeper & smoother. They do have different pre-amps though. Initially the 2405 actually sounds somewhere in between. At some point soon I’ll have a more in depth listen to all three on the same settings.