Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

Telebass

Member
  • Posts

    3,653
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Telebass

  1. There are certainly many ways to reduce the weight, to some extent, of valve amps, but you can only go so far, as yet.
    One thing that I think no-one has yet mentioned as a down-side for valves is the need to match impedances always. Unlike SS, where a 4ohm output can be run into 8 with merely a loss of output power, doing this to a tube amp will wreck the output transformer sooner or later, usually sooner.

    My personal take on the whole thing? SS every time, purely to save my back! I'm certainly old enough to have been around when SS wasn't often an option!
    My favourite valve amp of those I used was a Vox AC50 head. Great amp, and reliable, too. But I wouldn't have a valve amp now even if i had free roadies! I prefer not needing a big car...

  2. They are too different for that, really. That big 'ole mudbucker is a world away from the single coil of the 51, which is different again from the split coil humbucker in the standard Precision. This way, I have three totally different basses, all with "Precision" on the end!

  3. No, wouldn't change a thing on either. The 51 is indeed a slab. The Squier is a slab with an arm contour only, a la Mike Dirnt, whose sig is now a Squier model also. Why change to the SD antiquity? It's no different at all to the stock pickup. We have a Sting in the shop here with that pup, and it was a swap for no reason...I love the big fat sound of the humbucker on the Squier, so why change it for a single coil? A modern amp can control the mud, so no problems with it as-is. And the other bridge cover would just not be right for this style P.
    I love 'em!

×
×
  • Create New...