Telebass

Really, I'm totally surprised. In that situation, I'd be looking at which was duff, the bass or the amp! In the OPs case, as he's certain the bass is that low an output, I'd be spreading its guts on the bench to find out why! Maybe it's got 25K pots instead of 250K...

I'm surprised...Any bass I've ever had, plugged into any amp I've ever had, with the input up full, would just be a very loud mess.

[quote name='MoJo' timestamp='1447956722' post='2911861'] It's fully up (Fender Rumble 500) [/quote] I'd suspect a faulty bass if your input gain needs to be flat out!

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1447880845' post='2911263'] Ever single electrical component from the pickup to the speaker will have some effect on the tone. [/quote] This. The whole idea behind on board pre-amps, originally, was to drive the cable at a lower impedance, so as to reduce the capacitive loss effect. Tone control was an afterthought. Replace cable with wireless - no need for active bass. Ok, you know I only play passives....

^^^ That too...

Except that Frankenstein didn't have a slab body. The Ox always said that he thought that the circuitry was somehow different, but it wasn't. The only major difference between standards with maple boards and slabs was that the slabs had cap necks, ie a separate fingerboard. Of course, this fails to explain why owners of the even rarer rosewood board slabs say that they sound the same... As all MIM and USA Standards have cap necks these days, almost any new Precision should get you into that ball park. Not forgetting a fresh set of RS66s...

You're welcome! Wish I still had the 250 to go with my Gibson TR tool...

How about a...no, can't think of one... I dislike actives with a passion, but if forced, a P-Retro is what I'd have.

Last gig, and only gig for many years, was in March: Judith Owen, Leland Sklar, Russ Kunkel and Pedro Segundo. Not a boring note in the entire set. If you've not seen this setup yet, I can only recommend that you do. I will try to see them again, if I can, and I've never done that for anyone else, ever.

TW did have a variable coil tap on some Vintage guitars. Wide open, the pups were full humbuckers, sliding down to single coil at the ither stop. Don't't know if they used this on Mavericks.

[quote name='fretmeister' timestamp='1447152530' post='2905250'] I used to have a Warwick Fortress 5 that had an amazingly huge neck. It was bonkers. I think it was from about 2000 ish - certainly not like the earlier slim ones. [/quote] I had a 2001 Streamer Standard 5 that had a monster neck, probably a similar profile to this. Hurt my hands.

The single biggest factor is the difference in thickness, all else being equal. As examples of how this can be made to matter less: 1) the strings of a classical guitar are all nearly the same thickness, so the bridge is essentially square across them. 2) If you've ever used contact-core strings on your bass, you'll have noticed (I hope...) that because the string is broken over the bridge much nearer to its centre, in terms of setting the intonation, all the strings are 'thinner' and the saddle adjustment across the bridge is more linear. Edit: my favourite strings were contact-core - Rotosound Superwound 505s. Contact-core pressurewounds with flats-like feel, rounds-like zing and truly massive sustain. On a BBOT.

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1446849242' post='2903005'] What are you getting bent out shape for.....its a promo video [/quote] This, it's a cymbal endorsee video - of course he's hitting everything a lot. Not good, but understandable.

Welcome! It'll take over, you know...