Ed_S

I have to wonder whether there was actually something wrong with the Elf that I had and moved on. Nice tone, but it couldn't produce anywhere near enough volume to be useful through a pair of cabs which are more than capable with amps of only slightly higher quoted power.

I think in the OP situation, if the Elf proved to be lacking I'd be tempted to try the Transit B preamp pedal into a power amp. I like the Crown XLS xx02 series, myself.

I don't take my slightly more expensive couple of basses out because whilst they greatly enhance my enjoyment of practicing and recording, they'd absolutely ruin my enjoyment of rehearsing and gigging. I don't want to spend my time preoccupied with thoughts of theft, loss and damage.. I want to put my gear in a storeroom and head out for food after soundcheck, load offstage into the dressing room and drink irresponsibly to the other bands that are on after us, and maybe let somebody else in the band take my stuff back with them if they're driving. So I take a pair of less expensive basses that are perfectly solid and reliable, and I enjoy playing them, and they look great on live photos.. but they don't cause me any stress and I believe I play better for it.

Got another dep outing yesterday, helping to open proceedings at the Sheffield M2TM competition final at Corporation. To say that the doors opened at 13:30 and we were on at 13:40, there was actually a decent crowd pretty much straight from the start. I think some of that was possibly initially helped by there being 4 other guest bands and 5 competition bands on the premises at the time, but a crowd's a crowd and there were definitely increasing numbers of paying public there, too. Played well, enjoyed the gig, got positive feedback from people who'd seen us, and a box of lager from the band as a thanks for jumping in last-minute.

Played my Rockbass Streamer LX 5 (which I bought as b-stock, fettled, gutted and re-wired passive) through a couple of new bits of kit which I bought as an aid to travelling light; a Fender Telepath wireless system and a Tech21 Bass Fly Rig v2. Went straight into the PA from the Fly Rig, and also into my Markbass Nano 2 on top of the house Blackstar 115 cab - pretty unnecessary if I'm honest, given the foldback on the main stage. The Fender wireless seems to be decent - perhaps functionally no more decent than any of the much cheaper 5.8GHz alternatives, but it feels solid and it performed flawlessly so I'm happy with it. The Fly Rig v2 sounds much better to me than the original version I had a few years back ever did - definitely keeping this one for when the full pedalboard isn't practical.

Same black boots as usual.

1 minute ago, stevie said:

Modern plastic feet/corners are quite tough, but subjected to enough force, they will crack. What may not be immediately obvious is that, by deforming, they act like a crumple zone to protect the cabinet corner - and they're cheap and easy to replace. Because they're more rigid, metal corners  transmit most of the force through to the corner.

That's fair, I can see how that'd work from an engineering standpoint. I guess 'inferior' is a poor choice of word without a good deal more qualification, isn't it. Better to simply say I personally don't like them for a number of reasons, both practical and aesthetic, and much prefer my cabs to have metal corners and rubber feet.

Is your preference for the plastic all-in-ones such that you'd actively avoid metal/rubber?

2 hours ago, TRBboy said:

 

@Ed_S did you base your positioning of the feet on anything, or was it just a tongue-out and squint approximation? 😅

It was kinda squinty - I wanted them close enough to the edges to be stable and far enough away from them to still be well under, so I matched them up (by eye) with the centre of the first large ridge or channel. Very scientific.

1 hour ago, Phil Starr said:

 

 

I hope you don't mind me using this image but it illustrates the problem for manufacturers.

 

If you look at the top left corner has two diagonal ridges and three hollows. Top right has three ridges and two hollow channels. When stacked the corners on the top cab interlock with those on the bottom and the riges are thick enough that the bottom panel is held clear of the floor. The corner is also the foot. The fitted round feet are obviously better than the corners in clearing the floor but will stop the cabs interlocking. If I were buying two cabs to stack I would expect interlocking corners and which manufacturer wouldn't want their cabs to stack neatly. It drives you nuts though if there is a top handle and the corners wont separte the cabs enough to accomodate the handle and the top cab rocks. You can't suit all of the people all of the time.

Can only speak for myself, of course, but I think plastic stacking corners will always be a massively inferior solution to metal corners that don't break and rubber feet that give significant ground clearance. I used to have the NY121 cabinet to put under the CMD121p and even then I had rubber feet on both; even if you never use the combo on its own, at some point you have to put the combo down on the ground, so if its carpet then collects guff it'll just be transferred onto the top of the extension cab. I'll take misaligned over soiled.

I suppose if the stacking corners were redesigned so that the ridges had undercuts in them (kinda mushroom shaped in profile, if you get what I mean) and there was an optional corner-piece with a rubber foot mounted on it, that was moulded to interlock with the new shape, slide diagonally into the corner and lock in place somehow, that would give you the option of both. But it'd still be made of plastic.

Where carpeted cabs only have stacking corners, I'd always fit rubber feet to avoid them soaking up the usual cocktail of beer, fruit juice and other less wholesome substances that ends up all over most venue floors and car parks by the end of a night. I totally get the warranty concerns about driving screws into the bottom of a new cab, but I consider the alternative a much worse situation so I've attached rubber feet to all my Markbass cabs and combos before taking them out. Never had any problems with either the feet or the carpet covering, so my vote is definitely to feet.

My CMD 121p for example - still nice and clean:

£40 or less should get you a Peavey Micro Bass in decent condition. They're built tough and sound alright.

On 13/01/2025 at 19:00, Steve Browning said:

Steve Harris seems to manage ok. That said, each to their own. 

 

Everybody's preference is the right choice for them.

Sorry, was just revisiting the topic as it resurfaced and realised that I never responded. Of course you're absolutely right on both counts, and in the case of Steve Harris I'd say he manages even more impressively than most, his preference being for fresh sets of Rotosounds. I personally found them uncommonly harsh and inflexible when I tried them, so I'm guessing he has a very different touch to me and/or much hardier fingers after years at it!

In any case, my own most recent foray into flat territory with the Ernie Ball stainless 'group' set has just ended and I think that's probably me finally done with the concept. If I absolutely needed flats in future (unsure how that would ever come about) they'd have to be the Cobalt Slinky variety, and at that point I might as well spend the same amount on a set of my usual rounds and an EQ pedal.

Our lead singer tried the SE V7 at rehearsal last night and I thought it behaved very well in a loud room. It sounded good with no EQ or DSP - just straight into a QSC K8.2 set flat. Needed a bit more gain to achieve the maximum output level before feedback that we've previously been getting with the e838 on a stand, but then allowed me to go on and almost max-out the dial on the QSC with no feedback even whilst being hand-held. We'll give it a first proper run out at a gig on Friday, but on current evidence I'm hopeful it'll work well for her.

I had the 2816 set (2814 with a 130 B string added) on a Fender Jazz V not too long ago and my personal experience was...

They aren't silky smooth (Galli Jazz Flats would be my benchmark for that) but they're also not rough; they're just kinda finely textured and uniformly grippy. If it makes any sense, they have the kind of texture than makes them 'sing' when you run your hands across them.

I found the tension to be similar to other comparable-gauge flats I've had (Fender, Chromes, EB Group) which I guess is to say they feel like playing the next-gauge-up set of rounds.

They do sound brighter and more like rounds than all other flats I've tried, and I personally liked the grippy feel of them so I'd happily get another set at some point in the future. I think the feel is what might put some other people off, though.

22 minutes ago, Minininjarob said:

I read this topic a few days ago and made the effort to speak to a pro live audio engineer and producer I know who confirmed that a SM58 is pretty much the standard and anything else just add uncertainty to them. They know the characteristics of them, they are tough, sound great and easily replaceable. For a studio session other options may be better but for a live situation why get anything else?

That's something I've been pondering just recently. I provide a mic for our lead singer who is an operatic soprano and therefore not used to needing a mic, but now fronting a metal band. Whilst the Sennheiser e838 (cardioid) she's been using sounds great for her voice and was very forgiving while she was developing her mic technique, I've noticed that some sound guys seem to have a hard time working with it. I was considering just getting her an SM58 for all the reasons given, but then couple of months ago I played alongside another metal soprano who was using an SE V7 (super-cardioid) and it both sounded great for the style and didn't seem to cause undue headache at the desk, so I've actually got one of those arriving tomorrow to try out at rehearsal next week.

I owned multiple Ashdown cabs back in the day, but that was because I was experimenting with different speaker sizes before I knew better. It wasn't brand loyalty - it was just all you could buy in local shops.

These days I own multiple Barefaced cabs based on the progression...

Super 12 - Bought because everybody said it was the one cab to do pretty much any gig. It was. It still is.

G2 Midget - Bought because it's half a Super 12 and sometimes that's all you need. Also vertical 3x12 potential.

One10 #1 - Received as a birthday gift.

One10 #2 - Bought to make a pair with the first one so it was any use to me.

Two10 - Bought to give me the same sound as the pair of One10s in a one-hand-carry format. Also vertical 4x10 potential.

I don't know whether it's brand loyalty as such - more just that they engineer light cabs that perform well and look acceptable in a utilitarian kind of way, and if something goes wrong they sort it out.

1 hour ago, martthebass said:

Was that with an ebony fretboard Ed?  I've had a few Sandys with Rosewood boards and they've all been fine finish wise but the one I had with ebony had peeling on the edges in a few spots.

I believe it was pau ferro - nice looking board, too. I had the issue with ebony once before on a Jim Root sig Telecaster but this was the first time with any other wood.

I like the idea of Sandberg as a brand, and enough of the ones that aren't factory-damaged appeal visually, but having had four of them I can't see me getting another.

Three were original cedar body superlight 4s (two TMs and a TT) which were great for my back problems but the recessed and un-filled fret slot ends felt weird, they all sounded somewhat lifeless in the same way, and the matt finish was stupidly easy to damage. My Maruszczyk Jake L4P+ wasn't far off the same weight, sounded lively, was finished in good strong gloss poly and had smooth fretboard edges, so it ended up winning.

The last one was a Central 5, which ended up with the finish peeling off the edge of the fretboard so had to go back to be refinished. They did it perfectly well, but I'd not had it long enough before the issue appeared to really bond with it in any way, and by the time it came back from refinishing I'd kinda lost interest; played a couple of gigs with it and just couldn't get excited about it so moved it on.

3 hours ago, knirirr said:

 

The reason I was wondering is that I've been finding that a significant number of new instruments need fret work, and so have started assuming that pretty much anything I buy new could require extra money to be spent if I want to play it with a low action and no buzzing.

So, a second hand instrument might be better value if someone else has already done the work.

Perhaps it's just my bad luck.

Yeah, I guess if somebody was making a big thing of the fact that they'd had their bass fettled by a recognised luthier, could prove that to be the case, and the work done was exactly what I would be having done myself... maybe I'd offer or accept paying a few quid extra for that, provided I was totally confident that it was worth it to me. But to my mind, the thing about having the work done yourself is that at least you've seen the instrument in its original state, know who's done what and (perhaps most importantly) why, and you can have some input into the process, so I think I might still be more inclined to get a cheaper deal on one that's been left alone and take it to my own choice of professional.

41 minutes ago, knirirr said:

 

Thanks, this is useful.
Something I wondered about - would you take into account any work done on the instrument? For example , if you'd bought that £570 bass and then had to spend £100 getting the frets properly filed down. I'd guess that this is simply a hit the original purchaser would be expected to absorb, though.

If it's still possible to go out and get a new one that you'd expect to be perfect and not need the work, or if it's no longer available new but you'd expect the vast majority of second hand ones never to have needed the work, then no, I'd say that's on the seller for electing to keep and fix a b-stock, rather than swap out for a different one.

Nothing against anyone who does that, btw.. as long as they realise that it's rarely an investment. I've done it myself - for example keeping an unusually light example of a bass with really attractive wood grain patterns but a knackered preamp because a swap could easily turn up as a boring-looking boat-anchor of an instrument, but with a functional preamp. I knew the money for a new preamp was never going to be recouped, and I was fine with that.

I broadly agree with the 'what it owes me' comments, though I do use the phrase when talking generally about what a project has cost in total. If I ever use it when it's time to sell, I switch to a different version which involves completely writing-off the initial purchase price of anything I buy as a modding platform or fixer-upper, and then not spending any more on parts than I'm confident I can sell the whole thing for once completed, unless I'm willing to lose the additional outlay. That's perhaps just a me-thing, though!

9 hours ago, TimR said:

Ibanez put pattern machineheads on their affordable basses. It's the only issue I've had with my bass that's 20 years old. I replaced 2 machine heads with Ibanez stock machine heads when the original broke, and they also subsequently broke.

 

I have now upgraded them all with Gotoh machineheads which are miles ahead of the stock ones. 

 

The fact that the premium Ibanez basses come with Gotoh machineheads tells me that's an upgrade. 

Agreed. I put GB707s on all my Ibanez SRs. Never had a problem with the function of the stock ones myself, but I prefer the shape of the tuning keys and the wider string posts on the Gotohs, and they feel nicer. I also used them on my Harley and Fazley cheapo P copies, but that required a degree of bodgery to get the 18mm holes down to 14mm.

24 minutes ago, dmccombe7 said:

Yep had that with a few Fender style bridges. To be honest its only been on Fender basses. Both Mex built ones.

Other than that issue they were pretty much ok basses.

Dave

Aye, at least with those you can just replace the barrels if you really object to a whole different bridge, and if you don't then there are loads of drop-in replacements from the sublime to the ridiculous. Sadly this was the cheaper end of Ibanez, and I think they choose mounting screw locations by committee.

9 minutes ago, Terry M. said:

Oh that's not good.

You sound like you have great tinkering skills. A passive Warwick even with active pickups is indeed a  beautiful thing soundwise. I nearly bought one last year from Will at BassBros but it went fast. Do you think you'll eventually install the new preamp?

I doubt it, to be honest, but in the spirit of this thread I'll be sure to include it should I ever come to sell. I've actually just recently bought another Rockbass - a Streamer LX this time - and I've done a version (the pickups are passive J's, so no battery or switch needed) of the same thing with that so they're both nearing P-bass levels of 'nothing to go wrong', and I wired them up so I've only got myself to blame if anything does! I guess some would call what I've done a downgrade...

I know my limits where the tinkering is concerned, but I bought both of these as end-of-line b-stock returns and was quietly confident that I'd be able to get them into shape. They were both Friday afternoon specials in the fit and finish department and the fret ends needed attention, but they've got good bones and they're now metal-gig-appropriate workhorses.

2 minutes ago, Terry M. said:

Got you. Can't say that's ever happened to me but it sounds like a real pain.Would that also bring fret buzzing as it lowered itself as well as flat notes?

Yeah, it was beyond buzzing on the worst one - we're talking full choking-out and rattling within one song.

Speaking of Warwick preamps, as you were, I had a Rockbass one fail last year and after a bit of back-and-forth they eventually sent a new preamp out to Thomann who forwarded it on to me to fit. They would have fitted it but I said I was happy to avoid the chance of loss or damage in shipping and just do it myself. Thing is, in the intervening time I'd actually grabbed some pots, a switch and a jack from my bits box and wired it up passive (well.. they're active pickups so still need power, but then into a passive volume/tone) and used the switch to allow me to split the twin-jazz pickup in the bridge. In the end I much preferred that to the preamp, so the new one it still in packaging.

12 minutes ago, Terry M. said:

What is it they fail to do after a while? I'd like to hear of other experiences.

Granted this isn't a 'fail to do after a while' - it's a manufacturing defect, but I've had bridges where the grub screws for adjusting the action were so loose that the vibration of the strings caused the screws to turn and the saddles to hit the deck. Tried new grub screws but it was the holes in the saddles that were too big or badly tapped, and replacement saddles weren't an option. I could have bodged them with thread-lock or PTFE or nail varnish etc. but in all cases it was just easier to get a new bridge that actually worked.

I like to find really cheap basses that just happen to have great necks, and then have fun replacing all the bits that were actively skimped on in order to have that standard of woodwork and fretwork at such a low price. In those cases I think the word 'upgrade' is more easily justified, but I do agree that it's important to make peace with the fact that a £200 bass with £200 of parts fitted and a load of time invested using expensive tools is still very often only worth £100.

All the same, if such a bass falls out of use or favour down the road, I prefer to send it off as-is and stand to a degree of loss - partly in the hope that it makes the new owner happy and perhaps lets them have something they otherwise couldn't, but mostly because taking something that I've made as good as I think it can be and then spending even more time to rip it apart and make it worse (even if only subjectively), I find to be the complete opposite of fun.

Doesn't always work perfectly, but the quick calculation in my head is that I expect the offer when I sell current gear back to a shop to be about half the value of a new one, and that then represents two thirds of what they'll aim to sell it for. So if I'd bought a bass that retailed for £570 and wanted to move it on, I'd expect to be offered about £285 and then see it up for sale at £425-450 in the shop. Buying from a private seller, I'd be looking to split the difference between the shop buy-in and sale prices with them, probably two thirds in their favour, so if we take a mid-point of £435 that works out nicely to a difference of £150; an extra £100 for them, and £50 off for me. £385 would be my offer.

I ordered a bass from them on the 4th, it left their warehouse the same day, it was picked up over here on the 6th, and it was delivered on the 7th; actually several days sooner than I've become used to. As it arrived on a Friday I had the weekend to iron out its b-stock issues, which was a bonus. Not saying that they don't sometimes get it wrong, but they certainly can still get it right and even exceed expectations.

They're my local - I've been happily doing business with them since they opened the current shop and I've known some of the guys who work/ed there for years longer than that. I'd be willing to have a crack at answering any specific questions or concerns if I have relevant personal experience, but otherwise feel free to assume a general vote of confidence from somebody who doesn't even want to think about how much money he's put their way... 🙂