Kiwi

And Lee Sklar added a p pickup to his old session mongrel because he felt the string balance was better. Nice to see some faith being restored in Denmark Street finally. Go Wunjos!

The band in question has definitely got industry credibilty. Good luck to whomever gets the gig, it'll be a doozy.

[quote name='fretmeister' timestamp='1357320544' post='1921055'] Having had all manner of composite 'boards I have to say the body is much more important. As a direct comparison - my Graph neck, wood body Energy (old one - no truss rod, very stiff) compared to my Streamline... the Energy is much more traditional sounding and a warm rounded tone is entirely possible, whereas the all graphite Streamline is much more modern. that being said, the difference in Stainless Steel and Nicket frets is quite obvious too. Zon boards are wooden but pressure treated to force resin into the wood. I like it a lot! But I'm not convinced it makes a huge amount of difference unless you are looking at a fretless. Body wood and pickups are a much more important part IMHO [/quote] I kind of agree. I've noticed the fingerboard generally affects attack more than anything. It probably affects lows but the higher frequencies are more directional so I've noticed them more. Pickups seem to be a bit like a blunt edged weapon. They generally have a single resonancy peak that can be adjusted up and down the frequency spectrum depending on number of windings, magnet strength etc. The treble response of pickups can also be dampened or boosted depending on how much resistance there is in the coils and how random the windings are around the coil. Lots of other factors come into play such as how even the windings are, thickness of the wire..so it becomes a bit of a balancing act. Body wood has a dampening effect in bolt on instruments if the wood is softer and less stiff than the neck. I'm still open minded about how much impact the wood in body wings in through body necked instruments has. I'd like to believe less but I noticed more warmth in the mahogany bodied Smith 5 I used to own, compared to the walnut bodied fretless. So...don't know yet.

[quote name='thisnameistaken' timestamp='1357320116' post='1921044'] You guys are crazy. The fingerboard is what, maybe 2 or 3% of the mass of a bass, and you're all freaking out about the effect it will have on the sound? This is a fretted electric bass we're discussing here right?[/quote] Well, before you crow any further, this is a neck [u]not[/u] a bridge. The relative mass of a fingerboard is irrelevant to how stiff it is. But don't take my word for it. Try a few bassses where they're identical apart from the fingerboard material. (I've tried Fender and Celinder jazz basses, Smiths, Musicman Cutlass basses vs Stringrays and Status basses) Note how consistently the attack differs between two fingerboard materials. Better yet, talk to a few luthiers about it...like Jon Shuker, Rob Green or Ken Smith, like I did.

I would be asking Jon about how much stiffness the phenolic would add to the neck. Some Status basses from the early 90's and most Musicman Cutlass necks had problems with phenolic fingerboards not being stiff enough to resist string tension. If he thinks the fingerboard will be stiff enough to resist tension then it gives you more options with softer woods for the neck. Mahogany and strips of wenge perhaps?

[quote name='Vinny' timestamp='1357149723' post='1918238'] Don't forget to use really big bolts and to drain the fuel and oil out first. [/quote] To the quotes page with you. [Dammit]

[quote name='hamfist' timestamp='1357119756' post='1917590'] That is why experienced Jazz players rarely use them like that. There are a load of other settings which work beautifully. Just like you wouldn't use your amp with the bass on full and mids and treble on zero, you wouldn't use a bass on a setting which doesn't work either. Actually, in honesty, I was very, very slow catching on too. It took me several ownings of J basses and many others to realise this fundamental fact about J's. I am now a confirmed J bass user but NEVER use that "both pickups full on" tone. Oh, and going back to the P bass suggestion, to me a J can get 90% of a P bass tone as well as the other J tones, but a P can only do ...... a P. I suspect you're all getting the point that my vote is for a J bass. [/quote] I have a Celinder Jazz bass. Both pickups on full is the classic jazz bass sound that is heard on countless records. If someone isn't going for that then I don't see the point of staying with a jazz bass. Many other instruments out there are more versatile and look nicer. The Fender Roscoe Beck signature for example is definitely more versatile. Those coil split humbuckers really come into their own. But if someone is playing mostly fingerstyle and doesn't need lots of attack, then p-bass with flats for sure.

I can't hear a jazz bass on stage very well with both pickups on. For any track that has a non-specific bass low in the mix, a Precision with flatwounds does a pretty damn fine job. But a jazz with flats and just the neck pickup would be good enough. For covers that have specific sounds, its a little more challenging. My Spector NS5 has been customised with coil splits to cover most situations and it does a pretty good job in a covers band.

[quote name='thisnameistaken' timestamp='1260565008' post='681704'] My old Godin Acoustibass fretless sounded more like a double bass than a fretless bass IMO, even with Rotos roundwounds on it. If you get a Godin A4 (the newer version, £749 new according to Google) stick flats on it and pick up by the fingerboard I reckon that's about as close as you'll get. [/quote] This would get my vote, with nylon wound strings. Ashbory comes sort of close but I've always struggled with the ergonomics. Rob Allen/Shuker Artist/Turner Renaissance are all worth considering but they sound more like electric uprights to my ears...which isn't necessarily a bad thing for gigging...unless you're in a trad jazz band I guess.

Jon builds [i]extremely[/i] stiff maple necks. So you may risk having a brittle and sizzly sounding instrument if you go for a graphite reinforced, maple and phenolic board in the same instrument with stainless steel frets. I'd recommend thinking about some dampening in the neck if your heart is set on a phenolic fingerboard. Maybe consider putting a significant chunk of mahogany into the laminates just to warm things up a little but keep enough maple so you don't have to adjust the neck with every change in the weather. Otherwise I'd suggest putting a rosewood or pau ferro fingerboard on a maple neck to take the sizzle out of the fretnoise a little.

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1356894239' post='1914869'] In the meantime here's how one sounds in the right hands : [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qMAUSr8GaE[/media] [/quote] Hate to say this but that sounds suspiciously like an Alembic Series bass on the bridge pick up!! [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEPrsuuYLTE[/media] What do you think? (Skip to 3:10 in the clip above).

[quote name='Conan' timestamp='1357059270' post='1916945'] [b][i]Most[/i][/b] of the time? I like the Steinbergers, but then again the Status series II is kind of a Steinberger with wooden wings... But on big guys like myself, those small bodies look slightly ridiculous [/quote] They sound [i]completely[/i] different though. Rob Green told me he doesn't believe in the need for big lows on stage. My Steiny sounds immense. The warmest instrument I own without question so its no surprise they have been popular for dub and reggae. [quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1357059505' post='1916951'] oooshhhh! [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ4Og9LNJpk&playnext=1&list=PLE57610EF70DA4FE4&feature=results_main[/media] f*** face is optional..... [/quote] That is the best justification I can think of for not owning one.

Yes after posting I realised there was a chance it wouldn't be an 83 bass. Unfortunately prepping for NY celebrations got in the way of making a correction. Thanks for picking that up for me.

Thanks for the heads up about Industrial Radio BigRed. Nice to see a company retaining faith in Steve Chick's technology. Great also that they've included pitch bending too. If I can ever afford it, I'll be getting one.

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1356963191' post='1915669'] The decline of Hamer as a brand is not so much the fault of Fender so much as it a result of the long but steady decline of the brand , due almost solely to the founders of the company abandoning it . Hamer were never the same company after Kaman aquired them in the late 80s , and their profile in the prestige guitar market slipped accordingly [/quote] Given Kaman have achieved lofty heights of indifference with another brand (Trace Elliot), so it could be Kaman's fault.

[i]Sub zero:[/i] Steinberger XL2's: They look fantastically purposeful and elegant. The ergonomics aren't to everyone's liking but the same could be said for the Lamborghini Muira and that didn't stop it being cool either. I'm in the process of building a rack for mine so I can mount it on the lounge wall and it really does look the business when lit properly. Kubicki Ex-Factor: Incredible design and can be picked up for virtually pocket money right now. They didn't need to make a 5 with the fingerboard extension but if they did, I would have one. Ibanez Roadstar/Roadster: Just well made, workhorse basses that are the equal of anything Fullerton produced from the same time period. Aria SB basses: They look great, have superbly quick necks and the design still looks contemporary. The Industrial Radio MIDI bass - incorporating an updated version of Steve Chick's fret sensing technology that was featured on the Valley Arts MB4, Peavey Cyberbase and MIDIbass, and the Wal Custom MIDI Bass. Lets hope it's everything it promises to be. [i]Seriously uncool:[/i] Alembic Series basses - just too many knobs and the design is fussy and the stereo electronics just aren't justified any more (I still own one though). Doublenecks - Heavy, most of the time only one neck is being played anyway. Anything with large fingerboard inlays - to me they look pretentious.

[quote name='drTStingray' timestamp='1356704263' post='1912642'] The thing with early 80s Musicman basses is that they introduced new colours (as well as the Cutlass models with graphite necks), rosewood fretboards, and some colours moved to alder rather than ash bodies so give an arguably smoother sound. The 2 band Stingray EQ has been more or less the same since 1979 to date. And yes, made by Charvel. [/quote] Bodies were made by Charvel and a number of other luthiers such as Grover Jackson out of pretty much whatever wood they could find. Mahogany and popla-...[ahem] tulipwood were also used when alder and ash weren't available. This happened because Leo Fender's company, CLF, was sub contracted to supply the bodies and necks and there had been a lot of returns due to quality control issues with the finish of instruments. Apparently Leo was also disappointed with the sale of Stingray guitars and started to deliberately sabotage some of the parts, such as shipping necks with unanchored truss rods (according to Sterling Ball in an interview). Seems both logical and reasonable that this situation might have prompted the use of graphite necks on the Cutlass basses, its another avenue for cutting dependency on a single supplier. Although not much chance of clarifying if that is the case given so much time has passed since then. But back on topic, I'd go for an Aria SB-1000...maybe with the Alembic pickups option.

[quote name='alstocko' timestamp='1356785293' post='1913553'] This was Blondie. I talked to Trevor about it a couple of years ago as he is a FOAF, he said it was a bit awkward... [/quote] I think you might be right!

Motley Crue? I also remember some band somewhere that had to re-record all the bass parts laid down by the original bass player because they were so bad. I think it might have been a Trevor Horn produced track...was it Frankie Goes To Hollywood?

Chris_b is right although Smiths have been gradually usurped by Tobias. Perhaps because the Tobys have a bit more mid range. But the track sounds like it might have a jazz of some kind on it. Difficult to tell though because the bass is so low in the mix. Definitely doesn't sound like a Smith or an Alembic, whatever it is.

I'd go with hamfist. It also sounded like he had heavy strings and pretty high action, but looking at the vid its clear he's not running high action.

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1356377327' post='1909753'] Alembics committment to the ultimate quality is beyond question , but my ( limited ) experience and knowledge of Alembics is that they need taking good care of in so mucjh as they are far more breakable than more robust Fender -style designs . The angled headstock is prone to breaking if they are dropped , the electrics are good quality but will eventually wear and need servicing and /or replacing , and some of the 70s Alembics are now having problems with the neck laminations shifting slightly apart , according to some reports . Most fancy custom basses do need care and consideration in how they are treated and maintained , I'm not just singling out Alembic . My Wal basses , for example , were also quite finnicky and needed periodic servicing by Electric Wood . Used Alembics are indeed well worth considering if they "fit" you as a player , most certainly . Alembic basses have a special allure for me , and they are without question basses with a special sound , and I'm just sorry that I find the classic ones like I always wanted when I was a kid so uncomfortable. [/quote] Well, I'm a bit wary of Pre-CBS Fender snobs whipping up anti-Alembic sentiment too. Not to suggest you are the former at all but its always interesting to know where the information comes from. Can you cite any testimony from owners as evidence of more serious issues? I'm not aware of any Alembic owners mentioning neck laminations shifting apart from mistaken identity where the headstock laminations have been known to shrink at the joint with the neck producing a crack in the finish. This is nothing like a neck delaminating however. The bass continues to be perfectly robust and playable. I've had one like that. On the subject of electronics, the pickups have been known to crap out after 30 years and funnily enough, this is not unusual on any bass (including Fenders). The magnets just lose their strength. Nothing that can be done about that unfortunately, regardless of the quality of the bass. My Alembic has had the pickups replaced. The preamp can be serviced but US Alembic owners tend to be fastidious...how much of that servicing has been to fix a specific fault and how much for normal stuff like pot cleaning just to keep the bass in tip top and noise free condition?

[quote name='bassman344' timestamp='1356368371' post='1909612'] Also. Dingus mentioned they were delicate. Delicate how? [/quote] They're not delicate at all. They were designed to be the best engineered instruments it was possible to make in the mid 70's - both structurally and sonically. They haven't changed much in the last 40 years or so because they haven't needed to. Every plaudit that could be extended to Leo Fender could be extended even further to Alembic. I agree that they're idiosyncratic but I really like mine. They're expensive because they've decided to position themselves at the highest end of the market. If you want the brand, you pay the price. Looking at their options list, I doubt very much that some prices could be justified in terms of labour and materials. Late 70's Series 1 instruments can be picked up for very reasonable prices if you keep your eyes peeled. But forget about slapping on one regularly unless you get the pickup selector relocated away from the horn.