No. 8 Wire

The papers I skim read were looking at softwoods, seeing as the main push with the research is to get fast growing softwoods to be water and rot resistant and dimensionally stable for cladding and flooring etc. They were looking at up to 30% loss of MOR but only a few % increase in MOE. I've only had a cursory look, but couldn't find anything on Hardrock Maple (some studies on soft maple but obviously not applicable). I would think because hardrock maple isn't going to be used for construction there won't be research into it. There are some hardwood studies, but ultimately the process can be so different between suppliers and factoring in the variability of the wood itself... you can only really talk in generalities unless a neck supplier produces pass off tests for wood batches. One thing I haven't looked at is durability - which you alluded to. Some papers allude to a reduction in durability, but I haven't read further to know in what context. It would also be interesting to know if figuring like flame has a more detrimental effect or whether the curing process stabilises the 'imperfections'. I'm pretty sure these roasted maple necks are serving their purpose though... I have extreme GAS for a stingray 5 with a roasted maple neck and ebony board...

I read about this a couple of years ago. Haven't kept up with it. It's interesting, but it's essentially using wood as the base source for creating a polymer, in the same way oil is mostly used at the moment for creating Carbon and plastic. I guess it's good as it replaces a non renewable source with a renewable one. Haven't read if it can be recycled or if it is toxic to burn as fuel at end of life. For musical instruments though, the problem is the end product is not wood any longer and probably won't even look much like wood. So not a direct replacement. More like using carbon fibre to make instruments I'd say.

I'm not a wood expert, but I am an Engineer so I understand the figures. The wood can lose strength up to 30%, but specific to maple I can't see any figures and it could depend on the process used anyway. TMW isn't used for structural purposes in construction for this reason according to a couple of papers I skim read. However, what we are talking about is the ultimate strength (ie breaking point) of the wood, there is no way a bass gets anywhere near that! On the other hand, some papers say there is a slight increase in resistance to bending in TMW - very desirable in a bass. So that's where you get the brittleness. ie The wood is stiffer but will break under less load. Whether it's good or bad depends on the application. I would say it's a very good trade off to get less weight and better dimensional stability for a small loss of the breaking strength - seeing as instruments never get close to that unless you jump on them! A good summary here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/thermal-modification (Just for the avoidance of doubt, I'm saying 'roasted' maple necks are a good thing!)

I pretty sure what is marketed as 'roasted maple' is Thermally Modified Wood. It's heated under certain conditions - no oxygen, pressure etc for a certain time. It was developed in Sweden a long time ago so that fast growing cheap woods (pine varieties) could be used in place of hardwoods. Mainly for cladding I believe. It's not the same as kiln drying and it doesn't mimic the process of ageing. It actually modifies the cellular structure of the wood. You get benefits like resistance to moisture and rot, but it actually makes the wood weaker and more brittle. So I guess it's a trade off between weight and aesthetics vs ultimate strength. As far I as can tell, the main benefits for a bass would be the reduction in weight and resistance to taking up water, thereby being much dimensionally stable - pretty big plusses! But as for mimicking ageing, the process alters the properties of the wood so it will not be the same as aged untreated maple (if anyone cared, but it is often lazily marketed in this way).

Preaching to the converted! I was just saying the bass on that particular studio version, didn't sound the like a ray, and the live videos seem to back that up. Not a comment on the merits of either type of bass. A Stingray 5 is my favourite 5 string for the tone of it...apart from a Wal. However I can never aspire to owning a Wal, but a Stingray 5 is definitely achievable at some point.

To me, that sounds great (Ray + Ampeg), however not anything like the recording. Here's a live vid of the first song you posted, he's playing some kind of P bass there, probably with flats to my ear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6x9gRqdX5I

I like the sound of that. Although it's really hard to compare from YouTube videos. What does the 8 coil do that's different from the standard humbucker (when used in the same mode)? Due it give more even string volume? It's each coil tweaked slightly for the different strings? Would like to know more.

Are you sure that's a ray in the recording? It sounds a lot like my p with flats. I found this live video with the Stingray 5, it sounds very Stingray in this

What an incredible list of bass string endorsees (right word?). I have to join the choir of Harris fans though. How does he do it?!

Just to round off the topic, I think I'll just solder in a longer cable rather than use an extension. It's sounding like the most straightforward and reliable option and also the cheapest! That last little bit of info from agedhorse makes the decision easy really. I only considered an extension because my soldering skill is somewhat sub optimal! Thanks for everyone's posts and input, very much appreciated.

Thanks for this info. Much appreciated!

Well, I agree in general, but my walkabout was made in the early to mid 2000s. Not sure when it became standard procedure to install speakons on everything.

Not suprising I guess. I was vaguely thinking of a locking jack socket for extra security, like this: https://www.neutrik.com/en/product/nj3fc6 or are these for instrument cables only? EDIT: I found one pre-made - would this do the trick: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tour-Grade-Van-Damme-SPEAKER-Mono-Jack-Extension-Socket-Lead-AMP-CAB-Cable/152751182825

Bill, thanks so much for your input. I take it the neutrik equivalent would be fine also? Also assume there is no problem having an extra male to female connection in the line to the extension cab?

I can see how this would be confusing. The Walkabout combo is a backpack type combo, you can remove the amp to use as a stand alone head. I have two of the backpack combo cabinets but only one amp between them. Check out the crappy image attached to see what I mean. Also, this ad from bassdirect shows the arrangement at the back of the cab - the speaker cable is only about 8 inches long: http://www.bassdirect.co.uk/bass_guitar_specialists/Mesa_Boogie_Walkabout_115_combo.html

Although i don't have 2 walkabout heads, if I did I would use them in a master-slave arrangement. Ie with one preamp driving 2 poweramps through the effect return of the slave amp. Would be a killer rig.

Just to clarify, there's only 1 amp, the second combo cab will just act as an extension cab. The walkabout head doesn't have speakon connections unfortunately. Sounds like I'll be getting my soldering iron out though from your answer...

Hi All, Just after some advice, I have 2 walkabout combo cabs, but I want to use one as an external cab. However, these just come with a short cable to link to the amp inside the combo housing. To get it to the back of the amp in the top combo i need a 2 ft extension. I know the ideal would be to replace the existing cable with a hard wired longer one, but is there any harm in using a male to female 2ft extension with quality jacks?

I feeling a bit happier today, i still haven't got the tone I wanted but I'm on the way and can now see it's possible. To cut a long story short I needed to set the EQ controls on the VMTD flat and set the boost to off on the B3K, also the grunt setting onto thin from Raw, at least for now. That gets me in the ballpark but I've got some work to do yet. Be a while before I report back on this - I haven't even had time to swap the order yet!

Understood on the cab sim limitations. I was just using the cab sim settings with a few tweaks from the manual, to be honest I just liked the tone, how it corresponded to an actual cab I'm not sure! I will try it out at the front of the chain over the weekend. Live is a whole other thing, I've no prospect of playing live again for some time, so I won't consider that yet.

With the stacked DG boxes I'm really after a quite defined tone, along the lines of Nolly Getgood but with a little more bottom end. So the high part of the fizz needs to be there, just not too fizzy! I had a play last night and running the Q last I just can't get a tone I'm happy with, however, with the Q bypassed the tone is also a hollow fizzy crap fest! So, it seems that the magic happens when driving the Walkabout preamp and the VMTD and B3K settings won't read across. So tonight I'll start from everything flat or zeroed on all three pedals (after noting the current settings) and go from there. I'll also swap the order if that fails time permitting. Cheers all for the input!

Essentially, yes the B3K and VMTD are always on and stacked for driven mode. They are set for unity gain (well, equal volume compared with clean to the ears) to the Walkabout. I like your advice there, I'll try dropping the level into the Q strip and see what happens, both in terms of volume change and tone. If that fails I'll try running into the Q strip first. For recording purposes that could be quite neat as I could get a clean and dirty signal from the Q Di and the VMTD Di - blend later in the DAW. I'll try those options tonight.

You're review of the Q Strip was superb, really helpful and informative as well as a critique of the product - and great playing to boot!