Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

No. 8 Wire

Member
  • Posts

    522
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by No. 8 Wire

  1. 5 hours ago, mcnach said:

     

    My 2002 Stingray was 2-band, and now has a John East 3-band in it (2-band plus mids module). I'd say the 2-band part is very very similar to the original, but a bit sweeter: the treble doesn't get so shrill if you overdo it, and the bottom end feels a bit tighter. But it's not radically different. I love the MMSR preamp. Go for it!

    I'm going to have to think about it some more. My Stingray is the only bass I have that is still completely stock, is always been the one I thought I'd never mess with....

  2. 26 minutes ago, stingrayPete1977 said:

    The 55-94 is a great bass, and twice the price though? 

    I dont think any SR5s have an unrolled board, maybe less than some. 

    Is there a difference between rosewood and maple boards? My maple board is heavily rolled, but a friends rosewood ray built a year later has much less pronounced rolling (though still comfortable).

  3. 13 minutes ago, Chiliwailer said:

    In one of the promo videos for the new Specials one of Sterling Ball’s sons talks about fixing the issues with the A and G string. I’ve never heard of the A string issue before though. 

    I vaguely remember that video too.  Never heard of nor experienced the A string issue.  The saddle one above is a new one on me.  I've always thought the bridge was a strong point. Never had a hardware problem at all and my bass is 22 years old (I've had it for 14).

    Really interesting that the Balls admit to those issues only once they have a new model to sell.....

    • Like 2
  4. 46 minutes ago, artisan said:

    I tried that with all of mine but to no avail unfortunately.

    My classic was a beautiful instrument but the G string was inaudible when played in a full band setting which drove me nuts,my band mates noticed it too.

    Don't have this problem with any other bass.

    Can't argue with experience - maybe they should be tuned B-D 😀

    I remember when I was looking at this problem a few years ago now, mostly there were just the usual hardcore fans denying this problem existed.  Even the EBMM site was full of posts saying this was a myth (inc Mr B as I recall) and even getting abusive to anyone who asked for some help with the problem.  Lo and behold I noticed a year or later they changed their official setup guide from about 1mm height difference on each side of the pickup to drop the E to the pickguard!  Only took 30 years to admit the problem.

    This youtube channel explains a fix I've have heard of a lot. Haven't needed to change the pole piece heights on mine, but its worth considering.  I guess if it just gets lost in the mix, this isn't going to fix it, but that's never been an issue for me.

     

  5. 50 minutes ago, artisan said:

    I've owned 3 stingrays over the years (a 2 band,a 3 band & a classic ) & all of them had a weak G string which no amount of eq or setup work could fix,including a Nordstrand pickup.

    I never ever had that problem with any other bass I've owned in the last 40 years,it's no myth the 4 string single pickup stingrays do have a weak G string issue.

     

    I did have a weak G, not really weak but enough to bug me, I used to notice it especially in the intro to californication for v some reason.  I don't think anyone else ever noticed.  However EBMM changed their setup guide a while ago, so now you drop the E side to the pickguard and leave the G side close. Now it's fine but I don't like looking at the angle on the pickup!

    • Like 1
  6. I love my Ray, when I only had one bass I used to use it for all styles without any issues.  I find mine (3 band) really sensitive to even slightly old strings, the tone just seems to die away instantly.  Although, weirdly I had TI flats on it for a while and it had a great tone with those, but sounded more Jazz like than Ray.

    I've played a few 2 bands and really like the sound, but I'm never going to get another MM except possibly a 5 string - I feel like I'd miss the mid control.  I'm tempted to try out the East 4 knob preamp which according to the blurb sounds like a 2 band with the mids set flat.  Anyone tried out the East Pre next to a 2 band to see how close it is?

  7. 12 hours ago, Bob Lord said:

    £139 for a 4x10's got to be worth a punt, even if it turns out to be not amazing sounding, and not something you'd take on the road for 20 years.

    Having said that, I'd rather try and pick up a second hand Ashdown ABM 410 from ebay, for about that price - there seems to be a lot of cheap ashdown gear out there, and I think probably a safer bet in terms of sound and durability than an obscure chinese brand (didn't wharfedale make cheap stereos you'd get in argos, like alba?!)

    These cabs could be a good way of turning of turning £139 into £50 🙂

    I can see how these are a good option if you need postage.  For me I'll think I'll leave it until I really need one rather than having a cab sitting around in the shed.

    • Like 2
  8. 49 minutes ago, Dan_Q said:

    that's practically what I thought when I saw these- i've not much experience with different amps, and I only have 2 because I play / live in two locations. They are both 15w combos with a 1x8 speaker.

    out of interest- would a 300w head and a 1x15 or 2x10 actually be able to be used at very low bedroom volumes?

    I have a 12w (valve) 2x10 guitar amp, and even that struggles to be quiet enough- but i suppose that could be different with solid state / bass applications?

    Something I picked up in the video was that the 15 didn't have a tweeter, so maybe not good as a stand alone, low volume cab?

    • Thanks 1
  9. 8 minutes ago, Mudpup said:

    They're 200, 300 and 400 watts at 8 ohms respectively. And not going to be super light for that money but i don't think they'll be bought on the weight or frequency response basis. Plenty of people out there on a limited budget, fancy a punt as an experiment or just need a cheap cab for home use. 

    I'm sure you're right, however while they might not be lightweight in the absolute sense, if they aren't too crazy though I might be interested in one for the shed.

  10. 10 minutes ago, thodrik said:


    The price of the cabs are silly. Just ridiculous. You would think with the lighter weight they would be easier and cheaper to ship than the old Powerhouse cabinets (which are/were really expensive as well).

    I think international shipping is more about volume than weight.  At least it has been when I've been moving larger items between countries (ie when iso containers are involved).

    Agree on the prices though.  My walkabout was 10 years old before I could afford one! So I'll get one of these in 2028 when they'll only be around £500, that's if the class d units aren't worn out or obsolete by then!

  11. 5 minutes ago, Bill Fitzmaurice said:

    Until roughly 1975 the only significant difference between guitar and bass valve amps was that guitar amps had reverb and tremolo, bass amps didn't.

    What changed after 1975? Always thought it was interesting that some of the most sought after amps are famous for both instruments. Hiwatts, Bassman, Super Bass for instance.

  12. On 04/12/2018 at 15:15, Quilly said:

    Hi folks I'm looking at a bargain of a 50w valve guitar head that just needs an few EL34 power tubes. I'm toying with the idea of buying it for bass use. Is it possible to convert a 50W valve head for use with bass? is is a big job?

    I don't know any technical details but there is no need to do anything to a guitar amp to run bass through it.  I run my bass through my h&k valve guitar amp with no problems, has a great DI tone! I don't use the guitar cab though for fear of damaging the driver.

    Check this video, obviously clickbait, but some good info on the subject.

     

  13. 28 minutes ago, krispn said:

    Yer man from Incubus, Ben Kenney, used to tour with a couple of WA rigs - combo and ext cab beneath - see the link. It would be a pricy rig for us mere mortals :)

    http://mesaboogie.com/artist/ben-kenney.html

    I had a feeling I seen that before - I've seen some pictures of him using two WA rigs on stage, that picture shows the same rig.  The manual talks about using them in a master-slave arrangement to have both running.

    Edit - actually its 3 combos + ext cabs. 1 master, 2 slaves, check it at 6.08.

     

  14. 22 minutes ago, chris_b said:

    Why would Mesa not consider everything?

    They were clever enough to build the Walkabout in the first place so if they are lining up the WD800 as a replacement I'd expect it to perform. There are a few who will be dissatisfied no matter what, but as Mesa know much more about their amps than we do, I'd wait to see what the WD800 sounds like before jumping to conclusions.

    Thanks, I'm not jumping to any conclusions, just wondering what from the original WA they have included.  Largely in the hope that someone more learned would say yay or nay.  I have no doubt that Mesa know their amps, they are my favourite manufacturer by a long distance.  But whether it is technically possible to get the WA power amp effect in a class D format I don't know.

    What's the point of this thread if we can't speculate on its features before trying it out?😁

  15. 12 minutes ago, thodrik said:

    My concern is that part of the 'magic' of the original Walkabout that the tubes are used at the driver stage with the Mosfets. I'm interested to see how Mesa have approached this with a class D preamp. 

    Walkabout owner here too. I understood this to be the case too.  I thought it was one of the reasons that the master volume also affects the DI.  As i recall there is a mod that can be done to decouple the master from the DI, but you lose some of the essential tone of the WA by doing it.  As you say, would be interesting to see if Mesa have considered this in the WD.  At the moment I think my solution to be louder would be 2 walkabouts....

  16. 12 minutes ago, PawelG said:

    if your son is making lovely music

    That's a big if!  

    I get your point, but with some instruments there is a more or less 'right' way and piano is one.

    Yes a good teacher must take account of the individual, Scott is the ultimate in this.  However, even he through this course gives right ways to do something.  Lownote12 wouldn't be needing help with deciphering Scott's economy picking if he was one on one.

    Hopefully the quality online lessons will mean less of the poor quality 121 teachers though.

    • Like 2
  17. 1 hour ago, lownote12 said:

    The interesting meta point is the cost v 121 traditional lessons. It’s roughly a quarter the cost and for top notch teaching  plus invaluable support from the hundreds if not thousands of other students on the course. I feel sorry for traditional music teachers - like so many other trades their day is over seems to me. 

    I don't know, my son is learning piano mostly by book/online and there really is no substitute for someone hands on making sure he has the right technique.

    • Like 1
  18. 4 minutes ago, lownote12 said:

    Dunno, not in the Academia so i can't say. But when I was in I never saw anything like the accelerator.  After 8 weeks we've just covered holding the bass, how to hold your fingering hand and how to pluck with two fingers.  Yet that tiny detail stuff is transforming my bass playing.  

    I guess i meant any changes from the SBL fundamentals courses which haven't changed since you left. From what you've said it sound like concentrating on little things in nano detail.  The sort of thing we don't do let to our own devices!

×
×
  • Create New...