iiipopes

The Fender 9050CL's have less tension than the M set, but still enough to get a good feel. They are steel, not chrome, so they have a little more growl than the LaBellas, or D'Addario chromes or similar, for that matter. They last "forever." I've had my set on for over two years and they just keep getting better. They are consistent string-to-string and up the neck, and are relatively inexpensive.

Except for the tuner arrangement, it seems to meet the criteria I suggested. Congrats on a fine acquisition.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1369225552' post='2086505'] The design and construction of the bass is at fault. Routing a hole at the point where the neck meets the body, which effectively cuts through the neck block, the glue at the joint failing due to not much earea taking the stress is the actual failure that allows the neck to shift.[/quote]Um, Rickenbacker basses are neck-through. There is no joint. Your observation is valid, however, from the point of view that the wood can be cut too thin by the pickup routing at this point. Oh, BTW - Gibson guitars, especially first generation Les Paul SG models, had the same weakness, and guitar necks would actually fall apart until the tenon was redesigned.

The above bass is interesting, and strung exactly backwards. I would take the G & D through the body and have the A and E strings through the tail, for the reasons in my above post. And Leo's bridge is not the only reason. I like the compression through the body rather than the shear, or what engineers call "moment of inertia" induced in a top load bridge.

They work just like any other truss rod: tightening them counters the pull of the string. The deal with the old rods is that they are/were not simple tension bars. They are rectangular, so if you try to adjust them without setting the neck you can torque them and pop them out of their slots internally, putting the force on the fingerboard instead and popping it off. The new rods are made, and the internal slots for the rods are milled, so this is not an issue.

Thanks for the space to rant. And now, relaxing...Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....

[quote name='molan' timestamp='1368524420' post='2077916']This is particularly true for most quality flat wounds apparently. He told me it caused all sorts of string issues and regularly lead to certain strings sounding dead. He has over 30 years of string manufacture and sales behind him so I'm happy to believe him [/quote]The LaBella rep has a definite point when it comes to the larger strings, like the E and A. On the other hand, I have 37 years experience playing bass, and I prefer the string-through, not necessarily for the supposed increase in sustain, but because if the G string ferrule is repositioned so that the string comes straight down over the back of the saddle, like a guitar string of the same gauge, and on my bass, it takes most of the twang or whang out of the G string without having to readjust the saddle, put a piece of paper in the slot, etc. That said, and like the LaBella rep said, on my low E string, even though it is through body, I have the ferrule repositioned so that the string through is much farther back than on a stock instrument, so there really isn't any more break over the saddle than with a conventional top load. This preserves overtones and causes less stress on the string core. The problem with string through on most conventional basses, especially with flats, is that the bridge works backwards to what it should: the G string saddle has to be farther toward the neck for intonation, so the break angle from the ferrule over the bridge is insufficient to seat the string properly, and the E string saddle has to be so far back to intonate properly there is insufficient room and too much break angle for the string to seat and speak properly, and the strain breaks the core. The string through ferrules have to be repositioned in an increasing arc behind the saddles to account for the intonation compensations and the core diameters, instead of just being in a straight line near the back of the bridge plate.

There is as much to a player's perspiration chemistry and playing style that will determine how long strings last as anything. In spite of wiping down the strings, etc., I can take all the above mentioned conventional nickel-plated round strings, and since my hand perspiration reacts with nickel, they will be dead before the gig is over. Stainless rounds will fare a little better, having to only change the E string between gigs, but even then they will still last only a couple of gigs before they go from clang to clunk. I am not reactive to chrome or iron, so strings like GHS Progressives, which have more iron in the mix, or D'Addario Chrome flats, or Fender steel flats last a long, long time. As a matter of fact, I put on my current set of Fender 9050CL flats more than two years ago, and they just keep getting better, and better, and....

I got my first guitar, electric, when I was 13 years old. Nobody in my family knew about ultralight strings. My Grandfather bought me a set of Black Diamond strings, which were probably about a 12-52 gauge. So even though my guitar had only a 24 inch scale, it had quite the tension, especially for a new player. I remember distinctly, when it came to learning barre chords, of placing my left hand fingers in position, using my right hand squeezing down over my left hand fingers to help hold the strings fretted, and playing the chord until my left hand gave out, leaving a fair amount of blood on the rosewood fingerboard. Thirty-eight years later, I'm glad I did, as it got my hands in shape like nothing else ever would have.

[quote name='Highfox' timestamp='1369027360' post='2083986']The only thing the Rick can miss is a bit of clout compared to a P in the very lowend, but the Rick has a lot of sweet mid sounds that you won't get on any other bass. That's how I hear them. [/quote]Actually, it is the mid-bass, from @ 150 to 300 Hz, not the fundamental low end of 40 Hz to 150 Hz. Maple has an inherent dip in its response in this mid-bass range, where alder, the traditional body wood for P-basses, does not. But the way the ear hears overtones, or the lack thereof, gives the impression that it is the low fundamental that is missing, when in fact it is the 2nd harmonic that is shy. It is this aspect, along with pickup placement, that are factors that give Rick basses their signature tones. Again, the newer Rick basses, with their newer adjustable pole piece pickups, have a shade more windings to address this issue. And yes, with two pickups and independent controls, they are much more than "one-trick ponies."

RANT FOLLOWING: OK, the internet is great for many things. Context and non-verbal expressions are the key factors that help people determine satire or sarcasm from straight forward communication. With the internet, in spite of emoticons, there is neither. That is why I do not post in satire or sarcasm, and neither should anybody else.

The newer Epiphone pickup is not the same as the old Gibson mudbucker. Yes, it has more presence to the tone.

With three knobs, if the pickups work in passive mode, the most straightforward thing to do is just wire it like a Jazz bass, V-V-T, and be done with it. 250kohm pots if you want mellow, 500kohm pots if you want a little brighter.

I have tried just about every combination and scheme of wiring there is over the last 37 years that I have played bass: active, passive, all the conventional bass setups, series/parallel wiring - both of the pickups together and the individual coils of the pickups, etc. I always go back to a conventional 2-noise reducing pickup (whether soapbar on my Ibanez SRA305, P+J [end-to-end humbucking] on my custom bass, or my Rick 4002) with standard jazz wiring V-V-T and a .01 microfarad capacitor inline to the J bridge pickup to cure the phasing and impedance drop issues when both pickups are full on. It's the most versatile setup there is.

I use an ancient Hamilton capo for the few times I need to capo up a fret or two to play technical parts with horns.

Or that I earn enough money gigging with it to justify its existence.

A buffer is an electronic circuit to match or transform input and output impedances. In this case, it takes the very high impedance of the piezo and transforms it into a lower impedance signal for either an onboard preamp or into the amplifier head itself. For example: [url="http://www.cafewalter.com/cafewalter/fetpre/pzp1_project.htm"]http://www.cafewalte...zp1_project.htm[/url] . What we think of as an onboard preamp, with volume and tonal control, can include the buffer circuit or not, depending on the pickup involved. For example: [url="http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/tubes-valves/83696-bass-guitar-preamp.html"]http://www.diyaudio....tar-preamp.html[/url] .

Here's the deal: alnico magnets, with their iron content, interact with the coils to increase inductance, which effectively increases mids and can roll off treble, which to a lot of players' ears equate to more "vintage" or "growly" or "thicker." Ceramic magnets do not interact in the same way with the coils, and therefore with the same wind will have less inductance and therefore less mids, which most players perceive as increased clarity. The ceramic/alnico magnet switch started in the late '60's as players were wanting more out of (gasp!) their now-vintage Gibson humbuckers, and companies actually sold the magnets for swapping out, before there were aftermarket companies making their own pickups. Here is the modern version: [url="http://www.seymourduncan.com/blog/tips-and-tricks/tinkering-with-pickups-102-the-humbucker-magnet-swap/"]http://www.seymourduncan.com/blog/tips-and-tricks/tinkering-with-pickups-102-the-humbucker-magnet-swap/[/url]

Well, there is a company called Carvin in the USA that makes good neck through basses, and a few others, but very few. Also, the lead block is not in all Rickenbacker basses. I don't believe it is in mine.

There is nothing new but the history one does not know: EMG started putting pickups in different housings starting in 1974 with the "H" pickup, essentially a Strat pickup in a humbucker housing, for, urban legend goes, Keith Richards. Then they put essentially a P-bass pickup in a humbucker housing for Steinberger basses. And then there was the aborted mini-humbucker for the Tele "Elite" that never happened, so the mini ended up in a standard humbucker cover as the model 60. Add to that many cheap import pickups that look like humbuckers are actually just a single coil taking up half the room.

What kind of P-bass is it? And before you go changing pickups, has it been set up properly with a new set of strings? Sometimes lowering the pickup segments even as little as one-half screw turn clockwise will back the magnets off the strings enough to restore clarity.

It doesn't have to be expensive. I put off purchasing a 5-string for over 20 years until I could find "the" one. A couple of years ago Ibanez made a version of their lesser expensive SRA305 that has EMG passive soapbars and the Ibanez version of the EXB. It's now my main gig bass. It meets all the above criteria. Ibanez wanted to change everything around, so instead of listing for US$700, I got it on a closeout for US$279 late last year. And it is a standard top load 34 inch scale.

Well, no, it has to do with the mechanical impedance of the neck-through. That little bit extra compression on the neck really evens out the tonality from note to note; especially with the models that have the shedua stripe in the middle: absolutely no dead notes. Now, that said, we all know that it is good if the E string can have a little more room to travel. So that's why I really like my 4002 (yes, I wrote "2," not "1" or "3.") with the G side perfectly straight per RIC specs, and the E string side with ever so slight of relief to accommodate string excursion.

For further reference, the neck, according to RIC specs, is supposed to be dead straight, no relief as on a Fender. The factory owners manual can be downloaded here: [url="http://www.rickenbacker.com/pdfs/manual.pdf"]http://www.rickenbacker.com/pdfs/manual.pdf[/url]

Going back to the OP -- why haven't sets been made like this before? Answer -- arc of the fingerboard over a flat topped pickup. The D and A strings were made larger so that, being ever so slightly farther away from the pickup pole pieces, they would need more mass to induce a signal of similar strength as the G and E strings being closer to the pickup, to maintain tonal balance. Now, pickups are made with arced pole pieces, and, of course, a P-bass pickup is completely adjustable, so now the string sets can be made for feel as well as tone.