martindupras

Hi Tom. Most fuzzes want to see a high impedance signal from the pickups. I believe what you want is an impedance buffer: in essence a unity-gain pedal that takes your low-impedance input and turns it into a high impedance signal. I can't remember off-hand who makes some but several small independent pedal makers make such things (I guess there just isn't enough demand for a big company to market such a product.) Here's a thread discussing one: [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=22126&pid=224852&st=0&#entry224852"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=...mp;#entry224852[/url] - martin [quote name='tm486' post='1181031' date='Mar 29 2011, 05:12 PM']Hey, I have been reading about people's experiences with the woolly mammoth and active basses. Many people advise that it is only worth using with a passive bass. As far as i understand, it isnt a matter of just turning the volume on the guitar down, its an impedance issue. What i want to know is, could i use something like the 'Whirlwind little IMP' along with a 1/4" Mono to male XLR converter to play my active basses through the mammoth and achieve similar results to passive basses? [url="http://www.guitarcenter.com/Whirlwind-Little-IMP-Lo-to-Hi-Impedance-Matcher-427600-i1134878.gc"]http://www.guitarcenter.com/Whirlwind-Litt...600-i1134878.gc[/url] [url="http://www.maplin.co.uk/1-4-mono-socket-to-xlr-plug-43159"]http://www.maplin.co.uk/1-4-mono-socket-to-xlr-plug-43159[/url] I am new to effects and impedance and all this lot so simple explanations of why this would or wouldn't work would be much appreciated. Another possibility, the effects send and return on my amplifier (Ashdown MAG 300), are stated as being 22k ohms on the Ashdown website, would this be a considered a high or low impedance and therefore could i place an effect such as the woolly mammoth within the effects loop, getting results similar to a passive bass. [url="http://www.ashdownmusic.com/bass/detail.asp?section=mag&ID=112"]http://www.ashdownmusic.com/bass/detail.as...=mag&ID=112[/url] Any replies will be much appreciated Thanks Tom[/quote]

The luthier is John Shuker. After much shopping around he seems like the best option for what I want. I have not asked him why he recommended brass yet. I will. I just thought I'd ask for opinions first. I checked my existing basses and they're all with jumbo frets. I'd really like to try some basses with different fret wire to see what that feels like. Either I've never played anything other than jumbo frets, or I've never paid attention. Thanks for all the comments, really helpful. Keep them coming! - martin [quote name='BigRedX' post='1180510' date='Mar 29 2011, 10:15 AM']Who's the luthier? For the nut why have you been recommended brass? Is it to get a more even tone between fretted and open strings? If so I'd go for a zero fret and a low-friction graphite nut instead. Otherwise stick with what you know and like. What does your favourite bass with the least amount of sticking string tuning issues have? Pick that. Same for frets. What does the bass you find most comfortable to play have? Match that. If you're finding that your current basses have excessive fret-wear due to your string choice and playing style then by all means go for a harder material, but keep everything else the same. Tuners. Hipshot Ultralites IMO are as good as any other good quality machine heads. Unless the whole bass is going to be very light weight and extremely finely balanced then they aren't going to make any significant impact and the balance. I have two Gus G3 basses, one with Hipshot Ultralites and the other with Gotoh 510s. I can't detect any difference in balance.[/quote]

Also: fretwire size v. radius: discuss. I'll have to think this through but my intuition tells me if you're going for flat and a low action, then it would make more sense to have small fretwire. I'm sure there's a flaw in that logic, though. - martin

I never really paid much attention to the frets. I just never really noticed the variation. On guitars it's quite apparent. I suppose it's also something I would notice more when comparing two instruments side by side. I think I'll have to measure the frets on my existing basses and see what I find out. I'm going to guess that I might not notice anything because they'll all be medium. - martin [quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='1180325' date='Mar 29 2011, 12:50 AM']You can get very hard steel frets, to avoid the wear if you go for thin frets, most of my basses have big frets, but I've liked thin frets when I've had a chance to play them.[/quote]

Understood, and point very well taken. Thanks for that. - martin [quote name='icastle' post='1180317' date='Mar 29 2011, 12:41 AM']Yes. The 'ideal' balance for a bass is that it stays put without the head dropping down because the headstock is too heavy. Conversely, if the headstock is too light then it's going to have a tendency to lift up - don't forget that the ultralite tuners are a lot lighter than the standard ones that the design of the instrument was designed to be balanced with. I'm no luthier (hell, I can't even put up shelves without using blutak!) but I'm sure your luthier will have a trick or three up his sleeve to provide compensation for the lighter headstock weight. Point I was making is that it's best to mention that to him before he starts building your bass so he can put in whatever adjustments he decides are needed as he goes instead of trying to put workarounds in later.[/quote]

Thanks, really useful reply. That's what I thought about the brass nuts, but that's what the luthier recommended, so I thought there must be a good reason. [quote name='icastle' post='1180304' date='Mar 29 2011, 12:22 AM']If you're considering the ultralites then mention it to the luthier sooner rather than later or else you'll end up with an unbalanced bass.[/quote] When you say unbalanced, do you mean the headstock will be too light? I can understand why a heavy headstock isn't particular desirable (gravity and all that), but I don't quite get why it should be unbalanced with light tuners? And would you recommend that the body is made lighter to compensate? I'm all for a lighter bass, as long as it's not a substantial compromise on tone. - martin

I could do with your collective wisdom and experience. After much pondering , I've decide to take the plunge and get a custom bass built to my specification. I'm pretty much decided on most things, but there are a few things I need to decide, on which I don't really have much of an opinion. It'll be a 35" J-type, bolt on. 1) nut material: I've been recommended brass. I'm not keen on the look of brass, but in order of importance I care about (1) sound, (2) playability, (3) looks. Opinions on a brass nut? 2) fretwire: I've never really thought about fretwire size on basses. (On guitars, I have.) I care a lot about a low action and good intonation so my intuition says go for as low and wide as you can. Once again, opinions? (If that makes any difference I use stainless steel .045-.135 strings, they do wear the frets out a bit.) 3) Tuners: this'll be a 3+2 headstock. Can anyone think of a good reason why I shouldn't choose HipShot Ultralites? I like the look of them, the reviews are good, and they are light and small. What am I trading off? Thanks in advance! - martin

Ah, no, that's not on the Fusion. It probably would be nice to have, but I don't feel like I'm missing out. - martin [quote name='ThomBassmonkey' post='1179691' date='Mar 28 2011, 04:18 PM']Maybe they don't then. On the RB heads, the tweeter has a low shelf and the woofer a high shelf, so you can decide whether or not to send the lows (up to a point, I expect there's still a shelf in there) through the tweeters and the highs through the woofers. It adds a big more versatility to an already very versatile amp.[/quote]

What do you mean by "shelving options"? I have not played with an RB series head, so I don't know. On the Fusion 550, all you have it the tweeter volume knob, the one labelled "Horn Bi-Amp". - martin [quote name='ThomBassmonkey' post='1179621' date='Mar 28 2011, 03:30 PM']Don't forget that if you do this, the tweeters won't be drawing power away from your woofers (which I doubt will be a big problem anyway) and you'll have access to the shelving options for the tweeters that the GK heads have (I assume the Fusion has it too, all the RB series do).[/quote]

ThomBassMonkey is right: you only get the Horn-Management System if the cab is wired for it. The only stock cabs that I know of wired that way are the GK cabs. However: it's really straightforward to rewire your cab (you just unsolder the tweeter cable from the crossover and connect it to the speakon socket) and it's reversible. You, of course, do not need the HMS setup to benefit from a tweeter in your cab. The only reason to use it is so that you can change the amount of tweeter sound from the amp itself. - martin [quote name='ThomBassmonkey' post='1179542' date='Mar 28 2011, 02:25 PM']Yeah, if you use your Ashdown, you'll just be running the main power section, the tweeter power from the head won't be doing anything.[/quote]

Thanks for the precision. You're right: tweeter amp is 8 ohm. The manual doesn't say that it goes down to 4 ohm, but that's really good to know. As for the knobs, I don't have the amp plugged in right now so I can't double-check, but I'm pretty sure that I can hear the sound change as the knobs turn. I don't know the full story about the design but I'd be very surprised if it was an oversight. In practice it's not a problem. I thought it would be but it wasn't once an issue. In effect, what you get is a smooth transition from one sound to another. In true channel switching you often get a loud click when you switch channels because of the sudden difference in gain. From what I know about guitar amp design at least, the main approaches are to live with it or temporarily mute while the switching is taking place. Personally I'd much rather have no click and no temporary muting but have a smooth transition. That makes me wonder how it's handled in the RH450. My guess is that they very quickly ramp the controller values, which is the same idea but without the slowness of the mechanical knobs. - martin [quote name='ThomBassmonkey' post='1178239' date='Mar 27 2011, 01:25 PM']IIRC, the tweeter amp is actually 75w at 4Ohm and 50w at 8Ohm. It doesn't advertise that as it'd be too confusing with different resistances etc going on. It's worth remembering though if you're modifying a cab to use the 4 pin speakons. It sounds strange that the tone doesn't change instantly (obviously I wouldn't expect the knobs to instantly change), I'd have thought that the knobs controlled a digital controller rather than being mechanical and changed by the motors. I've not played with it properly, but that sounds like a really big oversight in design if you're right (and it's not faulty).[/quote]

I thought I'd chip in because I do own and use a Fusion 550. I'll start by saying that I'm biased because I love it and it's my main head. For comparison I also own and use an old Trace Elliot 12-band 4x10 combo, and Ashdown Evo II 4x10 combo and a Traynor YBA-200 all-valve head. Personally, I think the GK head is superior in terms of tone to all of the above. As far as I'm concerned tone comes first, and the GK delivers on that front. I like a very bass-heavy sound but one that is not muffled and not boomy. I also like the sound and the playing feel of valve saturation, and none of my other amps is capable of both the low-end clarity and the great sounding distortion at the same time. I will make an aside here: I've used the GK Diesel Dawg pedal for years, and have not been able to live without it until I got the Fusion 550. It was partly a quest to have the sound of the Diesel Dawg in an amp "channel" that led me to this particular head. When I first got the head, I was a little disappointed by the sound of it until I flicked the input switch from "active" to "passive." I only play active basses so I had done that as a matter of course. I never run the amp in "active" mode; even in passive mode the range of gain between the gain knob and the master volume is enough. There are a "bright" and a "deep" switch which do what you'd expect. I'd say that with them off the amp sounds very true; I have the "deep" switch on all the time and the bright one most of the time; to me they are what gives you the GK sound if that's what you're after. The 4-band EQ is drastic. I found that even small changes affect the sound a lot. I think this is both really good and really bad. In my opinion, you're not going to be able to make quick EQ adjustments to your sound during a live gig. On the other hand spending some time with the EQ is really worth it. The fact that the motorized knobs retain their settings is key here. If the knobs were not motorised your settings might change slightly when you accidentally touch them in transport (say) but because they retain their settings, one you set a tone it stays that way from gig to gig. I like the Horn Management feature (a 4-wire speakon lead feeds the 500w amp to your lows and mids drivers and the 50w amp drives only the tweeter.) I have rewired my Tech Soundsystems nd612 that way and that works great. It's subtle, though, because it's only affecting frequencies above 5kHz. The footswitch allows you to switch between two "channels" which are in effect just two memories of knob settings, and a mute switch. Switching "channels" takes about one second. At first I thought it would be a problem. It isn't. Just don't expect to go from clean to distorted between the verse and the chorus. That's not going to work. The way I use the amp, I have a "modern, clean, deep" sound on one channel and a "warmer, motown-y" sound on the other, which I select per song rather than per song section. The master volume gets saved for each channel. That is a little bit annoying because if at a gig you're too loud or too quiet, you can only alter the sound that is currently selected, so you have to switch to the other sound to change its master volume. [I'm planning to put a volume pedal in the effects loop precisely for that reason.] The DI output is brilliant. Most of the ones that I used before are OK, but they don't sound that good. This one does, as far as I'm concerned. Live, if there is a house PA, I feed it pre-EQ and that sounds great (or so I'm told, I'm not in the audience.) For recording I use post-EQ and it sounds like I want it to sound. One last thing: the pre-amp section is valves, and those valves are in a slightly different gain cascade than other amps, which is partly why it is capable of quite a lot of distortion without damaging your low end. However I wasn't 100% happy with the head when I got it because I felt the distortion wasn't increasingly smoothly and consistently enough as you dialled in more gain. I have had a very helpful chat with Andy (?) of Watford valves about it and he helped me decide on replacement valves. That made a lot of very audible difference to me and it made me very happy. Feel free to message me privately if you somehow feel that I've missed something in the above. - martin

I was gutted that the MusicMan Bongo wasn't in there. Oh well, there's no pleasing everyone. That issue is very thin. I got mine today and I was thinking that the Screwfix circular I receive in the post has more pages. - martin

In my bands, we tend to split the money evenly after expenses. All expenses that apply to the whole band are taken from profit, e.g. PAT testing, van rental when we play far away, etc. Having said that, everyone in the band does their share of work, so there are no feelings of "I'm doing more than he does." (As far as I know.) Also, nearly all of our gigs are through agents so we all know what the gross profit is, the agent's cut, the expenses. One thing we do that we find works well for us is that when we play more than an hour away, we meet somewhere and travel in two vehicles (rather than five) and collectively pay for petrol. - martin

Thanks, that was a really interesting reply. - martin [quote name='Circle_of_Fifths' post='1172303' date='Mar 22 2011, 04:51 PM']The Fender Jag - not to be confused with the Squier Jag - never was a really big seller in the US - it's home market. With resale values super low and the demand for them was lacking all the 'way around, it's logical that the Jag was DC'd when it was if not sooner. In all honesty, I considered one - but it un-impressed me a lot - lots less than a MiM Deluxe which could play circles around it I felt. Too many gadgets and switcheroos and thing-a-ma-bobs to go awry and asunder. If one has one - and one actually finds one is a delight to hold and play, then one should by all means keep that one as it will accrue value - [i]albeit not well-founded IMO[/i] - when they are scarcer than they are now and the collectors in Japan and Holland pay gross sums of Yen or Kronos (or whatever the Dutch use for coinage) and secret them to underground bunkers, never to see sun nor stars again in a private vault. One can only wonder, cannot one? Cute? - yes. Playable? - sorta. Valuable? - not to me. < insert usual disclaimers here > I have to go now and have a new muffler (engine silencing device-UK) installed (fitted-UK) on my car (auto-UK) and will return shorter than in a fortnight (a while-US) and resume this discussion then.[/quote]

I have an RB850; same series but cosmetically quite different (rounded boundy, no binding, black hardware). Mine has the same two humbucker pickups. On mine, the pickups are split to single coil by pulling two of the knobs up. I would imagine that if you have two switches, they are also wired as coil split. - martin [quote name='clauster' post='1169474' date='Mar 20 2011, 01:46 PM']Wayne, you're welcome anytime mate.[/quote]

Ah! Good question. First reason: because I have built two guitars already in the past, and as much as I loved it, I do not have the time to put into it, and I made them at a time when I had access to a state-of-the-art woodworking workshop, including a full vacuum spraying room. I do not have access to any of that now. The second reason is that I want an instrument that is better than those I play already. As much as I love the guitars I built, I cannot honestly say that they are superior to some of my best guitars. With a self-built guitar, you decide exactly how it's going to be, but you do not have the benefit of the experience of building hundreds of instruments. So for me: I know that I could make a decent neck, but not as good as someone who is really good at it. I could make a perfectly usable body, but choosing the wood would be a gamble (I know this from experience: the first guitar I built was a semi-hollowbody with birds-eye maple front and back; I had no idea what that particular piece looked like before I planed it, and even then it didn't look much like what it became with twelve coats of red lacquer.) So: no self-build for me, I'm going to leave it in the hands of the professionals. I would however totally recommend the experience of a self-build to anyone. My first guitar probably took around 400 hours of work, but I enjoyed (and cherish the memory of) every minute of it. - martin [quote name='charic' post='1165248' date='Mar 17 2011, 12:51 AM']Why not go for the shuker build it yourself course? Although you may not be able to have all the options you want actually... Thinking about it if you do want ALL of the options definate luthier. If only some then luthier course? Now where the hell has my coat got too...[/quote]

Tom Waghorn is excellent, there's no doubt about it. I've had all my setups and repairs done by him (well, by his workshop, anyway) and I've always been pleased. I've never heard a bad thing about him. I'll have to talk to him. That was my first thought anyway before putting this post, but I wanted to see what others had to say. In a way what I'm after is more or less a Fender-bass with custom options more than a one-off build, so I thought it would be worth seeing how different players would approach it. - martin

Thanks guys. I just checked the Warmoth site: you're right, nothing like a jag body. Tom Waghorn does all my set up and repair work, and I trust him completely. I'm not sure he can do sparkle finishes but I'll ask him. Thanks! - martin

I'd also consider suggestions of an off-the-shelf model that is close to what I have in mind. - martin

I would welcome all opinions and advice. I'm thinking of either putting together a bass from parts or getting one made. Basically, what I'm really after is a 5-string Jaguar, and I'd quite like a purple sparkle finish (http://donereachwest.com/guitar/images/RS_JB2.jpg) A matching headstock would be nice. I'd settle for a Jazz body in that finish, though, I've never even seen a 5-string jag body. Other than that, I'm not looking for anything particularly outlandish: I'm happy with a Warmoth neck, say, in standard Fender dimensions. Electronics-wise, I'm thinking: nordstrang NJ5S pickups with a John East Retro preamp. I really like the pickups+piezo sound on my MusicMan Bongo, so I'd quite like a piezo-loaded bridge to mix in with the pickups. I have no idea whether that's possible with a John East pre, however. Which route would you guys recommend? Get a quote from a luthier for the whole thing? Buy a body and a neck from Warmoth in the US and assemble it myself? (I'm comfortable with that.) Any other ideas? Thanks! - martin

Thanks guys, all useful comments. I hadn't clocked the Imperial v. Metric thing. Makes sense. - martin [quote name='markinson' post='1156190' date='Mar 10 2011, 08:01 AM']I have recently had the same problem with a MIJ Jazz Bass. Neck pot was scratchy and I decided to replace it by a new one I had at home (USA one). When changed I tried to fit the knob but it didn't fit at the New Pot Split Shaft. When I forced it I broke the Knob. Also, when I removed the knobs from the other pots I broke them (knobs were really tight). At last, I have order New Standar Pots (solid shaft) and New Standar Knobs... (Pickguard's drills are also different Standar vs Japan) It all about metrics. Cheers,[/quote]

I bought an Acme Low B-1 cab from Soliloquy. Very smooth transaction, lovely chap. - martin