Al Krow

The missus and her NHS colleagues are getting done tomorrow - they're all really happy about it. Means she'll be able to visit her mum for the first time in months.

What sort of a prick would you have felt like if you had done that? Actually don't bother answering that, 'cos it's obvious - a big one.

TIER 4 !!!!

Yeah fair, life can crap on timing sometimes 😞

So...hold on! You had a 435 that you preferred to your P34 and was in a different league to your TRBX, with a great low B string and weighed around 9 lbs and was in your chosen finish, right? And you did what, exactly, with this wondrous bass?! 😁

Fixed 😁

Well obviously it did - the P34 really struggles with the low D and C in my experience, almost like there was nothing there 😁

Cheers Dave - I almost linked you into my original reply as, at the back of my mind, I thought you'd had a TRBX in times past, but couldn't remember the model! I think you've nailed what @Ricky Rioli was looking for in terms of a comparison between the two. What you're both saying about the two humbuckers on the TRBX seems to completely chime with each other and I suspect there is no way that most of the BB owning crew on this thread would describe the P-J pups on the BB 435 and its sister basses as being in the same bag!

Do you know this guy personally SM? I've always been very impressed by his YT demos - he seems to totally nail the covers he's playing.

Cool - well now that we've got that sorted 😁, it does look like a significantly souped-up version of his HPF / LPF with individual gain knobs rather than a global single "make-up gain" (using compression terminology) knob. And given that it's $180 vs $165 and shipping will be the same and seems to have the same footprint from the pics - the newer model is definitely the more attractive option!

So to summarise for my simpler understanding of these things: we're still getting -12db/octave cut below the HPF threshold and the same above the LPF threshold but overlaid on this is a 0 to 18 gain for either/both and that gain is centred at the HPF and LPF cut-off thresholds?

I don't think most folk would describe a P pup as a humbucker though? They would describe it a as a P pup.

Interesting - must admit I'm still a little confused by his numbering system of -15 to +15 for the para mids vs -3 to +15 for the HPF and LPF then, but I was just going from the pedal markings whereas you and Mr Lukin are a step ahead of me and have delved more deeply into the blurb.

Well yes it is and yes you did 😁

Is amiable = polite / bland / tame? If so, I've not been disappointed with the Yammy BB series 2 (425, 1025) or series 3 pups (735A) at all - in that regard. I love the tone, particularly from my 1025 / 735A.

I guess it really depends what you're after? The key tonal difference is going to be from swapping humbuckers for a P-J set of pups which, for me, is the "USP" of the modern BB range (apart from the NE2, which is a souped-up Spector in disguise not a Yammy BB 😁). The body construction on the 434 will also be a step up from the TRBX and, as you already note it's purely passive, rather than active / passive. Do you feel the TRBX is coming up short and, if so, what is it "missing" for you? On the other hand if you're after a PJ that punches well above its price point, I suspect you're not going to be disappointed with a BB 434!

Seems to be looking to do a different job from typical HPFs which provide a -12dB / octave (or ideally -24dB / octave) cut. This has a much more restricted -3dB cut for the HPF and LPF. Intriguing.

A comment about a BB235 being "off-topic" on a Yamaha BB thread? Now I know you Scandinavian types have a reputation for being super honest (by the rest of the planet-we-all-share standards), but I'm afraid that hardly even registers on the off-topic Richter scale. You're going to have to try a LOT harder...😁

One more suggestion for consideration. This seems to be working just as well as my Ciocks DC5 and OneSpot CS6 and is a fraction of the price and has a tiny footprint:

For the avoidance of doubt, please note that neither of the above two basses are for sale either through the official channels, or otherwise 😁

Go on then, post a link to your favourite track he features on 😊

All the main knobs have indents at their centre point. I find a slight cut on the bass to handle that awesome low end and with mid and treble broadly flat is a great starting place. But usual rules e.g. a little mid boost if you need to cut through more, a bit more treble for slap but dialled back for Motown. Then the Nathan East mid scoop can be dialled in to suit your personal "taste". I suspect you'll be all over it in no time - although you won't get bored with the sound any time soon, as you have so much variety available at your fingertips! 😊

Unlikely Twins! Two of my very favourite basses! Pic inspired by recent chat with @Chopthebass whose identical finish new NE2 has just arrived and @cetera, undoubtedly the biggest Spector lover on BC (and probably the UK!) I posted a while back about how I felt that the NE2 took more design cues from Spector than from any other of my basses including my other Yammys. In particular, they both have in common: sculpted backs making them very comfortable to wear; neck through; 3+2 headstock; purely active; seriously meaty low end; and 24 very accessible frets - even more so on the Yammy with its cut-away lower horn. The "extra" that the Yammy delivers is a 3 band EQ vs 2 band on the Spector and a Nathan East mid scoop, which I believe is centred at 2kHz, and which adds to its capability as a phenomenally versatile tone monster. On the other hand the ability to obtain tonal precision by being able to select single or dual coil for either pup on Spector is an excellent feature. Differences: obvious key one of pups - the Spector has it's iconic EMGs whereas the Yammy features two Jazz-style, hum-cancelling, stacked Alnico V pickups; single bridge piece Spector vs individual bridge pieces on the NE2; 35" scale on the Spector vs 34" scale on the NE2; 17mm string spacing on the Spector vs 18mm on the NE2, but with a shallower taper on the Spector (down to 9.5mm at the nut vs 8.8mm for the NE2). In theory the individual bridge pieces should provide better isolation vibrations on other strings, but I know some folk prefer single bridge pieces, and whilst a 35" scale should provide a slightly tighter low end I think it's relatively marginal and I personally find 34" a more comfortable scale length. I was kinda gratified to read in this excellent review: Yamaha BBNE2 Nathan East Signature Model – MusicPlayers.com that their evaluation short list for the NE2 were the following: Spector Euro5 LX 5-String Electric Bass Guitar Warwick German Pro Series Streamer CV 5-String Electric Bass Guitar Ernie Ball Music Man Stingray 5 HH Neck Through 5-String Electric Bass ...so it appears that I'm in good company in wanting to put these two superb basses side by side! Both have pretty eye watering new prices although the NE2 is typically another £750 to £1,000 on top of the Spector - I was fortunate to get my NE2 in great condition used and my Spector new in a "sale". If I had to save just one 'in a fire'? Hmmm...tricky question! I guess I'd just be happy to still have either!

@Japhet - nice! Another P bass with flats?

You've got me thinking I need to remind myself how the Nathan East mid cut works! The best clue is in some of the blurb that goes with his separate pedal. I'm guessing that as "Deep 4 is his favourite setting" that is what has been incorporated into the bass i.e. a mid scoop at 2kHz which, as you note, has a surprisingly potent effect! Yamaha NE1 manual.pdf