Al Krow

Well it's clearly not to recommend the Squier PJs is it? 😂 😀

I think the consensus is that the Yammy BB's have their 'own take' on the P bass sound and a lot of Yammy owners prefer it to the original Fender P sound; which is part of the reason I guess why we have gone for a Yammy rather than a Squier P or a Fender P. Further differentiated by the PJ config on the Yammys and the much liked PJ setting used by a lot of Yammy players in preference to either a solo'd P or solo'd J. I've updated the OP with a table showing a comparison between the 234/5, 434/5 and 734A/5A for ease of reference, which is particularly for anyone thinking about getting a 3 series Yammy BB.

Good man. It's actually not an outrageous price they're asking and seems to be a lot of bass for the money. Certainly not compared to some of the Spectors I'm currently having my head turned by! You tempted / thinking of getting / had previous good experience of Jacksons? With you on the pointy headstock. The last bass of mine to have one of those was actually my first ever bass and obviously I was excused as I didn't know any better and also 'cos it had actually been bought by Mrs Krow 15 years before when she was having a little dabble on bass and I was still pretending to be a six string guitarist... 😁

Andy - interesting. So based on that would give a different poll answer to the rest who have expressed a vote?

Thanks - your earlier comment about 2:1 comp ratio being generally too low for bass seems to have either disappeared from the thread, or was never there in the first place! I'll go back and amend the update to my earlier post about what settings I have this on.

Good stuff Darren - I'm finally starting to appreciate the value of your ES8! Although, in my case, I'd need to have off board given its size which could make connecting up an ES8 interesting! Which pedals do you particularly find benefit from being in parallel?

Interestingly the retailer has recently offered this bass at decent discount, which is kinda what got my attention in the first place; but with no explanation as to why it was being discounted. The age of the bass only came out of the woodwork when I asked them directly what the year of manufacture was, but maybe that needs to be a 'stock' question (excuse the pun) when we're buying 'new' basses in future? I'm guessing that there is more 'new old stock' in both physical and online stores than we perhaps realise? I completely agree that trying to pass this off as anything other than a 2015 bass to a fellow bassist when reselling wouldn't be the right thing to do. Not sure whether that can be squared with saying "I bought this new in 2019", which would also, however, be true. I guess you just give full disclosure of both?

@TRBboy - that is sweet! Looking forward to a 'before and after' pic when you've put through your mods. You about to become the next BB AndyT?

I'm in conversation with a retailer about one of their basses and turns out that this 'new' model was made in 2015 but only obtained by them from their supplier in 2018, when it will likely have been available to try out in-store. If you were buying a bass (and maybe at a later date selling it on), what would you be thinking of / saying as the 'correct age' of the bass?

Nice explanation of the Tri Parallel Mixer at 1.40 in the attached and bass demo starts at 2.40. @stewblack - seems to me you've got yourself a really good bit of kit here!

Totally agree with the first point - if you're creating your synth sound with the traditional octave --> (poss gated) fuzz --> filter then you need these in series. If you have an actual synth pedal or looking for your octave to track well then these pedals IMO are going to need as much clean signal as possible and would be ideal candidates for parallel looping. Filters, on the other hand, seem work best by having the most complex wave-forms to be acting on. I'm kinda landing on: Initial in-series BASS --> hpf --> comp --> In parallel loops - Synth - Dirt - Octave Final in-series --> filter --> modulation & delay --> AMP Does that make sense?

Fair. Fair enough to be blonde, in fact. Not sure she was ever a serial killer though?

Mucking about on Stomp defo sounds like a good idea! Although given it's all being simulated not sure how good a reflection of what be would happenning with actual dedicated pedals? So still keen to hear about folk's actual parallel set ups / use of loops on their own boards, (particularly as I won't be ditching all my pedals for the Stomp, unless it's able to match what they can do).

I'm particularly interested in what parallel set ups folk are using with their pedals (if they have gone down the parallel route) and what improvements in sound they are getting by going parallel over keeping things in series.

The piece of kit that @stewblack has recently got, looks really neat, compact, won't break the bank and has ease of live use with stomp buttons.

Excellent TB'er review of the Becos Stella: https://www.talkbass.com/threads/testing-compressors-cali-smoothie-empress-diamond-keeley-fea-darkglass-doc-lloyd-jhs-more.1345638/page-88#post-22491233

Classic series pedal board order Shared this another forum, but reposting in case it's of interest to folk here. There won't be a single 'right' answer, but the general order I try to follow is : Like to have as much clean to bite on so place at / near the start: BASS --> Tuner --> HPF --> Compressor --> Octave --> Mid board: Synths --> Distortion (drive / fuzz) --> Better with something complex to bite on: Filter (for funk) --> Want to act on the whole of your 'effected' signal: Modulation (chorus / flange / phaser) --> Delay / Reverb --> Preamp(s) --> AMP Parallel routing does potentially offer a whole bunch of additional flexibility.

Cheers! Anderton's reviews are not bad, but don't always get it right e.g. describe the Korean Legend as 'neck through' when it's a set neck (so Mangotango you're completely justified in getting this mixed up, when the retailers who should know better get it wrong!) Here is said video in case of wider interest. They deal with my very question (at 6.40) with regard to the pups - Aggies more rounded / versatile; EMG's have the 'Spector Tone' and more punch particularly at treble end. I'm definitely leaning to PJ Euro LX with EMGs (10.35) over the Legend with its Aggies (8.10), but how much of that is down to PJ vs whatever soapbar setting they had on the Aggies (likely to be single J or dual coil humbucker). Be interesting to see if folk agree? Amusing that they were using a MB LM3 and DG M900 heads respectively, simply 'cos these have been my gigging amp heads to date.

Well not to be out done, we've played Wembley too! (Ok it was more like the Underground in our case 😂)

Cheers! Is that a Warwick thumb doing the honours? Been a while since I've been into anything quite that heavy (drummer in my covers band real passion is death metal, which I'll have to 'fess has never been for me) but I thought that was just great! Must have been awesome playing in front of such a large crowd; and I love the fact that you pull off such a big sound as a three piece and are so tight!

Taking a Wal to a pub gig - good for you! (And you're defo a braver man than me Mr R! 😀

Guys - any views on the Aggie pups & Aggie OBP-2 pre vs EMG pups & Spector Tonepump pre? Both are used on e.g. the Spector Euro LX basses and wondering if folk had a strong preference for either?

But the Pale Waves were keeping up a tradition of quality bands hailing from Manchester, right? Need to stop being such a positive old git, I know... 😄

Just had a little play with the tape saturation ('TS') and stumbled across a useful additional volume control over any 'dry' signal. For folk who are not familiar with the detail; - TS affects the dry (uncompressed) signal only; - the pedal allows you to blend dry and wet (compressed) signals to taste; - the vol control for the tape saturation also provides an independent volume control for the dry signal (i.e. works whether the tape saturation is set at nil or on full); - can add a nice underlying bit of 'dirt' to provide additional harmonic complexity if desired. Or set to fully dry and TS to max and it's effectively a dirt pedal. A cool feature.

Let's see if we can get @Opticaleye back on the case! He's posted some decent clips already and is using tape saturation as part of his sound! I suspect I'm much more likely to be using a full on dirt rather than something subtle like tape saturation. I'll give it try out, of course, but I'm guessing it's effect is going to be akin to having a 'touch of dirt' on a preamp such as the DG M900 which, tbf, I'm coming round to!