Pirellithecat

Yep - Nut checked out! The bass is actually much better than it was, still not perfect though. I will check it vs other similar models though to make sure it's not my Ears that need fixing rather than the bass!

Thanks for the ideas. The bridge has been swapped back and forth with a couple of different saddles, to no avail. Now back to the original (plus original saddles). It's a MIJ P bass and I'll try it next to a Squier/Fender P when I next get to a Guitar Shop - maybe well be that I'm just being "picky"! .... I'm sure most folks wouldn't notice, particularly those in the Pub audience!!

Belated response to this ........ but I've now tried pretty much all the above suggestions, thanks everyone! However, there's still a difference in the sound of the e String - it just sounds "muffled" . The bass is nice and much better than it was to play, but as I've been using it as an "back up" whilst my main bass is off at the "Doctors" I have renewed interest in trying to fettle it. If the bass wasn't a Triggers Broom already, it is now .... replacement Tuners/Bridge/Strings/Nut "fettled"/String tree added/New Pups and electronics (courtesy of KiOgon)/Shielded and grounded. All made a difference, although not necessarily in a positive way, and non sorted out the problem. If a compatible neck came up, I might see if this does the trick as I'm not sure I'd feel comfortable selling it on as it is and it seems a pity to use it as an ornament. Anyone able to recommend a UK based replacement Fender compatible neck supplier? Or any hints at a donor bass should a cheapy come along? It's a 40mm at Nut P Bass, and I wouldn't really want anything much broader, might even go for a Jazz neck if something similar is difficult to find.

Stephen from LFSys arranged for me to try out one of his LfSys Monaco speakers, so here’s a rather belated review. The Monaco at home and directly compared to my Mesa Subway Ultralite 12 using an Ashdown ABM 600 Evo IV and a Genzler Magellan 800. Basses were passive P Bass with TI Flats AND A Sandberg California VM4 with D’addario NYXL’s. Tried out in a 4m x 4m room with solid walls, an acoustically treated wooden floor with a large central carpet square. The speakers were positioned side by side in free space (Mesa “Portrait orientation” to better match Monaco). I found the following; 1) Mesa noticeably quieter than Monaco 2) Monaco more bass presence and punch than Mesa 3) Mesa more mid-range presence than Monaco 4) Monaco had better note definition in the low ranges -particularly up to 5th fret on E and A strings (using flat EQ settings on both speakers) 5) Slight upper mid-range emphasis with the Mesa but not with the Monaco 6) The Monaco seems to have slightly less forward mid-range than the Mesa. 7) Via The Monaco the Sandberg’s mid frequency “honk” is tamed a little, making it sound a little more P-Bass-like - but much clearer 😎 The Mesa is brighter and more mid-range focussed - the Sandberg mid-range “Honk” is back when using the Mesa. 9) The Monaco has a fuller bass response than the Mesa 10) Putting the Monaco on the small tilt stand makes only minor differences to the sound – a little clearer perhaps but nothing significant. 11) The Mesa benefits from being on the small tilt stand which tightens up the bass and makes everything easier to hear. 12) The Sandberg has roundwound strings so there some string noise BUT this is present to the same extent with both speakers. I like the size, and the light weight - very handy and manoeuvrable. The Monaco seems well built and the top handle does NOT get in the way of the Genzler nor the Ashdown (which overlaps the speaker but the feet locate on the top of the Monaco so no problem). Nice Speaker and at home, if I had to choose between them for a “complete” home speaker the Monaco would win. Part 2 - The Monaco at a 3hour rehearsal. We are a loud 4 piece, and a single Monaco was used to replace a 2xVanderkley EXT112 stack. In this context the Monaco was insufficiently loud and I didn’t feel sufficiently bold to crank it to excessive levels on the amp which was being presented with an 8 Ohm load rather than the 4Ohm Vanderkley stack. However, despite the lack of that familiar bass “hit” associated with the inability to hear what I’m actually playing, the opposite seems to be the case with the Monaco. Less trouser flap but more information about which notes are being played. Very odd, but good! After an hour, I added one of my Vanderley EXT 112's (set up beneath the Monaco). This combination sounded great. Very full and certainly "better" than 2 VDK EXT 112’s. Very punchy and very easy to hear without being "in yer face" - a kind of magical property and somehow the opposite of what I usually find i.e. I'm plenty loud enough in the mix, but I can't hear what I'm playing! There was very good sound dispersion around the rehearsal space - I could hear what I was doing throughout the room which is not the case when using the Vanderkleys alone – where off axis and relatively close to the speaker there is a noticeable decline in volume. I haven't compared the Mesa's directly in this regard, but I have noticed a similar property in the past, so I'd be confident that the same would hold true. For context I had a Barefaced Big Baby 2 a few years back and, from memory, I’d say the Monaco is a more coherent speaker with a “better” low frequency response. Certainly, in terms of hearing more of what’s being played, the Monaco seems noticeably better. As per the Monaco, a single BB2 was not loud enough, so I used it in the same way as the Monaco, - a single VDK with BB2 on top. This combination was OK, but not better than 2 VDKs. So going for 2 BB2’s to replace the 2 Vanderkleys would probably not have been a worthwhile (or inexpensive) move. I prefer the overall sound of the Monaco to the BB2 as the former produces a surprisingly punchy bass for its size without being “boomy”. It is a more articulate and coherent speaker - you can really hear what you're doing. I suspect that the design really does pay dividends in terms of hearing what is being played, and, in moderately loud bands (particularly with PA support in bigger venues) I’d say that a single Monaco would be more likely to be used successfully than a single BB2, VDK EXT 112 or a Mesa Subway Lite 1x12. In a louder setting, I think two Monaco’s might be needed. Overall, the Monaco is a great moderately sized speaker. It’s very even across the frequencies, it’s punchy and it really is easy to hear what you’re playing, whether standing right in front of it or at some distance. It has a fuller sound than the Mesa 12inch and I strongly prefer it to a BB2. It’s light, easy to shift and well designed and built. So, big “thank you” to Stephen and LFSys and I hope business (and its growing range) gets the success it deserves and I’m sorry I took so long to produce this review!!

So, ok as long as using wireless system, but not if using stereo cable from bass to passive mixer . Many Thanks

Supplemental question if I may ............ Will a passive mini mixer (Behringer MX 400) work as the means to combine the stereo output from the bass, or is this just replicating the original wiring issue within the bass? I guess I'm asking ... do I need either an active 2 channel mixer or dual channel pre-amp .... and if so ..... any ideas?

Probably time to start a new thread .......... But before I do .... I like the sound of the separated Pickups - jerry rigged into a mixer and then into my amp. Obviously not at all practical at the moment and until I use it "live" I won't know whether to keep it "modified". I could wire up a stereo jack output on the guitar, use a stereo lead, to a Y cable and onto separate channels on a mixer and then, combined, to the amp. If it sounds OK I'll see about a wireless set up - I see there's a Legato Stereo Wireless "dongle" available - might this do the trick? I could reinstate the volume controls on the bass (no tone control) wired separately to the stereo output. It would give me the chance to modify the tone by adjusting the volumes of each pup. Any reason not to do this? Thoughts invited - probably all a waste of time but I do like the bass in terms of playability etc. and if all this works it'll be a lots less expensive than buying a replacement. I'll start a new thread with the "build" plus photo's if it all looks promising after the rats nest stage. Thanks for the advice so far.

OK - it's a rabbit hole ......... but through a small rig it sounds VERY promising. I guess I'd just need to find a 2 channel pedal board pre-amp to make it practical ........ oh and fill up lots of holes in the Scratchplate and get hearing protectors for all the flack I'd get from the rest of the band ....... The wireless bit would be between the pedal board and the amp 🤣

Well that's a surprise/disappointment ... so no real advantage to an active bass used wirelessly then...... Anyway, I now have my P and J pups wired separately to a mixer and it sounds very good and significantly different (albeit via the mixer head phone socket) If it sounds this good through my bass rig, it'll be a problem!!!!

So .... been experimenting and I guess there might be a good reason for active basses - even with Wireless .......... I invite all to comment and put me straight if this is complete ^*&llocks!!! Thinking about PJ basses (or basses with more than 1 pickup) I have always been a little frustrated by the effect that changing one volume control (certainly at "max") affects the Volume/tone of the whole caboodle - insertion loss I believe - which seems perfectly logical to me and my albeit limited understanding of electronics, and which is somewhat inescapable in a passive circuit. So, I guess one way round this is to amplify each channel before "mixing" the signal subsequently in the chain. As I have a "mule" bass I wired the P and J pickups separately to a mixer this morning. And it works really well! Better tone and ability to mix each channel with no effect on the other. Added benefit of tone control on each channel too! So, I thought, why not just build a stereo-out and use the same setup "live" - got quite excited ........ before realizing that this would preclude wireless operation (unless there's a stereo wireless system out there?) And then the mists cleared and it dawned on me that an active bass does exactly this! Doh!

Yep - had several cables from them now, all good and UK assembled @ reasonable cost. 👍

So ....... no need for an Active unless I feel the need for more tone controls ON the bass rather than the Pre-amp/Amp ............ How disappointing, Gas Evaporating ............😌

Yep - I did find the issues with cheaper Wireless systems - so always have a cable to hand should there be interference problems. However, I haven't had problems with dropout since changing to a Boss WL 20 and I can not detect any change in signal quality, when using wired or wireless. I've used the Boss WL20 with active and passive basses with no issues (I did read up about it when choosing between the WL20L and the WL20 and chose the non L version for a reason I can no longer recall!) - however my Gigging bass is active and I have no "impedance issus that I can detect. So these technical issues associated with wireless units aside, is the reason for choosing Active vs Passive now purely a preference as to where one wants to set the tone, i.e. on the amp (pre-amp)or on the guitar? I tend to leave the tone on the bass alone and maybe use a change in the blend between the pickups for different styles during a set. The Amp gets set up for the venue acoustics at the get go and that's about it apart from pedals for Drive/Octave etc. I'm interested as I have the urge to buy a "new" bass and am weighing up the active vs passive options.

Oops - probably should be in the Bass guitar section ........

I know that there are several reasons for the choice of active vs passive electronics. One of them seems to be that Active basses address the issue of signal loss via (long) leads and once the signal has degraded you can't adequately address this using external EQ. Isn't this argument invalid where wireless systems are employed?

I'm looking forward to an update from Al 😉 after a few gigs, (it'll be fascinating to see how empirical observation aligns with theory). I find it really difficult to judge PA speakers other than by hearing them in a live setting with a band. I do hope you've got a lot of gigs within the next 3 weeks Al - 'cos I "need" some new PA speakers for the 8th April ....... 😄

Isn't the Sandberg a VT 4 rather than a TM4?

Very interesting - quick question re. "gain at mixer" from a novice (me!). Am I right in thinking there might be 3 (4 including FX's?) controls which affect gain before the PA speaker. 1) the incoming Mic sensitivity control, 2) the channel fader control for the channel in question 3) the Master (left/right) faders to the PA speakers So which of these would you see as being the main target for feedback control (if any?) or are they all equally important? I've been through the process of setting the mic sensitivity/gain on the mixer for each mic and then the channel outputs to give the appropriate LED responses on the mixer, so I guess ideally it's a question of the master fader in concert with the PA speaker volume control. But I'm weak .... and I can be found fumbling around (tweaking) the other knobs 🙄

OK - borrowed some speaker stands - rigged up PA using a small Soundcraft mixer. Tried the Sandberg straight into the mixer using HiZ input alone and with some Spotify piped in. Tonally, it's pretty much as before but clearer now it's centred at Ear level. Yes some of the bass "muffle" has gone, but, for me at least, the E string performance is lacking - "dead" if you like. Higher up the fretboard - probably OK. So, tried the D.I. route, Sandberg> Genzler on-board D.I. preEQ > Mixer. Sounds better - livelier all round and the sound is better - actually sounds as I expect a bass to sound. However, the E string still sounds relatively "dead". Carefully listening to piped-in music (OK it is from a phone via the mixer) I would say the "produced" bass has a similar tonal quality. I guess it all depends on what you're after, so probably OK if not loud. Would it be OK for a 5 string ............not so sure. Would I use the 710's for bass ...... in an emergency, yes, as a routine replacement for backline - no. So there you have it. YMMV Interesting experiment , for me at least, I clearly need bigger/better PA speakers if I'm going to succeed in reducing stage volumes I'll need some PA support. Even then, unless it's IEM's all round (unlikely) I'll need a backline amp/cab set-up. Probably rather go for very good 12 inch PA speakers and no sub, due to transportation .... for now at least. I'll check my piggy bank 🙄

2 and a half feet - ?750mm! My bass cabs would be taller than me on a 750mm stand! But, I'll try the 710's on PA stands as promised - just as soon as I can get them from the rehearsal space - I can hardly wait!! 🙂

Actually, both the 710 and the Sense 12 were on an open frame support about 500mm off the floor but it's a good observation and I certainly can't argue with experience. As soon as I get the chance I'll use the PA speaker stands and try again. Good call!

I'm increasingly unsure about the rights and wrongs of all this. I spend 90% of my time playing bass using headphones, usually with a backing track of the music I'm practicing/playing along to. All works fine and can hear myself and the backing band! I guess that 2 x 2 inch speakers - even less if I use in Ear Monitors. During gigs, we often put a music feed through the PA during breaks - full band loud enough for people to dance along to if they feel the urge. And then we get up and play with a huge acreage of speaker cones. I suspect a lot of this is down to competing with loud drummers but I also believe that there are "traditional" beliefs that lead to lots of unnecessary/wasted volume. Why is it virtually impossible to get guitar players to get their cabs off the floor? Why do guitar players, listening to their heroes perform on u-Tube on their PC's or smart speakers, insist that the guitar just won't make a good noise through the PA ('cos it's not a guitar cab!!). Why do I need two huge speaker cabs which are played with a hugely powerful amp (at <20% of it's output) - except to get the top cab nearer to my ears so that I can hear myself? Another band playing similar material in the same venues use a 10" Markbass cab for the bassist and I can hear him! However, if we do find a way to control the volume so that everything can be heard and the dynamics are sufficient to whip the audience into a dancing frenzy, it'll be even more important (and worthwhile) to ensure that the bass sounds great. At which point I'd go back to my suspicion that, in the long term, 2 x RCF 710's may not do justice to Al's bass playing, (and investment made in gear)!! 😏😄

OK - Headphones donned and had a proper listen. The bass sounds tidy and clean and I can hear the notes being played. Can't hear much in the trouser flapping frequencies (and who can tell from a phone clip) which might be as intended. Great vocals (and nice bass playing of course!) and everything well controlled and civilised.👍 Makes the band I'm in sound like a war zone! 🙄 I would expect the 710's to be better than the 310's so maybe they'll work well for you. I have the opposite issue, which is that my 710's are great but probably not sufficient to deal with more than the 3 vocal mics, at the volume we tend to deliver. We have a fantastic female singer and to do her justice (and be able to add other stuff to the mix) it would be great to get the Art 932's (plus a sub) and stick the Kick Drum/ Snare through them too when necessary. The chances of getting the guitars through the PA with quiet(er) backline are low .... but I'm working on it. I could still fit all this in my car, the sub only really occupies the space of the speaker stand at the venue so stage space would be OK and I would probably reduce my cabs from 2 to a single unit (and get PA support where necessary.) Expensive hobby this music malarkey!

Interim Update.......... for the Instant Gratification folks .... I've set up the RCF Art710's alongside a Studiomaster Sense +12 inch Monitor for comparison. I've taken a DI from my Genzler Magellan. The sound produced by the E string isn't great - it's quite dead , almost muffled. (Sandberg VM4, Roundwound D'addario NXYL's) strings) As the frequency increases above 440Hz the sound is pretty good with more harmonic information. Volume wise it might be OK for quiet gigs, but I wouldn't use it "alone" for a live gig, except to reinforce the backline. I tried using a sub-octaver to get an idea of what a B string might do and I feel that a B string might be a bridge too far in terms of sound quality. The Studiomaster has a nicer bass response in so far as it sounds fuller and with more harmonic info. However, it breaks up rather quickly - OK as a bedroom noodling practice amp though. (or indeed a monitor) I'll try again with the band and mixer etc. on Wednesday, but I suspect I wouldn't be happy using the 710's in a live situation to carry all the bass sound reproduction. Maybe with a sub, but I'm not sure the Crossover point would be appropriate. And that's with a 4 string. I'd also be concerned about what effect it might have on the sound of the rest of the mix, but I am rather conservative in this regard. It strikes me that there are really 2 elements to this. One is the innate quality of the sound of bass guitar via the 710's and the other is whether they can deliver sufficient volume and maintain this quality. I certainly wouldn't be happy with either. Maybe in a quiet band ........... ? But even then, and even if the audience doesn't care about the quality of the bass-sound, it would distract me o end! More to follow..........

Just back home after gig. Another "blàst" but not helpful on the 710's, as we ended up using the venues PA and only one 710 as monitor. But, I'll assemble the full PA tomorrow and try it out for you. I also have rehearsal on Wednesday and will add the bass into mix of vocals/guitar/kick to see how it copes. Sorry to keep you waiting!