Baloney Balderdash

Little known, but absolutely true, fact! : Cliff Burton recorded the bass track for "Master of Puppets" with finger puppets of respectively James Hetfield, Lars Ulrich and Kirk Hammett, but strangely enough looking remarkably similar to how they did in their "Load" phase, placed on the tuning pegs of his bass, and with the low E string tuning peg being equipped with a finger puppet of the Grim Reaper himself. He was truly prophetic like that. Though the conspiracy theory goes that it was actually really part of a black magic ritual that he performed to place a curse on Metalica, sacrificing his own life as part of the deal, and as an evil ironic stroke of genius using James Hetfield's own words against him, basically having James unknowingly chant the incantation sealing the ritual to the doom of his own, as well as Lars's and Kirk's, creativity :

Loved my Wetsbury Standard, which I unfortunately was stupid enough to sell, the Yamaha Revstar gets pretty close though, and I will no doubt acquire one of those at some point. Until then my cheap budget Epiphone SG Special, with the stock pickups replaced for an IronGear Dirty Torque in the bridge position and an IronGear Blues Engine in the neck position, that I named "Epicphoneya", is actually not too bad either:

My old Peavey amp and my SWR Triad 1 cab actually both pretty much look like if they had just left the factory, even if being from somewhere around the early 90's and both bought fairly recently used. My main bass, an Ibanez GSRM20 Mikro Bass, from the December 2010 production, bought April 2011 looks pretty battered though, the worst blemish being from a failed haphazard attempt to drill an extra pickup cavity in the far neck position, which then later was filled up with filler mass and painted and varnished over, though quite poorly executed as well, this haphazard procedure also causing 2 small chips of the end of the fretboard wood to be ripped off by the drill piece ramming into it, as the drilling machine at some point spun out of my control, and since I stupidly enough didn't even bother remove the neck first. Here's a frontal shot of the whole bass : Here's a closeup the blemish from the haphazard failed attempt to drill an extra far neck pickup cavity, and the holes in the freboard at the last fret is from taking off the neck, filling out the neck screw holes for a tighter fit back on, however resulting in me needing to drill new pilot holes for the screws, but drilling far too deep, all the way through the fretboard, and then filling out the resulting holes in the fretboard with glued in wooden sticks, one of the previously mentioned chips in the fretboard wood is also visible on this picture (I have pondered on at some point thoroughly but carefully removing the filler mass that I pretty sloppily filled the failed pickup cavity with, and then redo the job, this time using a much more durable filler mass and paying more attention to getting it done properly, though this far, a couple of years by now, it seems like the original filler mass holds up just perfectly fine, but I just would wish I had made a better effort to make it look decent and that I had bothered doing the needed research and bought a filler mass that with guarantee would hold up at least as good as the mahogany wood the body of the bass is made of, instead of on a whim sloppily just slapping the first thing I had at hand that could do the job down in the hole, without much consideration really going into the process, unfortunately that seems to be a recurrent theme for me, acting spontaneously on a more or less random whim with a resulting haphazardly and poorly thought out and executed outcome) : And here's a closeup of the chipped off wood pieces of the fretboard, one wood chip found again and relatively successfully glued back on, but another wood piece never found again, and now lost and missing forever (luckily the fretwire remained perfectly seated and completely undamaged, and I have also pondered on possibly getting it fixed by a luthier, since I contacted one about it, sending him pictures of the damage, who confirmed that it would be perfectly doable, by cutting out a piece of the fretboard around the damaged area and then replacing it with a perfectly matching undamaged piece of wood, cut to precisely fit the removed part, which he claimed he ought to be able to do sufficiently precisely and elegantly subtle for it only to be noticeable for someone specifically looking for it) : And here's a big chipped off piece of the thick polythene coating of the bass from the side of the upper end towards the bridge part of the body, happening back to when the bass was still relatively new and I accidentally dropped the gigbag with the bass inside of it on the concrete sidewalk on my way to band rehearsal, luckily nothing else took any kind of damage whatsoever :' And finally this crude/crooked star like "engraving" in the polythene finish/wood, done on purpose by hammering a flat headed screwdriver into the body of the bass, and then dabbing special paint, supposed to replicate the effect of marble, down in the resulting cracks, and after that had dried then additionally dabbing clear glitter nail polish down in the cracks as well, intended to replicate the effect of the kind of star shaped crack that a sharp point impact in a glass window sometimes will result in :

I have admittedly drooled a lot over the basses displayed on the Serek homepage, personally I am particularly fond of the Sacramento model, and if I were to buy one of their basses it would be that model, short scale of course, and then probably equipped with TV Jones Thunder Blade pickups, or perhaps the Novak Thunderbird ones, but really they are all gorgeous basses to look at and listen to, and your's is no exception to that. Though if I ever get to save up the kind of money that a Serek bass would cost me, and can afford to use them on a bass, I'd personally rather chose to spend them on having a custom bass made exactly to my preferred specs by one of the cheaper luthiers who'll do custom work. I absolutely do understand the appeal of these basses though, as said they are absolutely astonishing beautiful instruments, and the ones I've heard demos or sound samples of has sounded no short of amazing as well, I just happens to have some very specific and a bit unusual preferences and wishes when it comes to the ultimate specs for a bass, so getting a bass that would actually fulfill those wishes and be able to closely match my, as said a bit unusual, personal preferences would have priority for me. However had my economical situation been different and I would never have to consider my priorities in that regard and weren't being forced to make such a choice, but was able to afford both I'd most definitely get me a Serek Sacramento bass, or perhaps even a couple. In fact owning a Serek bass is actually quite high up on my bass guitar wish list, just not at the very top, and I'll just have to come to terms with the facts of my economical situation coupled with my other higher priorities making the prospect of me ever actually getting one of these basses extremely slim, with quite high probability even. I suppose that would probably really make it more of a dream than an actual wish, as in : "If only..." ->**deep wistful sigh**<- "...guess we are just not meant to be..." Though they sure do seem to be absolutely amazing instruments, and I can totally see how you would love it so much.

I rest my case... Doesn't own one. Got these though: This one being the original stock old official Ibanez Mikro Bass gigbag that I got with my old 4 string Ibanez GSRM20 Mikro Bass, which is actually my main bass, back when that was still a standard accessory included as part of the deal when you bought a new Ibanez Mikro Bass. It doesn't have the thickest padding (not being of quite as high quality as the separately sold later version of the official Ibanez Mikro Bass gigbag), but it's the perfect size and shape for the Mikro Bass to fit quite snugly inside, which prevents it from skipping around inside the standard guitar gigbag that I later bought, which got thicker padding, and which is actually big enough, despite it being meant for guitars and not basses, for the stock Mikro Bass gigbag packed with my Mikro Bass, to easily fit inside of it, the two gigbags combined this way offering super effective protection, quite sure more effective than any single gigbag on the market would be able to offer, even if it does makes packing and unpacking the bass slightly more circumstantial, though really being a quite minor inconvenience to pay for the extremely solid protection this solution actually offers : And this one being the mentioned gigbag that the gigbag on the above picture is packed inside of when transporting my Mikro Bass : Note that the pictures not quite reflects the actual real size ratio between the 2 bags, the gigbag on the second picture actually ought to had been slightly bigger compared to the size of the gigbag on the first image.

I am quite sure he actually meant "saggy", as in dull and with less attack and articulation, tending to have a somewhat saggy response to your picking, compared to a maple fretboard.

Edit!/Please ignore this post! Wrong quote and no way to edit new quotes into already posted replies or to delete an already posted reply.... Sorry for the spam. Please refer to my reply under this one.

Thanks a lot for your reply. Though in the meantime I moved back to deciding in favor of the NUX Solid Studio IR & Power Amp Simulator, since I discovered that using a bit of full parametric EQ'ing from my Zoom MS CDR70 unit, then going into my EHX Black Finger, tube driven optical compressor, and then into a Behringer MIC100 Ultra Gain Tube Preamp, equipped with an EHX preamp tube, even if the Behringer starve the tube at merely 60V (but still sounds great to me, with a higher quality tube swapped in instead of the cheap crappy stock one), unlike the Black Finger that run it's 2 preamp tubes at proper high 300V voltage, finally going into my poweramp and then my bass cab, actually sounds really great. The Zoom CDR70 and Black Finger I would be using anyway, so space wise it's just the Behringer MIC100 that will take up extra space, compared to if I had gotten the NUX Bass Preamp with integrated cab IR simulation. So figured the over double resolution (34 bit, 88,2kHz, 2048 samples of 50ms length, which is pretty high compared to most other, even more expensive, IR cab simulation units) that the NUX Solid Studio run the cab IR files at, compared to the NUX Bass Preamp, plus the poweramp simulator that it features, would be a much better choice for my use, since I already got a preamp tone that I am really satisfied with. Plus I will get more slots for loading 3rd party cab IR files, and be able to change between them on the fly, even if I won't really be needing that feature.

Yes, but I assume the stated numbers is the measurements for the entire unit, and not just specifically for the 15" woofer, to me anything else wouldn't make much sense, as that indeed would say very little about the actual capabilities of the unit as a whole, and practically make the stated specs completely meaningless and useless. It would be like selling a car stating the top speed of it by how fast it is theoretically possible to roll the wheels when detached from the car. That can't possibly be how it is actually done, can it really? And in case they did in fact chose to state numbers that would actual make sense, be useful, and actually really inform about the actual capabilities of the unit as a whole, then I would think, even if it's sensitivity was really only being 85dB/w, that it would just be a matter of turning up the volume higher, as that would just mean it would be quieter at a certain amount of watt than a unit with higher sensitivity, right?

@Bill Fitzmaurice @stewblack Assuming they are not just making up these numbers, even if some might claim that it is impossible with the size and shape of this PA speaker's (The Box PA 502 A) cabinet, as I wrote the stated frequency response number in the low frequency range for the active PA speaker I suggested in the above quoted post is -3dB at 40Hz (I got those numbers from the manual I linked to), whereas, just as an example, the corresponding stated numbers for the Ampeg PF-115LF and PF-115 HE Portaflex real bass cabinets, each equipped with a 15" speaker unit, like the PA speaker in question, are -3dB at respectively 57Hz and 50Hz. Make of it what you want, but it personally makes me doubt weather the claims about this particular PA speaker in question not being able to reproduce the low end of a bass properly are in fact really also the actual truth. Not saying that the people stating it as a true fact doesn't know what they are talking about or that they are not right, just saying that from me looking and comparing, and judging exclusively by the stated numbers of this PA speaker and various real bass cabs, some by big acclaimed bass gear brands, and me knowing relatively little about the science of acoustics, it personally very much confuses me and makes me in serious doubt who to trust and who would be right here,. Though for sure looking at the most common stated numbers for most other full range PA speakers using a 15" woofer unit it does indeed seem, again only judging by the stated numbers, that most of them would in fact struggle with reproducing the lowest bass notes properly, however, assuming the stated numbers can in fact be trusted, that doesn't seem to be the case for this particular one. Now I do understand the incitament of the manufacture to paint up improved erroneous facts about their products capabilities, on the other hand as far as I know for one that would be illegal (since this would not just be vague and inconcrete exaggerated promises, but directly misleading very specific information that can be measured and verified), and secondly also put both said manufacture and the people distributing and selling their units, and repeating these stated numbers, in a bad light, if they in fact are just made up.

Thank you. Really appreciate when people genuinely likes my music. It's my brain children after all, and a lot of love went into by far most of the music I have created, so means something very special to me when someone else truly appreciate them. I don't know if you got to read my edit before you posted, cause while they are mainly my creations I was helped by 2 friends, 1 respectively on each of those tracks, creating, playing and recording their own parts contributing to the creation of those 2 tracks that way. The first one is particular special to me, because as said, it was one of my first attempts at writing and recording music by myself, and honestly among my own personal top, probably 10, tracks that I am most proud of haven written/composed overall. And you are right, there is also something quite magical over the other track, something very unique, and it is in fact also the only of it's kind I have ever created, even if of course more or less all of my other tracks share some similarities that comes from me haven channeled some of my own soul into them, but no other tracks in quite the same sort of particular unique style. A couple that maybe could be some of it's distant, not quite as wholesome, relatives (a couple of tracks by the psychedelic electronic music duo I was part of called Electro Jar to be more specific, in particular the track "Somewhere Over the Ocean (a song dictated in a dream)", and to a somewhat lesser degree the track "Lost") , but otherwise pretty much a one of a kind Jacob Læby (as in my name, and as in my identity as a song writer/composer, not as in the name, previously shared with me, of the project that track belongs to) track.

This is one of my earliest recordings on my voyage of composing/writing solo material and doing my own productions and mixing, dating back to 2006 (previously I had just taken care of coming up with and playing both/either the lead guitar and/or the bass parts, as well giving my opinions/suggestions, to songs that predominantly was created by other people involved in the original bands/musical projects that I had been part of up till then, and not really haven been involved in the recording process of the demos and releases we did, other than playing my parts, and eventual giving my opinions/suggestions to the mix, but without having any hand whatsoever in the technical aspect of it) : And this is one of my more recent compositions, recordings and productions, belonging to my "Fjernsind" project that previously shared my own name, "Jacob Læby" (for a bit less experimental example see the video in my signature) : Though the piano and flute (flute sample played on a synth) on the first track was played and recorded by a friend of mine who goes by the name Per Cnöeldh, and one of the backing vocals, the bass (not the baritone, that was played by me), and the synth (the kind of droning sort of deep buzzing one, as well as the quite subtle melodic sort of organ/deep flute like one, but not the weird swirling effects, those were created by me) of the second track was played and recorded by another friend of mine who wish to stay anonymous.

It's indeed a beautiful short scale, though I personally would have chosen to have it equipped with pickups that were to the more aggressive side. To each their own though, as long as you got what suits you best personally. Congratulations! It sure got the looks.

As someone who weren't on this forum a year ago and who have no intention of looking through the entire archive of threads on here, I for one personally really appreciate this re-run of the topic, as I actually am pondering going this way myself, also new people might have some new input to the topic, as well as new solutions might have hit the market since then. I honestly don't see the problem, lots of topics on this, as well as just about every other forum on the internet, are taken up frequently and rarely anyone complains, unless it happens to be one of almost identical noob topics that recurrently keeps being posted with what seems to be a weekly basis, then you'll usually see a couple of complains, as well as some people getting a laugh at the expense and much to the confusion of the genuinely ignorant and unaware OP. This topic however doesn't seem to be one of those, on the contrary, to me it seems to be a very useful topic of the times we are in, perfectly in line with the turn the evolution of bass rigs have taken in recent years, with a wide variety of preamp pedals hitting the market, a fair deal of those with build in cabinet simulation, and high quality digital multi effect units with quite realistic amp modeling and IR cab simulation capabilities, and generally more and more bass players moving away from the classic bass amp + bass cab setup to something more practical and mobile. @stewblack Know that you started a, not only very useful for me personal in the kind of situation I am facing at the moment, but in my opinion very useful topic for a lot of the bass players of today, my appreciations for that, thank you.

Thanks a lot. It was a track I started creating just for fun quite a while ago. Just a backing synth/organ and drums track programmed in Reason 5 and then me recording some more or less entirely improvised bass on top of it, after ripping out the indificual Reason tracks to my preferred DAW, Reaper, the bass as far as I remember having an 1 octave up effect mixed in with the regular bass signal, from my Sub'N'Up Mini octaver, as is going to be an always on effect on the bass for this project, and then obvious my heavy high gain distortion setup was used as well, though my current high gain distortion setup sounds slightly different, and I believe I might have added some VST effects to the original bass recording as well on this track. I kind of had dropped that track and didn't intend to ever finish it, but last night I took another listen to it, and found that it actually had the potential to be turned into a great track with some further work, so I spend all night editing and mixing it, as well as minutiously cutting up an audio file ripped from a text to speech old fashioned robot voice app I got that I fed with an old poem that I written a while back, for the robot blabbering to fit in rhythmically, as it otherwise juts sounded like one incoherent stream of mindlessly more or less randomly listed up as a more less random pile, as well as the result of that work was copied to several tracks, using a bunch of VST effects to both make the text to speech robot sound more alien, but at the same time more clear and articulated, which wasn't exactly an easy job. I am actually really satisfied with the result, even if the "real" songs I am working on at the moment for the project in most likelihood will turn out vastly different, as the plan is to use EZ Drummer 2 for the drum parts, which has much more realistic sounding drum samples than Reason 5, as well as some percussion will be physical and played and recorded live, and that the bass lines for the songs I am working on generally are being somewhat more complex than the ones featured in this track as well, and all in all I will most likely go for a far less electronic/industrial sound, than this track displays, as for for secondary flavor instrumentation beside bass, drums and vocal, for one I will primarily utilize either real physically played and recorded instruments or programmed ones using quality instrument samples from the Kontakt 5 VSTi. Nothing wrong with Reason 5, I actually prefer the way it works when programming music to regular DAW midi programming, and while not really working all that well for creating realistically sounding programmed compositions, it is an absolutely perfect program for creating electronic music that is fully intended to actually sound electronic and not like physical instruments. But who knows, this project might not eventually end up exactly as planed after all, and instead turn into something more similar to this early rogue demo probe for the project, too early in the process really to say, basically just having finished the bass parts for a handful songs, that still need to be recorded and then have added drums/percussion and vocals, as well as some more sparingly used additional instrumentation and ambient effects that the plan is will exclusively serve a more flavor based function.

"Rogue Probe" by all I nil, a work in progress progressive psychedelic stoner rock solo project of mine, which primary instrumentation is going to be bass, drums and vocals.. This particular track is sort of a demo for that project though, and genre wise it would be more like psychedelic industrial doom/stoner rock. And the lyrics are: Rogue Probe Nothing to hide, nothing to see we're going under reached the surface to breath like the tip of the iceberg there's more underneath battleships, aliens, deep blue and freezing out of mind, out of sight, out to hunt out of season U-boat out of torpedoes and reason the aliens strike back come in peace out of treason Mars Attack! Computer-animated nightmare Turn up the feedback only if you dare seal up the crack pipe Artwork is by me as well, by the way. Now also up on Badncamp for free download and listening: https://all-i-nil.bandcamp.com/ Here's a bit more information about this track and the project:

Some say it makes a huge difference, some say it makes absolutely no difference, both opinions sometimes seen from people having actual experience with doing that kind of mod to their bass. Personally I got no experience with it, but I am kind on leaning towards the opinion that the difference will properly be fairly minimal. Beside, how long do you really need your notes to sustain? I mean when I strike a note on my bass, which is equipped with a relatively standard mass bridge, and with the strings not going through the body, it will sustain for much much longer than I will ever need it to do, unless I deliberately mute it (just listen to for how long that overtone I strike at the end of the track linked to in my signature sustains (just took time, spot on whole 17 seconds before it has completely died out, and that with a relatively soft pick attack, also actually I think I even faded it out slowly in that mix, so it actually likely sustained for even longer). No harm in trying it out I guess, beside possibly being a waste of your money, but I wouldn't expect too much of a noticeable change if I were you.

Here's a demo, where the guy, beside also demonstrating the clean boost mode of the Behringer SF300 Super Fuzz, also demonstrates how the pedal sound when boosting both the treble and bass in fuzz Mode 1 (around the 03:55 mark) and cutting both the treble and bass in fuzz Mode 2 (around the 07:01 mark), to cancel out some of the very mids heavy effect of Mode 1 and some of the very mids scooped effect of Mode 2, making for a more flat response sounding fuzz tone. His clean tone though does appear to be somewhat mids scooped to begin with, unlike the clean tone of the bass in the demos of this pedal linked to in the OP.

Well it is definitely a quite high gain fuzz, even with the gain set low, and it is one of the more "artificially" sounding fuzzes too, which I guess is due to it being an octave fuzz, actually adding an analog fuzzed out octave up to your signal. So it is possible the effect just wasn't for you, though I guess it is possible it wasn't happy about your active bass too, some fuzzes aren't in general.

Catch on a bit slowly but then... Wauh!

I am about to make my bass rig mobile, and I have pondered on at some point buying an active PA speaker, just to have something in place of an amp. The one I have in sight is the ralatively cheap The Box PA 502 A. Judging from the specs at least it ought to be be able to handle bass fairly well. 15" 300W woofer and 100W tweeter, with a frequency response that claims to be 35Hz to 20kHz (-10dB)/40Hz to 18kHz (-3dB), which should mean that as long as you will not need to go lower than the low E of a standard tuned 4 string bass, it should reproduce it quite well. That's in theory though. But if these numbers are legit some dedicated bass cabs in existence got worse low end response. Here's a link to it from Thomann: https://www.thomann.de/gb/the_box_pa502a_aktives_fullrangesystem.htm?ref=intl&shp=eyJjb3VudHJ5IjoiZ2IiLCJjdXJyZW5jeSI6IjQiLCJsYW5ndWFnZSI6ImVuIn0%3D And here's a link to the manual: https://images.static-thomann.de/pics/atg/atgdata/document/manual/160815_c_160815_r2_en_online.pdf

Have been wanting one of these for a long while, and I can't really excuse not doing something about it by not being able to afford it, cause it is dirt cheap, about as cheap as guitar pedal effects come. Finally though I pulled the tricker, and I just picked my new Behringer SF300 Super Fuzz pedal up from the shop where it was delivered to by the postal service for pick up a couple of days ago. Man, this pedal is amazing. Might even be the #1 greatest deal there is on effect pedals for bass guitar. It just sounds absolutely astonishing great. And the one I got seemingly have no issues whatsoever, well, beside from the obviously fact of it being in a plastic housing as all these dirt cheap Behringer pedals happens to be. Doesn't bother me the slightest though. This got to be one the absolute greatest fuzz pedals for use with bass in existence, regardless of price, no short of sublime. For those of you who do not know this cheap Behringer fuzz is a pretty accurate clone of the now discontinued Boss FZ-2, which again was a take on the circuit from the legendary Univox Super Fuzz octave fuzz (Boss basically just added a 2 band active EQ section, and then threw in a bonus clean boost function mode). Here's a picture of my exact unit, and the settings I so far have settled for (possibly hard to see on this picture, but I am using Fuzz Mode 1. Fuzz Mode 1 being quite mids heavy, but me partially making up for that by boosting both the bass and treble, and Fuzz Mode 2 being heavily mids scooped, exactly as the 2 modes on the original Univox units. Also the reason why the picture looks a bit gritty is because I didn't bother taking a separate close up shot of the pedal, but just cropped it out from a shoot of my entire bass effect pedals setup): I use it in one of the parallel effect loops of my Boss LS-2, and it sounds awesome both when mixed with the clean signal, coming from the other parallel effects loop of the LS-2, for a more regular classic kind of high gain fuzz tone with the added articulation and low end from the clean signal, as well as with my high gain distortion setup, which happens to also reside in the opposite effects loop of the LS-2, engaged, consisting of a a vintage style relatively high gain Rat distortion stacked into the fairly dark sounding medium kind of gain overdrive, delivered by my Joyo California Sound, parallelly mixed together with the fuzz in about equal measures resulting in a massively thick, monstrously heavy and ballsy, but at the same time gnarly, blistering, crackling and spluttering, super high gain, earth, or at least ear, shattering, fuzz eruption of vulcanic proportions. Love it! Seriously spanks butts! Instant stoner/doom rock in a plastic box! Here's a great demonstration from YouTube by someone else of the SF300 Super Fuzz pedal's capabilities as a bass fuzz :

The differences are extremely minuscule, for sure there would be no possible way to tell the difference in a mix with those two basses. Though the maple neck one does sound ever so slightly brighter and more lively to me and the rosewood neck one ever so slightly darker and duller, but honestly that could just be the strings, and I actually kind of suspects it very likely might be just exactly that in this case. Also some playing styles, amps and eventual microphones and other gear used for recording do lend them self more to bring out the differences in different basses than others, and some styles of playing paired with some gear/recording gear would make more or less everything sound more or less the same, without any doubt, for instance I couldn't tell any tonal difference whatsoever in the slapping parts of your video. And of course the audio quality of the video, once it's been through the converter to YouTube format, doesn't make it any easier to tell tonal differences when they are so subtle as happens to be the case between the sound samples you recorded of those two basses.

Sure, that too. Some strings will be more flexible than others at the same amount of tension, which again will also partly be influenced by other factors specific for the individual instrument, like for instance, just to name one, the breaking angle of the strings at the bridge. As well as at a certain point thicker gauge strings will start to feel stiffer and less flexible on a shorter scale length instrument than they would on an instrument with a longer scale length, tuned to the same note, even if actually naturally being under less tension on the shorter scale. Which is also true the other way around, thinner gauged strings will at a certain point start to feel more floppy and flexible on a longer scale length instrument than on a shorter scale length instrument, tuned to the same note, even if actually being under more tension from the longer scale. Just think about playing a standard 34" scale bass with strings that was picked to have the same kind of tension as the strings on a regular electric guitar typically will have (like try to compare the tension of the individual strings between, let's say, to pick 1 typical set of strings for the 2 instruments respectively that seems to be a very popular choice, a .046 to .010 string set on an electric guitar and then a .105 to .045 set on a 4 string bass, both tuned in E standard tuning, as is most common, but of course an octave apart). It would be an absolute floppy mess.

Except not everyone play the same scale length instrument and in the same tuning. Tension will change according to that you know.