thodrik

Must say at current price levels I would probably get a Sandberg over a Sadowsky if I just needed a nice gigging bass that sounded great. When I was buying my last bass it was between a Sandberg JM4 and Sadowsky Metro MV4 and the price difference was about £200-300 between the models, wheras now its about £800. The Sadowsky just won out at the time because I thought ultra bright attack and snap on the Sadowsky just won out. The Maple on the Sadowsky necks seems to be really hard, which along with the pickups and preamps seems to give a pretty punchy sound. The Sandberg (think it was a JM4 though I have played others too that were similar) had a naturally sweeter tone, even when played acoustically, which although really really nice wasn't what I was looking for (lots of punch and snap). Horses for courses. I don't regret buying the thing either as I had literally spent years looking for the right bass for me. I tried Wal, Rickenbackers, Overwater, Spector, Warwick, Musicman, Zon, Lakland, vintage 1960s and 1970 Fenders and countless others. At the end only the Sandberg and Sadowsky seemed to play and sound spectacular to my tastes, though that probably says a lot more about me than the quality or the basses I tried, apart from the £3500 Fender that played and sounded horrible and was in terrible condition!

Its been ages since I did all my theory exams and unless I start playing the double bass again it probably won't return! To be honest in bands you are lucky if the guitarist knows to find an F#/Gb and the rest and have any knowledge of basic major and minor scales and playing with a certain key, let alone knowing when a sharp becomes a flat. Too many band practices I've had with potential bands have contained lots of fretboard watching or somebody saying 'play here...then here...then here!' before turning to the drummer and going ' Hey try "Dum cha cha Dum cha cha" then hit the big cymbal'! Not knowing when an A# becomes a Bb isn't that important, unless you are actually using notation, I just want somebody that knows what they are doing generally.

[quote name='Chris2112' post='963714' date='Sep 21 2010, 08:03 PM']But if you look Bubinga, bassists and guitarists are ridiculously bad for being stuck in the past. In the 80's, things looked set to take off. Graphite was new to the market and those who adopted it quickly became very proficient at crafting basses with it. Headless design took off, as did active electronics. Solid state amps came and moved the goal posts on heavy, flabby sounding valve amps etc etc. Then things seemed to stop and largely went back in time in the 90's! Luthiers everywhere continued to improve on the foundations of Ken Smith, Fodera and Alembic etc etc but the frenzy of development seen in the 80's just seemed to tail off (as did musical creativity in general, sadly). We've come leaps and bounds from the 80's in the past 20 years, but it's sad to think that those days of excellent development and creation are gone. I guess synth players are the same. They've got incredible technology now but they all want to get their hands on 1980's kit too! [/quote] Its not being stuck in the past, its being comfortable with a classic design that has endured, delivers no matter what the gig or the style of music and never looks out of place at gig regardless of it being a folk, punk, jazz or metal gig. More technology doesn't always make for 'better', it just makes it different. I don't know how a headless bass is that much of an improvement on the concept of the electric bass guitar, though I would be willing to hear it anyone that owns one. Many of the top-Fender inspired builders have greatly developed the design of Fender inspired basses, with chambering of bodies, pre-amps, the use of CNC, 'plekking', which have all been done with the intent of improving the design and quality control and making better instruments with fewer 'duds' being released. What you are left is a bass that is good balance between old and new. Obviously this isn't for everybody as some don't see the point of changing the original design of Fenders, either because they thought that Fenders were fine as they were or were rubbish in the first place. I'm not that backward, I do own a Vigier Excess which is full of features that would never have been included on an original Fender, (zero fret, the carbon neck system thing, powerful pre-amp etc), but that doesn't stop a passive Fender from being a classic design in its its simplicity, or Fender-inspired instruments from being equally as good (Sadowsky, Nordstrand, some of the Laklands). A good Fender is something special. I would sell the Vigier before my Precision without question (its easier to find a really good Vigier than a really good late 1970s Fender Precision) I haved played Warwicks, Wals, Overwater, Spector, but in terms of playability or sound none of them did anything to convince me that I would be improving my sound by ditching a battered old Fender or my 'Fender-clone' Sadowsky.

I would probably say that a 'proper' Jazz bass is the Fender standard model, (for snob reasons I'll say the US model too) four strings and passive. All the rest I would really classify as J-basses, taking elements of the original Fender design and changing it in some way. Being honest I would classify them all as jazz basses really, as it just seems like an exercise in splitting hairs.

[quote name='Mark Latimour' post='963152' date='Sep 21 2010, 11:41 AM']Pricing wise that's about spot on what you would pay if you imported that bass yourself. IOW, if its what you want, you won't get it any cheaper direct from Sadowsky. Current Retail on a base NYC Will Lee $3975 Add: Maple top (assuming its not "Master Grade"): $300 Add: Standard Sadowsky shipping charge to UK: $200 Total direct cost from Sadowsky: $4475 Current exchange rate (assuming you can get mid-market, you can't): 0.644 Cost in GBP: £2888 Add VAT and fees on import at 20%: £576 Total cost to your door in GBP: £3464 Basically, the additional cost of buying from that shop is about £35 and you get it shipped to you next day rather than having it sit through customs. Now, I can't comment on whether the price of Sadowskys is fair (but I own one), but that price in that shop is pretty darn good all things considered.[/quote] Thats what I would have thought. Also I think that the fact that Sadowskys are more expensive than Musicmans is neither here nor there really, especially if you don't like Sadowskys in the first place. I don't like Warwick thumb basses or Musicmans, but I don't go around saying how grossly overpriced they are because another make of bass I personally prefer (Fender Precision) is cheaper. After a point, it becomes a matter of identifying what you want to get out of a bass and buying accordingly. For me the 'spend more = better bass' becomes a bit blurred after you decide that a US standard Fender isn't quite what you are looking for.

Must...find...money!

Congratulations on both counts. I would just give it a thorough playing over checking that there isn't any obvious dead spots, bad fretwork or construction issues, which should be pretty obvious. I doubt you will have any problems though, just have fun.

Yeah very expensive but the NYCs are the generally custom made for the person ordering them. Much like any high end stuff its only really worth getting one if you like the inherent tone and concept behind the basses. Not everyone likes the Sadowsky sound and just think of them as highly-priced Fenders with the character taken out. If you want a Fender you should get a Fender. Must say though that I do really like the Metro I got, though given the recent upward surge in their prices I can't say I would buy one at the current prices (I got mine for £1500 which is pretty much the upward limit of what I could spend or would spend on the Metro line, considering the the amount of really good basses available for £1000-1500. If you just want a really good bass you can easily look elsewhere, but only a Sadowsky sounds like a Sadowsky in my opinion. Of course once I actually bought the thing Fender launch the US deluxe series which seem to very similar in style to the Sadowskys (I know the Sad is essentially Fender shaped but the new Fender Deluxes are a lot more 'refined' looking than they used to be). However, I still think that the preamp and bite of the Sadowskys is something I really like. If I was putting all that money into an NYC I would probably go direct to have the exact specs I want. I think that the Will Lee models are the most expensive anyway due to having a slightly different pre-amp, neck and body shape, so I'm guessing they would be more expensive than many other NYC models.

It depends on the kind of music played/money available for strings. Low tunings generally mean I will use the Precision. The Sadowsky gets played at most gigs though, and when I have no money to new strings I try and save them and use the Precision for rehearsals and the like.

I just read my earlier post. I should never attempt to write anything after watching Scotland play football, it puts one into a bad state. Cool thread though, I'm still in the 'pro-improvisation' camp, though of course there are moments where it isn't needed.

I always thought that once you have a decent knowledge of theory and know how to play the bass, you realise that it is possible and fun to change certain parts of a bass line in a song without ruining the feel of the song. There are situations where improvisation doesn't work or is a bit inappropriate, like playing the double bass in an orchestra, or in a project where the leader of a band (ie the guy paying you) wants the bass to play a certain line, a 'serious' cover band where everything has to be played as it was on record, or a certain line that is an integral part of the song. Frankly I think that if none of your band can improvise it can make for a very dull band and often means that they are unable to adapt to anything unusual (string break, drummers skipping a beat etc) in the context of a gig. The fact that 'only musicians' will notice improvisation is pretty much the point. Lots of people who go to gigs actually play instruments themselves and get great pleasure out of watching and listening to someone that is a master of their craft. Also if you can add something extra to a song without getting bad looks from your guitarist it usually increases your enjoyment of playing, which is possibly the main point of playing in the first place. Also if it is 'your song' then you can play it however you want, as it is 'your' song. Not all improvisation is good of course, but I think if you took it out of most blues-based pop/rock/metal music you would ruin the feel, vibe and character of the music itself, which is often as important as the notes that are 'composed' into the song. If I want to hear a brilliant composition, I'll probably listen to Mozart, Vivaldi, Stravinsky or some other guys that really mastered the concepts of theory, harmony and melody, not a person that attempts to justify boring simple plinky-plonk bass lines as being 'all that is needed', and that any deviation from root and fifth notes to be pointless and unnecessary. For me less is more only if you are capable of more or know why you need less, otherwise less is simply less.

The one time I used an Ampeg Classic head a tube went. This was in a guitar shop where I was trying out a bass. Side by side I thought the Aguilar DB 750 was a bit superior tonewise even before the Ampeg broke down. I would go all-tube but I don't like the idea of the constant upkeep costs and fear that a power tube would go in the middle of the gig. I don't think I'm really sacrificing anything when I'm playing a hybrid head at a gig (EBS Fafner, Mesa Walkabout until recently). After a certain point I think that good tone comes from whether you can actually play bass rather than whether you have an all-valve amp head or not.

I think that with each passing year, a 1970s Fender gets more and more expensive, so if you want one you might as well buy one if you have the funds. IF you find a good one of course. No point in my opinion spending £2000 on a vintage bass if it plays and sounds worse than a new Fender, Sandberg etc. If you find a good one though, you will probably keep it for life, unless you don't really like Fender basses, in which case you should perhaps question why you bothered spending extra for a vintage bass.

Warwick thumb bass. I wanted to like it, but nothing about it said 'this is the bass for me'. Didn't really like the neck or the general sound. Tried a Wal Mach I (I think) and really wanted to love it enough to justify buying it. It felt really well made, but the neck was just a bit chunkier than I would like on a £1800 second-hand bass. Spector basses, sound great and look great, but they don't look great on me! Every time I see a Stingray I just think 'well I would kinda like one, but what could I do on that that I couldn't do with a P-bass?' I don't really feel the sense that I need one, despite them being great instruments. Oh a five string basses regardless of the make. I love the idea of always being able to get a low B whenever, but I just don't want to lose out on the playability of a four string bass. I can't justify buying one right now, though I will probably get one at some point. To be honest though, there are more amp companies that I want to love but can't than basses. Ashdown, Orange, and Ampeg amps and 8x10 cabs in general.

I always need two so I have a back up at a gig. Saying that the back up is the Squier Affinity. You could probably get away with one bass though. I do love my Sadowsky Metro and my Vigier but when if it came down to me only having one bass it would be my Fender Precision bass every time!

Hi man sucks about the Uni thing. I'm at this very minute minute finishing my masters dissertation and I can tell you that you are not missing much! CC music have 3 or 4 late 1960s to late 1970s jazz basses in. Though when you go in I would seriously advise you to try the Sandbergs as well. [url="http://www.ccmusicshop.com"]http://www.ccmusicshop.com[/url] I was in your position a while back looking for a jazz bass, I ended up going for a Sadowsky metro, though the Sandberg was pretty close. Some folk don't like Sadowsky though, saying they are 'sterile', so best to give them a good playing to see if you like them. Though if you find a genuine vintage Fender you like its hard to go away from that. Personally I thought the Sandbergs in CC music were way better value for money than the vintage Fenders. [url="http://www.strungoutguitars.com/"]http://www.strungoutguitars.com/[/url] They sometimes have nothing whatsoever but you might find something really special if you are lucky. They often get a vintage jazz in but they tend to go quickly! I think guitar guitar recently got a whole load of Sadowskys, as well as some of the new Fender deluxe models and the Lakland models. Good luck and have a good time in Glasgow!

Lots of Trace Elliot stuff is around at second hand. The Smx range has a tube preamp and you can pick up the heads for pretty cheap (I got one for £250 as a back head). Not everyone likes the Trace Elliot sound though so its best to try it out first. Not wooly add at all though in my experience. Hartke as well are reliable and really good value for money new or used. If you like Ampeg you could probably find a B series heads (solid state stuff, it might have a different name) for under £500. You could also try Peavey as well, the new Tourbass heads are under £500 new. I have not heard anything about them from anybody though.

Fender 1978 P bass - £390 (a steal) Sadowsky Metro MV 4 - £1500 (not a steal!) Viger Excess - £1200 (think they are going for £2000 now, so thats okay) Gibson 1974 EB3 - £750 (I think that it is worth a bit more now, but nothing major) £3840 then, add in my guitar and its around £4400. Adding in my Double Bass as well puts it at around £8400! I don't want to start considering amps now.

I would have thought that any of the ampeg pro series would be able to pretty much nail the valve grit sound. I only have the bass driver DI, which is advertised as a DI, a pre-amp and a stompbox! It is a really good tool if you like the tone it gives you (some complain that it gives a very scooped sound). I personally think its more a preamp and DI than a stompbox as the speaker simulation drastically changes the character of the sound when you turn it on and off. For me its generally always on or not on at all. The bass driver is very good at clean, slighty gritty sounds but if you have a valve preamp already it might take away rather than add to your sound. I think it works best with solid state amps and as preamp for a passive basses. It really is a bit of an Ampeg emulator, so if you have an Ampeg already, I'm not sure it is that useful. I hear that the Vt bass is a lot better and less scooped sounding than the bass driver, but it doesn't have an xlr out so it isn't a DI box. I've not tried it yet so can't comment, but from what I've heard it is better than the bass driver at nailing the classic Ampeg grit. I would maybe suggest trying to set the gain on your amp a bit higher to drive your preamp tubes a bit, or try a dedicated overdrive pedal, perhaps one with a tube to get a more authentic tube overdrive. I hope that is some help.

I also have never have liked the guy from Kings of Leon or Kim Deal(as a bassist), personally and can't listen to either of them. I'm very much in the minority here I would guess though. A part of me wants to say Newsted for not saying "Hey, turn up me up in the mix!" during the recording/mixing stage of "...And Justice for all". But, that isn't really a talent question and he had just joined a band in a difficult time. He is a good player. I'm sure that there were a lot of really bad bassists that made albums during the nu-metal/nu-grunge era but I can't think of any off the top of my head.

Probably Kyuss - Un Sandpiper when I was about 16/17 I'd been playing for 4/5 years on the electric bass, originally playing lots a mixture of rock and blues Hendrix, SRV, Albert King, Buddy Guy, Sabbath, Led Zep. Then I got into Tool, Rage and Queens of the Stoneage. I was also playing a lot of classical double bass in orchestras and doing my grades and theory exams, so I was probably more into Vivaldi and Stravinsky than Sabbath at the time of discovering Kyuss. But when I heard Kyuss, I pretty much knew that this was the kind of music that I really knew that was for me. Loose, loud heavy, melodic with a prominent role for the bass. I also liked the improvisational nature of it, as most of the magic hadn't really been composed into it, but rather just happened. I did get into Jaco, Marcus Miller, Wooten and Mingus afterwards, but most of it doesn't speak to me in the same way, though they are all great muscians.

I know its a forum for the company, so you can expect a bit of brand loyalty, but it seems a bit over the top. Not good customer relations really. Still, they do make nice basses that are about as good as you get for mass production models. I would still take a Fender that works though. Score one for Sadowsky, Vigier, Status, Overwater et al.

I would say Pete Wentz. I would also say Danny from the Wildhearts, though that was live rather than on an album, and I believe it was mostly due to the heroin, rather than lack of talent. Must say I think Tal is a little bit overrated, but overrated and awful are pretty different, so she doesn't really belong in this thread. She is arguably a bit like Wentz, how they look makes a lot of people listen with their eyes, making them seem better than they actually are. Really though, I think that the guy from Complete wins hands down. [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRnPE1u4ruM&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRnPE1u4ruM...feature=related[/url]

[quote name='MoonBassAlpha' post='918867' date='Aug 8 2010, 05:15 PM']This may have been asked somewhere before in the mists of time, but does anyone know exactly what the frequency and boosts/cuts the pre-shape acts at?[/quote] Its at around 55Hz and I believe around 2kHz where there is a boost, with a mid cut at around 400Hz. Some amps from around the Kamen/Gibson era have a 'pre-shape 2' which is some kind of mid boost or something, which I think was described as a more 'rock' oriented voicing. I'm not entirely sure what exactly it is, all I know is that it doesn't that great to my ears, not because I hate mids, but that the pre-shape makes everything sound 'boxy' not at all natural sounding. I always thought that the original Trace pre-shape is about the best non-distortion/valve based rock voicings there is.

I played a furry GP7 SM300 1x15 combo for 8 years, no problems beyond a burst speaker due to lending it to an idiot. I'm been using peavey-era cabs for the past couple of years. Great sound and a lot lighter than the older TE gear. The build quality isn't quite what it used to be, (the rubber feet have come loose a few times) but they are still sturdy enough for constant gigging, good speakers. I love Trace Elliot amps, very dialled in sound if you use the preset but great if you like it. I have a GP12 300SMX head that I bought for £250 quid last year that I have as back up to an EBS fafner. I use the Trace now and again and it delivers. Its pretty much as good as the EBS, but I just find that the character of my bass comes through more in the EBS. I have not tried the new range of amps, its just hard to justify paying £1000 quid for a new amp, when you can find an older model with a similar design for about a quarter of the price. My opinion would maybe change if I tried one, but I'm not in a hurry due already having amps that work alright.