Herts Bash 2 - The Precision Test

[Wil]

Isn't the P pickup on the Hoppus reversed also? Always seemed a more sensible way of aligning it to me.

Edited July 7, 2014 by Wil

[Lozz196]

-
[quote name='Muzz' timestamp='1404739880' post='2495231']
Interesting to note that the majority couldn't tell maple from rosewood boards - I'd also be interested to know, did anyone/everyone spot their own bass?
[/quote]

No, but Gary Mac correctly identified my `78.

[quote name='Wil' timestamp='1404742502' post='2495280']
Isn't the P pickup on the Hoppus reversed also? Always seemed a more sensible way of aligning it to me.
[/quote]

Yes, and I think this must have a huge bearing on the really one-sided results.

[Highfox]

Whilst it's interesting, I still don't think I'll part with my 71 or 73 P's just yet.
There is so much more to it as we know.

[Happy Jack]

[quote name='silverfoxnik' timestamp='1404727127' post='2495018']

This is something that we should do at the SE Bash perhaps, with Jazz basses?
[/quote]

Oh I'm quite sure we'd be able to tell Jazz basses from Precisions.

[seashell]

[quote name='Muzz' timestamp='1404739880' post='2495231']
Interesting to note that the majority couldn't tell maple from rosewood boards - I'd also be interested to know, did anyone/everyone spot their own bass?
[/quote]

I'd narrowed it down to two. So I was quite pleased with myself when it turned out that mine was actually one of the two I thought it might be.

The other one was Happy Jack's 1957 USA Fender. Sorry, Jack

Edit to add: - mine was the 2006 MIM with groundwound ('half wound') strings. Jacks had flats.

Edited July 7, 2014 by seashell

[Jazzneck]

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1404746332' post='2495331']
Oh I'm quite sure we'd be able to tell Jazz basses from Precisions.


[/quote]

Hey Jack, do you [b]really[/b] think the SE Bashers are able to tell the difference between Jazzes and Precisions?

Edited July 7, 2014 by Jazzneck

[Happy Jack]

[quote name='seashell' timestamp='1404747207' post='2495345']
I'd narrowed it down to two. So I was quite pleased with myself when it turned out that mine was actually one of the two I thought it might be.

The other one was Happy Jack's 1957 USA Fender. Sorry, Jack

Edit to add: - mine was the 2006 MIM with groundwound ('half wound') strings. Jacks had flats.
[/quote]

Shell, your MIM was the shock result of the session, far more so than the Hoppus due to the 'hot' pickup issue.

For me, the low placement of the '57 was actually no surprise. There's a reason that Leo changed the pickup on that bass! My '57 is valuable because of its rarity, not because it sounds so nice.

The low placement of my '66, on the other hand, was a genuine surprise to me. Even I scored it low, yet of all the (far too many) basses I own, including a number of high-end boutique Precisions, that '66 is comfortably my favourite.

Hmmmm. All in the mind? All in the mix? All in Lozz's fingers?

Something to ponder.

[Happy Jack]

[quote name='Jazzneck' timestamp='1404748404' post='2495365']
Hey Jack, do you [b]really[/b] think the SE Bashers are able to tell the difference between Jazzes and Precisions?
[/quote]

Oh yes, the Jazz will be the one trying to play [i][b]Portrait Of Tracey[/b][/i] ...

[Jazzneck]

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1404749553' post='2495380']
Oh yes, the Jazz will be the one trying to play [i][b]Portrait Of Tracey[/b][/i] ...
[/quote]

So Sharon from Essex will be there, will she?

[Bottle]

[quote name='Muzz' timestamp='1404739880' post='2495231']
Interesting to note that the majority couldn't tell maple from rosewood boards - I'd also be interested to know, did anyone/everyone spot their own bass?
[/quote]

I couldn't tell at all! Personally I think (pre)amp and cab EQ, and also finger technique to a certain extent will have more of a bearing on sound than the fretboard. I say this out my own thoughts whilst listening to the basses through the MarkBass rig - some were incredibly bright and 'modern'-sounding, more 'Jazz' than 'Precision' IMHO. I was expecting more basses to have that characteristic mid 'hump' that gives '60's and '70's recordings that classic P sound (at least what I equate to [i]that[/i] P sound - I may be wrong, some could be Jazzes!)

And I couldn't even identify my bass (even though it was the only fretless in the test, maybe because it still had the original Fender rounds on it?)

Ian

[Grangur]

[quote name='Muzz' timestamp='1404739880' post='2495231']
Interesting to note that the majority couldn't tell maple from rosewood boards - I'd also be interested to know, did anyone/everyone spot their own bass?
[/quote] I had a Warwick Streamer PJ and a Gear4music P in the group. I think I recognised the G4M. I didn't recognise the 'Wick. What was amazing was the vast array of tones from the basses.

Lozz introduced the set by saying that P's are criticised for being a "one sound bass and this will prove this allegation wrong". I slightly disagree. The range of tones from the basses there was vast. What I think it misunderstood slightly is the tone from a P can be changed but changing pups, strings, set-up etc. Many other basses can change their tone with the turn of a knob. That said; how many folk with a Jazz in their hands, simply find a setup they like and then never turn the knobs ever again?
If this is the case, why not have a P and simply find the set-up you like?

Please forgive me.. this is just the ramblings of a noob.