SG

[Dave W]

You wish! 

He would have fallen to his knees and asked which one of his nuts - left or right - he could sacrifice for that TB Plus sound which would have driven his Marshalls mighty fine! 

You wish! It's got the TB Plus bobbin construction but with the wide coil separation it doesn't sound like one. And its output pales in comparison to a real mudbucker.

[4stringer77]

Mine’s the reissue with the humbucker so the bar bridge made for offset posts probably wouldn’t work then. I’ll keep my eyes peeled for an evertilt.

[amptech]

Mine’s the reissue with the humbucker so the bar bridge made for offset posts probably wouldn’t work then. I’ll keep my eyes peeled for an evertilt.

I see. Good luck, someone must have one lying around.

[uwe]

You wish! It's got the TB Plus bobbin construction but with the wide coil separation it doesn't sound like one. And its output pales in comparison to a real mudbucker.

Wish-wash-wosh! It doesn't sound quite like a real TB+, yes, but it shares the characteristics. And the output of a mudbucker is mostly one frequency, while the TB+ covers a broader spectrum. The TB+ just lets you hear more of the bass, with a mudbucker you hear mostly the mudbucker - it doesn't make much of a difference on what it is planted.

For the record: Of course, a mudbucker is a force of nature and worthy of cultish reverence plus nice to have in the arsenal. The amount of 60ies and 70ies home hifis through which you could actually hear what was being played through a muducker is limited though. 

[4stringer77]

Speaking of SGs, this fretless conversion ain't too shabby.

[morrow]

Nice walks ! That SG sounds good .

[uwe]

Notes ring out nicely, but inlays look plain weird on a fretless neck and get in the way. But generally speaking, nothing speaks against a shorty as a fretless.

[amptech]

Interesting. I've been working on getting a fretless EB-3 for probably 15 years now, but gave up Gibson.
I have to admit, none of the wood/body types of Gibson shortscale EB basses really works without frets.
I tried every possible combination of electronics, including positioning of pickups, LoZ pickups and strings but no luck.
Not even the bar bridge helps (Uwe can use this comment later if he wants to). The best so far must have been the SB300 I got from Scott, it needed a fret job so I tried it out as fretless for some time. But it was never better than OK, so I put frets back on.

In the end I built a body (60's EB3 thickness) out of an Abachi/Maple sandwich and a really fat laminated maple/katalox neck with a thick slab katalox board. I could hear it was better even as I strung it up the first time, it really sings. Can't wait to have it finished, hope to post a project here when it's done. I guess it's the woods that make it good, but I do have strong belief in a fat neck being better for this instrument.

Of course, now I want to build one with frets too 

[uwe]

I have an LPB-2 fretless and an LBP-3 doublecut fretless, both long scale of course, both all maho, both work fine as fretless basses. So do my converted Mon(k)ey Bass (all maho with maple top and walnut plate, long scale), the converted Grabber (maple and alder, long scale) and the converted Ripper(ditto) as well as the medium scale Epi EB-1 (whatever Epi fantasy wood they had lying aroung, probably limba). Never had a fretless short scale though.

[ilan]

In fretless, I find that the shorter the scale, the more "rubbery" the sound. Uprights have 41"-42" scale for a reason. The only short scale fretless that I liked the sound of was the Rob Allen 30" Mouse.

[uwe]

To me 'rubbery' is just different, not necessarily worse. I have large hands, so a long scale fretless is more comfortoble to play for me, with a short scale I need to adjust a little, especially in the higher registers.

My Super 400 Acoustic is "just" medium scale. Sound wise, I notice that less on that bass than on my electrics.

[amptech]

My Super 400 Acoustic is "just" medium scale. Sound wise, I notice that less on that bass than on my electrics.

I hate it when you mention it
Now that thing I'd lose a bit of testicle to own.

[Dave W]

Wish-wash-wosh! It doesn't sound quite like a real TB+, yes, but it shares the characteristics. And the output of a mudbucker is mostly one frequency, while the TB+ covers a broader spectrum. The TB+ just lets you hear more of the bass, with a mudbucker you hear mostly the mudbucker - it doesn't make much of a difference on what it is planted.

For the record: Of course, a mudbucker is a force of nature and worthy of cultish reverence plus nice to have in the arsenal. The amount of 60ies and 70ies home hifis through which you could actually hear what was being played through a muducker is limited though. 

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I've owned two SG basses, the neck pickup doesn't sound like anything like a TBird pickup to me, at least in that position. And it's somewhat anemic in that spot.

[ilan]

I have large hands, so a long scale fretless is more comfortable to play for me, with a short scale I need to adjust a little, especially in the higher registers.

Stanley Clarke has huge hands, plays an upright like a mandolin, and still prefers 30" basses. If guitar players of all sizes can manage the in the solo region (not to mention violinists), then we should have no problem on a 30" bass. To me scale is about sound. If I wasn't a vintage snob I'd probably be very happy with a fanned fret 30-to-34" bass.

[morrow]

I have a little Ashbory I fool around on when I want to hear iffy intonation .
The upper registers on that are tricky .
I had a fretless phase maybe fifteen years ago , I had a great fretless maple Pbass . It was my main player for a time and then I went back to frets .
I do play upright .