My colleague and I met two Gibson marketing guys. First a guy from England together and later on I met a guy from the US. For Basvarken! The American guy know Uwe. He told me some big Gibson news!!
- Gibson is preparing a complete new bass which will be introduced within some months. It's long scale, it has a maple neck, ash body and newly designed pick ups. The design is completely new, but sccording to the guy it has some style things in common with the RD, but it's definately no RD.
- Gibson comes with a non rev with a set neck (of course) and it's... ...short scale!?!?! 'Why?!?' I asked. Because it would be too big or something....
- I asked for a T-Bird woth chrome. He told me that normally it takes three days for the glue to harden for the body/sidewing construction. They found a new and faster method and they will bring out more varieties of the Firebird en Thunderbird in near future.
Wel, that's news, isn't it?
(a quick one from my phone)
This was on the Musikmesse and sorry for the typos. I'm on my phone.
Quote from: Chris P. on March 23, 2012, 03:32:35 PM
For Basvarken! The American guy know Uwe.
well they should, by now
Quote from: Chris P. on March 23, 2012, 03:32:35 PM
- Gibson is preparing a complete new bass which will be introduced within some months. It's long scale, it has a maple neck, ash body and newly designed pick ups. The design is completely new, but sccording to the guy it has some style things in common with the RD, but it's definately no RD.
And we'll see it as soon as they get the Continental V out, right?
Quote from: Chris P. on March 23, 2012, 03:32:35 PM- Gibson comes with a non rev with a set neck (of course) and it's... ...short scale!?!?! 'Why?!?' I asked. Because it would be too big or something....
Ridiculous. Another kick in the face to bassists.
Quote from: Chris P. on March 23, 2012, 03:32:35 PM
- I asked for a T-Bird woth chrome. He told me that normally it takes three days for the glue to harden for the body/sidewing construction. They found a new and faster method and they will bring out more varieties of the Firebird en Thunderbird in near future.
That sounds encouraging. I'll believe it when I see it.
Quote from: Dave W on March 23, 2012, 11:09:40 PM
Ridiculous. Another kick in the face to bassists.
Not those who prefer shorties ........ but if it's another half-ass job like the shorty TB they shouldn't bother .....
Quote from: Chris P. on March 23, 2012, 03:32:35 PM
He told me that normally it takes three days for the glue to harden for the body/sidewing construction. They found a new and faster method...
I don't like THAT shortcut implication...
headstocks and wings will be a falling... :P
Quote from: Chris P. on March 23, 2012, 03:32:35 PM
...He told me that normally it takes three days for the glue to harden for the body/sidewing construction...
Why would it take any longer for the glue to set than for any other neck? They don't glue them one lamination at a time.
Even if it did take three days all they need is enough space and racks. After the initial 3 day period there wouldn't be any lag in the work flow. Planning for things like that is not unusual in manufacturing. What a bunch of typical salesman BS >:(
WTF a short scale NR. Are they kidding ? MORONS.
Quote from: godofthunder on March 24, 2012, 07:27:47 AM
WTF a short scale NR. Are they kidding ? MORONS.
I agree. It may be news, but it's awful news! ???
I could totally get into a medium scale NR, but a shorty? Not so much.
T
Quote from: godofthunder on March 24, 2012, 07:27:47 AM
WTF a short scale NR. Are they kidding ? MORONS.
Funny that was the bass Watt wanted Gibson to make (he never talked to Gibson that I'm aware of ?).
No disrespect to short scale fans, but shorties will always be a small market share and Gibson already has a good-selling shortie. If they ever intend to expand their bass market to compete with the other majors, it will need to be long scale. OTOH there's nothing wrong with wanting to expand their short scale market, but why on earth would they do yet another historically inaccurate "reissue"?
Quote from: Dave W on March 24, 2012, 08:00:16 PM
but why on earth would they do yet another historically inaccurate "reissue"?
Because everyone else is already doing accurate replicas? ;D Dare to be different! Play a historically incorrect bass!
My 1986 LP Jr '57 reissue is also very inaccurate for a "reissue", with tune-o-matic bridge and stop tailpiece instead of a wraparound unit, modern style tuners and wrong shape pickguard (the humped guard, they used an SG Jr pickguard). I bought it new like that.
Well, why should 2012 be any better than 2011 as regards buying new Gibson basses and not finding the time to play them? Danke, kleiner Holländer, for the info. This year I was so under water with work, I couldn't even think of going to the Musikmesse, but in my heart I knew this forum of forums would be a reliable source for anything new!
I have a hunch that that "Neo-RD" they are planning might be the bass brother to the Firebird X. If they attempt anything in that vein on a bass it would make sense - a nice nod to the legacy - to do it on a bass that echoes the look of the RD.
That would surprise me.
Electronically we have reached a stage where they could offer a bass that has an aped P Bass, Ric, Stingray and Alembic-tone as well as a traditional Gibson one via push-pull or whatever. If done well, they could sell a few I believe. And argue that they have brought out something newish if not revolutionary.
Quote from: Droombolus on March 24, 2012, 02:16:32 AM
Not those who prefer shorties ........ but if it's another half-ass job like the shorty TB they shouldn't bother .....
I love my shorty TB. I think better than my two '76 birds. Nothing half-ass about it that I can find.
Quote from: uwe on March 29, 2012, 01:35:01 AM
Electronically we have reached a stage where they could offer a bass that has an aped P Bass, Ric, Stingray and Alembic-tone as well as a traditional Gibson one via push-pull or whatever. If done well, they could sell a few I believe. And argue that they have brought out something newish if not revolutionary.
Well, sure they can accomplish that with electronics. And who wouldn't want to pay 50x what you would pay for a pedal that scan do the same? :P
Quote from: JZumbro on March 29, 2012, 01:45:06 AM
I love my shorty TB. I think better than my two '76 birds.
Well brother, you're the first..... :mrgreen:
I think she looks like a budget knock-off, the PUPs look like they've been placed at random rather than on the sweet spots and on the whole, when playing, she just doesn't feel right or give me the tiniest spark of a feeling I'm playing something special.
But you have to consider the source here: I'm the guy who shot the concept of the SG Bass into pieces and fire-bombed the remains back in '05 and who is currently owning one SG Standard Heritage Cherry Bass, a SG Supreme Fireburst Bass and a SG Supreme Natural Bass..... ;D
I liked the shorty T Bird that visited with me for a month before I sent it to Uwe, I'm not a short scale player tho, otherwise I'd have picked one up.
Quote from: Droombolus on March 29, 2012, 07:52:25 AM
Well brother, you're the first..... :mrgreen:
I think she looks like a budget knock-off, the PUPs look like they've been placed at random rather than on the sweet spots and on the whole, when playing, she just doesn't feel right or give me the tiniest spark of a feeling I'm playing something special.
But you have to consider the source here: I'm the guy who shot the concept of the SG Bass into pieces and fire-bombed the remains back in '05 and who is currently owning one SG Standard Heritage Cherry Bass, a SG Supreme Fireburst Bass and a SG Supreme Natural Bass..... ;D
As I have gotten older, with Rheumatoid Arthritis in my shoulders, hands and back, the long scale TBs have become painful to play. The long reach for the first fret kills me after about an hour. The short scale TB takes away that problem. Also the short scale causes very little pain in my fingers. The flat black feels great in my hands, and the pickup locations work good, it sits in my band's mix perfectly and sounds great. I may be the only one that likes it, but I really like it.
The first thing I asked the Gibson guy was: Is it a bass version of the Firebird X and he said 'Nooo!!'.
The Minibird is a mighty fine bass. And cute. In a league of its own.
Quote from: uwe on March 29, 2012, 01:35:01 AM
Electronically we have reached a stage where they could offer a bass that has an aped P Bass, Ric, Stingray and Alembic-tone as well as a traditional Gibson one via push-pull or whatever.
You mean, like Line 6 did a few years ago with their Variax Bass - J, P, Rick, Thunderbird, EB-2, Stingray, Modulus, Dano Longhorn, Hofner, Tobias, Warwick Thumb, Almbic, Steinberger, Hagstrom 8, Hamer 12.
Anybody here ever play one?
Quote from: Aussie Mark on March 29, 2012, 04:15:02 PM
You mean, like Line 6 did a few years ago with their Variax Bass - J, P, Rick, Thunderbird, EB-2, Stingray, Modulus, Dano Longhorn, Hofner, Tobias, Warwick Thumb, Almbic, Steinberger, Hagstrom 8, Hamer 12.
Anybody here ever play one?
Never seen one. To be fair, their Variax models were pricey, although not in the Fireturd X price range. My point above was that bass effects pedals and processors can do the same thing at the fraction of the price, having it built into the body of the bass wouldn't be a big deal to me.
I've played the Variax bass and guitars. Seemed on par with other instruments in the $4-500-ish range. My buddy's guitar goes out of tune easily (crap tuners?). Another friend had the acoustic guitar version - probably my favorite of the bunch. They're fun and you could get some decent sounds out of 'em if it was your only axe, but I'd rather just have the Precision, Ric, Tbird, Stingray, etc... :mrgreen: :vader:
Again, acoording to the Gibson guy the bass will be a 'normal' bass:)
I played a Line6 Bass once. Sounds are quite well and could be nice for home recording. But.... Some examples: I play different on my T-bird with its tiny neck than on my 44mm P. When you play a Höfner it lacks sustain, so you have to keep on playing to make sound. I guess that's a part of how Macca developed his style. And of course the Höfner is tiny, light and small, so you really can play all those fast licks. I guess you can't get this feeling from a 34" modeling bass.
QuoteAs I have gotten older, with Rheumatoid Arthritis in my shoulders, hands and back, the long scale TBs have become painful to play. The long reach for the first fret kills me after about an hour. The short scale TB takes away that problem. Also the short scale causes very little pain in my fingers. The flat black feels great in my hands, and the pickup locations work good, it sits in my band's mix perfectly and sounds great. I may be the only one that likes it, but I really like it.
That is a similar issue for Watt.
I've shifted to shorties too because I can't handle most long-scales anymore for longer than an hour without problems. I've sold off most of my long-scales, Precisions and variations on the P theme mostly. [sneaky spam mode] The Robin Ranger's the last of the Mohicans and is still in the window .........[/sneaky spam mode] Luckily I've found a new home with the Gibbie SG's & DeArmond Starfires and I'm having fun playing again.
cool Droom, another bro seen the light. (screams my left shoulder)
Quote from: Aussie Mark on March 29, 2012, 04:15:02 PM
You mean, like Line 6 did a few years ago with their Variax Bass - J, P, Rick, Thunderbird, EB-2, Stingray, Modulus, Dano Longhorn, Hofner, Tobias, Warwick Thumb, Almbic, Steinberger, Hagstrom 8, Hamer 12.
Anybody here ever play one?
I did. Impressive range of different sounds, but not the real thing of course. And sans the fun of playing the originals with their idiosyncracies, just as Chris says. But if you do not want to switch basses and are satisfied with them emulating specific sounds, then it's a useful tool.
Quote from: uwe on March 30, 2012, 09:45:50 AM
but not the real thing of course. And sans the fun of playing the originals with their idiosyncracies
+1
I didn't like it at all.
Quote from: uwe on March 30, 2012, 09:45:50 AM
I did. Impressive range of different sounds, but not the real thing of course. And sans the fun of playing the originals with their idiosyncracies, just as Chris says. But if you do not want to switch basses and are satisfied with them emulating specific sounds, then it's a useful tool.
Surely you don't think that a Gibson bass equivalent of the Firebird X would be any different. I believe that was Aussie Mark's point, and my point about a pedal was the same. That's what was so laughable about Henry J.'s presentation of the Firebird X. It's still about the electronic emulation circuitry. Putting it inside an instrument doesn't change that.
I'm not advocating that modeling basses should be the future! But would I buy one if Gibson offered it? Not collecting for fins doesn't mean you're not collecting for circuitry!
Quote from: uwe on March 31, 2012, 04:55:17 AM
I'm not advocating that modeling basses should be the future! But would I buy one if Gibson offered it? Not collecting for fins doesn't mean you're not collecting for circuitry!
If it were ever offered, I would expect you to buy one. That's beside the point.
I suffer from the somewhat indiscriminate image I have here!!!
Not indiscriminate. We know you're a completist. You're still bothered because you haven't found a Continental V.
If they ever do this, it will no doubt be different from a regular model in some way other than just the emulation circuitry, just like the Firebird X is not just a stock Firebird with different circuitry. You would want to have one for your collection. All this won't change the fact that it will have the same sort of emulation circuitry you can get in a box or pedal for a couple hundred dollars.
You would have thought that Gibson would have learned something from the EB-0F, but they keep trying! Almost 50 years to get it right?
Quote from: Grog on April 01, 2012, 08:37:47 PM
You would have thought that Gibson would have learned something from the EB-0F, but they keep trying! Almost 50 years to get it right?
Well, it seems to be working for Rickenbacker, why not?
German mag Bass Professor has confirmed that a non-rev TBird "and a totally new design bass model" are on their way for supposedly fall this year.
That is a courageous step for Gibson given that the small piece of bass market they cater to essentially wants the tried and trusted done the old and good way - with chrome hardware of course! :mrgreen:
The last radically new bass creations were as far back as Ripper, RD and Victory (I'm now ignoring niche models like the 20/20 or Bass IV/V), the LP series of the nineties was essentially an old shape turned long scale and the Mon(k)ey/LP Doublecut basses (the last semi-new model they attempted that did not just echo a classic shape) of 2006 was only a variation of the LP theme (and already that found little favor with buyers even among the fervent here, though the Doublecuts were good basses).
Uwe
Quote from: uwe on June 19, 2012, 06:47:16 AM
The last radically new bass creations were as far back as Ripper, RD and Victory
You forget the EB-750, EB, EB-650,
Continental ( :o)
and the Wayne Charvel clown basses? :mrgreen:
The EB-6/750ies weren't really new shapes, but once more basses in a guitarish look.
And the Silly Purple Clown Basses never left prototype stage and ended up as the loveless Q-80ies which were Victories at heart.
And do not ache my heart with the Continental V!!!! Out of sheer desperation, I am now looking for a 2009 Ltd Ed Tobias Growler.
Straight from the Nashville horse's mouth:
- The non-revs will definitely come out.
- Followed by the miraculous "2012 bass" (sounds like an innumerate Rush tribute band!*), about which even my source kept tightlipped.
- But before all that - within the next two months - The Fearsome Threesome of the Fat-Bottomed Girls will be completed and the G-3 (II) will make a return - with new design single coil pups.
At this rate a reissue Victory can't be long, after all they are running out of models to rerelease.
*Of course that can't be: If you cover Rush you have to count out so many odd meters you can't afford to be innumerate!
PS: And the Gibson 2009 Ltd Ed Tobias Growler 5-string with set neck and chrome hardware never ever made it into production I just heard: The Nashville flood destroyed all the electronics destined for that bass so they scrapped the project altogether after they had cleaned up again which doesn't speak for too many orders I guess. :-\
A G3 reissue with new single coils?
I bet those will be jazz pickups again just like the RD reissue...
Quote from: Basvarken on June 19, 2012, 09:59:38 AM
A G3 reissue with new single coils?
I bet those will be jazz pickups again just like the RD reissue...
Oh, nothing would surprise me. I would much rather the "reissues" were more authentic. I feel no desire to own any of these recent models. But I'll wait until I see it before passing judgement.
I give them way more credit than Fender, at least they are doing something with their bass heritage.
Speaking of which: They will also rerelease the EB2 - now rechristened Midnight Bass. No joke.
Which makes sense to me. Let's face it: There is no sizeable market out there for reissued old Gibson hollowbody basses, but probably a couple of hundred diehards that would buy one. Those are catered for with a (most likely limited) release of a reissue which after interest dies down is unceremoniously shelved while the TBirds and SG Standard basses remain in the meat and potatoes line.
The G3 was the best sounding bass they ever made...a re-issue of that would be awesome.
Quote from: TBird1958 on June 19, 2012, 11:40:25 AM
I give them way more credit than Fender, at least they are doing something with their bass heritage.
Fender pretty much makes exact replicas of their iconic instruments as well as modern versions of them. This is unlike Gibson's weak attempts at reissues. They don't even use the original EBO and EB-3 names, instead they defer to guitard names that were NEVER used when the basses were new.
Maybe it's easier for Fender because they didn't use leftover guitar bodies to make basses but designed model specific ones. IIRC except for the original EB, Gibson didn't design a strictly bass body until the 70s.
Quote from: uwe on June 19, 2012, 11:48:31 AM
Speaking of which: They will also rerelease the EB2 - now rechristened Midnight Bass. No joke.
Which makes sense to me. Let's face it: There is no sizeable market out there for reissued old Gibson hollowbody basses, but probably a couple of hundred diehards that would buy one. Those are catered for with a (most likely limited) release of a reissue which after interest dies down is unceremoniously shelved while the TBirds and SG Standard basses remain in the meat and potatoes line.
Doubt it, "Diehards" will have an original, plenty out there and they like the sound...dilettantes on the other hand will jump just like they do for 'New Beetle', New Mini and anything else that gives them that warm and fuzzy nostalgia feeling without actually delivering the essence that made the original unique.
We know the reissues won't be faithful to the originals, that's pretty much a given considering what they've done in the past few years.
The big question is what the all new bass will be like. Let's hope it's not another regurgitated Tobias design that's been out of fashion since the mid 90s. Hopefully something that keeps a bit of Gibson heritage.
Quote from: dadagoboi on June 19, 2012, 12:09:08 PM
Fender pretty much makes exact replicas of their iconic instruments as well as modern versions of them. This is unlike Gibson's weak attempts at reissues. They don't even use the original EBO and EB-3 names, instead they defer to guitard names that were NEVER used when the basses were new.
Maybe it's easier for Fender because they didn't use leftover guitar bodies to make basses but designed model specific ones. IIRC except for the original EB, Gibson didn't design a strictly bass body until the 70s.
Ehhh..........Jaguar. Or that beautiful lefty version they just released. Guitar body, or even worse a leftover lefty guitar body. Yay for FMIC!
Quote from: TBird1958 on June 19, 2012, 12:49:24 PM
Ehhh..........Jaguar. Or that beautiful lefty version they just released. Guitar body, or even worse a leftover lefty guitar body. Yay for FMIC!
Jaguar bass wasn't released until this century. Jazzmaster was strictly a guitar introduced in 1958; Jaguar, a variation on it, in '62 Fender actually did a prototype Jazzmaster bass but didn't release it, did something else called a 'Jazz Bass'. Gibson looked at the Jaguar/Jazzmaster, flipped it around and it became the Reverse Firebird/Thunderbird.
Whoops, forgot about Mustang, Bronco and Musicmaster.
Exciting! Glad my source was right!
I don't want a modern day reissue of an early sixties bass to be an exact replica - that is so archaic it's laughable. I want it to have an intonateable bridge that doesn't tip forward, I want it to have tuners that don't break my arm when I turn them and I don't want an original mudbucker. I have enough old EB-2s, thank you. I want something sensibly refined and bettered just like I would expect the reissue of a Jag E Type to have an airbag these days, to hell whether that is faithful or not, it just makes sense and saves lives. I come from an engineering country - it's ok to modernize and develop things, we build our economy on it, not on the sale of Kuckucksuhren from the Black Forest that look and work just like two hundred years ago. They are just for American and Asian tourists. Vorsprung durch Technik, liebe Amerikaner!
Nobody I knew ever referred to an EB-0 or -3 as an "EB" unless he was an anointed know-it-all and even then people would have asked him what he meant. Everyone - including me - referred to them as "those SG shape Gibson basses". The term EB is utterly meaning- and descriptionless by itself, it can refer to a "Beatles bass" (EB or EB-1), to an LP Junior (early EB-0), to various SG shaped basses (EB-0, EB-3, EB-4, EB-6 second version, EB-Z, the original name of the SG-Z), but not even all of them (the SB-family, SG-Z, SG RI and SG Standard), to a smaller hollowbody (EB-2, EB-6 first version) or to larger hollowbodies from the nineties (EB-650, EB-750). EB is a bland abbreviation of electric bass and while SG stands for solid guitar the shape of "an SG" has left a firm imprint in everyone's mind. And if people really need a description you can always say "the guitar the guy in the schoolboy uniform from AC/DC plays!". Try asking someone to tell you the shape of "an EB".
For the record: I don't have an issue with the reissue policy of Fender, they do niche models for the most curious tastes and that is ok in my book. As if Kurt Kobain had ever given a shit whether his Jagmaster (or whatever) was original or not. I detect some vintage elitism on these sacred pages! Get over it, they are tools from another age, nothing less and nothing more. And in fifty years from now people will be holding their breath when they see a current Warwick ("from the age when wood was still allowed for guitar building").
Quote from: uwe on June 19, 2012, 06:37:47 PM
I don't want a modern day reissue of an early sixties bass to be an exact replica - that is so archaic it's laughable. I want it to have an intonateable bridge that doesn't tip forward, I want it to have tuners that don't break my arm when I turn them and I don't want an original mudbucker. I have enough old EB-2s, thank you. I want something sensibly refined and bettered just like I would expect the reissue of a Jag E Type to have an airbag these days, to hell whether that is faithful or not, it just makes sense and saves lives. I come from an engineering country - it's ok to modernize and develop things, we build our economy on it, not on the sale of Kuckucksuhren from the Black Forest that look and work just like two hundred years ago. They are just for American and Asian tourists. Vorsprung durch Technik, liebe Amerikaner!
Nobody I knew ever referred to an EB-0 or -3 as an "EB" unless he was an anointed know-it-all and even then people would have asked him what he meant. Everyone - including me - referred to them as those "SG shape Gibson basses". The term EB is utterly meaning- and descriptionless by itself, it can refer to a "Beatles bass" (EB or EB-1), to an LP Junior (early EB-0), to various SG shaped basses (EB-0, EB-3, EB-4, EB-6 second version, EB-Z, the original name of the SG-Z), but not even all of them (the SB-family, SG-Z, SG RI and SG Standard), to a smaller hollowbody (EB-2, EB-6 first version) or to larger hollowbodies from the nineties (EB-650, EB-750). EB is a bland abbreviation of electric bass and while SG stands for solid guitar the shape of "an SG" has left a firm imprint in everyone's mind. And if people really need a description you can always say "the guitar the guy in the schoolboy uniform from AC/DC plays!". Try asking someone to tell you the shape of "an EB".
For the record: I don't have an issue with the reissue policy of Fender, they do niche models for the most curious tastes and that is ok in my book. As if Kurt Kobain had ever given a shit whether his Jagmaster (or whatever) was original or not. I detect some vintage elitism on these sacred pages! Get over it, they are tools from another age, nothing less and nothing more. And in fifty years from now people will be holding their breath when they see a current Warwick ("from the age when wood was still allowed for guitar building").
I seem to have touched a nerve. What is this forum besides a collection of elitisms?
Quote from: dadagoboi on June 19, 2012, 07:20:51 PM
I seem to have touched a nerve. What is this forum besides a collection of elitisms?
;D
Fender offers vintage reissues and modern versions, and without changing the name. Gibson could offer both, as they do with guitars. I just don't expect it from them.
I'm a completist, not an elitist!!! :mrgreen: Perhaps a complelitist? ??? I don't even consider myself a vintage bass collector, I collect basses like Noah collected animals for the ark.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ARftJK-cado/T2qzlDeYAmI/AAAAAAAAGqk/1CDaMO3IjGU/s400/AaronDouglas.jpg)
As we all know, he took a pair of cockroaches with him as well. That's me. ;) They're part of creation after all.
And I've never subscribed to the notion that vintage guitars are somehow always better or more worthy. I'm with Blackmore on that: "They made good and bad guitars then and now." I collect Gibson's new stuff with the same fervor - if not more - than their old stuff (and through the decades their level of sloppiness has remained reassuringly constant!). If you REALLY want to flatter me as a bassist tell me that I get a good sound out of a 400 buck Epi and not out of one of my 5.000+ Dollars sixties Birds which always have me thinking "they better sound great, they sure cost enough".
I've said it before: Give me a time machine back to 68 and a modern TBird, a modern Stingray, a modern Ric and a modern Fender, and I would wipe the floor soundwise with what was current back then. People would want to see my "secret gear" from miles around and fall to their knees if they heard my Roger Waters P in comparison to a sixties one.
An old bass that still works and is in good shape is something to behold for the history it holds and the care that went into its upkeep, and you should play it by all means, but it's not automatically a better instrument than its modern day companions.
Quote from: patman on June 19, 2012, 11:51:37 AM
The G3 was the best sounding bass they ever made...a re-issue of that would be awesome.
That is maybe taking it a bit far, but if you want a bass that is zingy, snappy, responsive, full of attack, yet still retains bass ooomph the G-3 doesn't have to hide. It offers Jazz Bass flexibility with P Bass grit.
I'm with Uwe, in that I want a new instrument to have all the modern creature comforts...I've had a few "vintage" instruments, but I generally prefer a modern (but old-school style) instrument, where everything works "right", even if it was made in Korea. I still don't like active electronics to this day...
Neither do I. I always ask myself "what is wrong with me that I don't like active electronics?" :-\, everybody else seems to if you leaf through the bass mags and look at the hi-end boutique fodder in them. I certainly used to: For much of the eighties I played either a Kramer with active EMGs :-[ :-[ :-[ (the darn guitarist talked me into it, I was young and I had the money ...) or a Kubicki Factor, both essentially hi-fi'sh bass sounds. The one exception I can think of that I still like today is the Wal Mk 1 electronics, that sounds just like no other, idiosyncratic, yet natural, but then as Wals don't come in passive I have no idea how a passive Wal would sound. Possibly even better.
That said, if Gibson brought out an active SG Standard (how much treble can you tickle out of a short scale bass, somehow shorties never seem to get the active treatment?) or TBird I'd be naturally curious. I've heard Bartolini and Seymour Duncan Bass Lines active electronics that actually sound well and not overdone.
Regarding the G-3, you can always roll off some high end, if you have too much, but if the pickups don't reproduce it in the first place (as in a mudbucker), you're out of luck.
That's why I always liked real crisp sounding basses.
The G-3 is sharp, but it has balls, that is what I like about it. A Stingray is sharp too, but its balls come from a 9 volt battery.
I don't like or dislike active preamps. They're just another tone shaping tool. Either they sound good or they don't, depends on the particular maker.
Quote from: uwe on June 20, 2012, 11:32:14 AM
The G-3 is sharp, but it has balls, that is what I like about it. A Stingray is sharp too, but its balls come from a 9 volt battery.
A preamp can't add something that's not there. MM pickups have relatively low output, they're designed to work with a preamp, but set flat, they have plenty of low end on their own.
Herr Moderator I think you're working at least in part the "Half Noah" principle, 1 of everything.
Never forgetting the Eleventh Commandment written on the wall in fiery lettering:
Thou shalt not collect for fins!!!
I'll now go to a rehearsal, taking my little pelham blue Kalamazooomph KB-1 with me. Ever since it got the Hipshot Supertone (worth more than the rest of the bass! :mrgreen: ), it has wonderfully low buzzfree (not that you would really hear fret buzz with a mudbucker) action. It will have to compete with a zebra wood GoW TBird, a Peavey T-40 and a Greg Rupp boutique Telecaster bass - active/passive Basslines electronics in a mock Stingray look pup.
Quote from: uwe on June 20, 2012, 11:59:14 AM
Never forgetting the Eleventh Commandment written on the wall in fiery lettering:
Thou shalt not collect for fins!!!
Just one reason I'll be paddling around the lake of fire in my little aluminum canoe ;D
You can't fool me, you have more than a few examples of this!
I thought the 11th commandment was "Thou shalt not waste good beer."
Maybe that's a Coug thing. 8)
All alcohol is a "coug thing" ;D
My mother used to say the only mortal sin was to waste beer.
Quote
If you REALLY want to flatter me as a bassist tell me that I get a good sound out of a 400 buck Epi and not out of one of my 5.000+ Dollars sixties Birds which always have me thinking "they better sound great, they sure cost enough".
I get some good natured ribbing about my Holy Crap bass, but it honestly gives me a better sound for my $600 investment than my Johnson Scroll Bass did. The Scroll was a gorgeous bass, and had a wonderful sound, but my FrankenEpi turned into an experiment gone horribly right.
I think I posted a live cut of the reunion show I did in February with that bass. You can feel it hit the walls. An old friend came up to me after my set wondering what bass I was using, since he could hear every little thing I played in the room.
Quote from: uwe on June 20, 2012, 12:23:58 AM
I don't even consider myself a vintage bass collector, I collect basses like Noah collected animals for the ark.
Does this mean you'll be doubling the Ze Kollection if we get a significant rainy spell in the near future, or is it that you're "high and dry" in that eerie you house ZK in...? ;)
Or with you mentioning Rush, and considering the new CD cover inferring 21:12, and relating to Alchemy, are you practicing the Dark Arts in the hope of creating a C-"V" from one of your spare instruments...?
Embrace the Dark Side... :vader:
Quote from: Dave W on June 20, 2012, 11:45:13 AM
A preamp can't add something that's not there. MM pickups have relatively low output, they're designed to work with a preamp, but set flat, they have plenty of low end on their own.
An overzealous ( = cheap) preamp can, but then your bass will sound like a cheap creative 2.1 speaker set for PCs, you will sound cheap.
Boomy lows, annoying highs, crappy mids. Have I used "cheap" enough times for you? :P
Quote from: Dave W on June 20, 2012, 11:45:13 AMA preamp can't add something that's not there.
??? ??? ???
Isn't that exactly what an active preamp does? My experience with Barts is that they have very little tone of their own and they need to be put through a pre-amp. I very recently tried going back to active for the hell of it, since I was playing a variety of dance music. I picked up a cheap 80's Korean Spector NS-2A. Passive pickups, and a Korean copy of the HAZ pre-amp. Kind of liked it. Bought a nicer Euro one with EMGs and Tone Pump pre-amp. Didn't like it as much. Sold it 2 weeks later. And after a few of gigs without the Ric/Sadowsky pre, then going BACK... Yeah, that and the Paul are the ones. ;D The NS-2A is going to my daughter for her 10th birthday in a couple of weeks. I still dig that one.
Quote from: gearHed289 on June 21, 2012, 09:49:23 AM
??? ??? ???
Isn't that exactly what an active preamp does? My experience with Barts is that they have very little tone of their own and they need to be put through a pre-amp.
The Holy Crap bass is passive, with a pair of Bart CGBG pickups that just roar all by themselves. I'm still trying to figure out what an onboard pre-amp is good for, other than bringing the front end of an amp to your fingertips. Wouldn't a bass with an onboard pre-amp work by plugging right into a power amp with a speaker attached?
Quote from: gweimer on June 21, 2012, 12:03:33 PM
I'm still trying to figure out what an onboard pre-amp is good for, other than bringing the front end of an amp to your fingertips. Wouldn't a bass with an onboard pre-amp work by plugging right into a power amp with a speaker attached?
That's about it,they don't add enough gain to drive a power amp. I have a few basses with active pickups and an onboard preamp, I can get good sounds out of them.. Good pickups and a good pre can produce a good sound. Or a bad one depending on who's twisting the knobs.
Quote from: TBird1958 on June 20, 2012, 11:46:36 AM
Herr Moderator I think you're working at least in part the "Half Noah" principle, 1 of everything.
That's why I collect guitar & bass matches..................... If we have a massive flood on Dec 21st 2012, I'll load them on the Ark, two by two. When things dry up, the Fenders will all be lost & the Gibsons will rock the new world............... (I'd better bring plenty of 9 volts for the RD's!)
The 7enders will make good boat paddles :mrgreen:
Is maho a good ship building wood? I doubt it. What wood would have been Noah's Ark been made of anyhow and how did he keep the woodpeckers and beavers from following their instincts with it?
I understand beaver tastes quite good...........
like chicken.
Woodpecker is very different........
;)
Quote from: uwe on June 21, 2012, 04:43:39 PM
Is maho a good ship building wood?
1928 Chris Craft, finest mahogany available.
(http://i976.photobucket.com/albums/ae241/cata1d0/ME/450px-1928_Chris_Craft_Cadet.jpg)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/1928_Chris_Craft_Cadet.jpg
Quote from: gweimer on June 21, 2012, 12:03:33 PM
The Holy Crap bass is passive, with a pair of Bart CGBG pickups that just roar all by themselves. I'm still trying to figure out what an onboard pre-amp is good for, other than bringing the front end of an amp to your fingertips. Wouldn't a bass with an onboard pre-amp work by plugging right into a power amp with a speaker attached?
As Carlo said, it can't drive a power amp, but yes, that's what it does, it gives you tone shaping at the bass. Not meant to replace the front end, just adds some versatility and convenience.
I mentioned MM pickups as an example of pickups being designed to work with a preamp. They're deliberately not wound as hot for more clarity. The preamp lets you boost what you need without blurriness. Of course you can still overdrive it if you want.
Quote from: gearHed289 on June 21, 2012, 09:49:23 AM
??? ??? ???
Isn't that exactly what an active preamp does? My experience with Barts is that they have very little tone of their own and they need to be put through a pre-amp. I very recently tried going back to active for the hell of it, since I was playing a variety of dance music. I picked up a cheap 80's Korean Spector NS-2A. Passive pickups, and a Korean copy of the HAZ pre-amp. Kind of liked it. Bought a nicer Euro one with EMGs and Tone Pump pre-amp. Didn't like it as much. Sold it 2 weeks later. And after a few of gigs without the Ric/Sadowsky pre, then going BACK... Yeah, that and the Paul are the ones. ;D The NS-2A is going to my daughter for her 10th birthday in a couple of weeks. I still dig that one.
No, it can't boost frequencies that the pickup doesn't produce. You just don't like the tone of the Barts. If their tone doesn't float your boat, a preamp is not going to help.
Quote from: TBird1958 on June 21, 2012, 04:58:34 PM
I understand beaver tastes quite good...........
like chicken.
Woodpecker is very different........
;)
Very different? Isn't woodpecking more of a mirror view to beaver tasting? In 69 it was, but times do change of course. And, no, Bryan Adams was not singing about a certain year either.
I just had a co-worker bragging up how great beaver tasted......... I don't recall him comparing it to chicken, now woodpecker.........???????
Quote from: uwe on June 22, 2012, 02:56:03 AM
Very different? Isn't woodpecking more of a mirror view to beaver tasting? In 69 it was, but times do change of course. And, no, Bryan Adams was not singing about a certain year either.
It's more like a certain cheese filled Hot Dog we have here in the States that "plumps when you cook 'em" ;)
where i grew up on the hudson river there were tons of those mahogany boats. just beautiful things.