The Last Bass Outpost
Gear Discussion Forums => Gibson Basses => Topic started by: dexter on August 28, 2009, 05:42:17 AM
-
HI Guys does anyone have much info on Jack Bruce's EB One Bass . i have seen various pictures ,such as this , and it looks to me like its a modified 50's bass . original pickup, different machine heads , refinished. can anyone shed more light on it ? .
Also , anyone can tell me if there is any u-tube vids where you can see /hear him on this bass ? , thanks
i wanna get me one , but it looks like if going after a 50's its gonna be big bucks , even broken , repaired and beat up ones , are expensive .
Or , i could get a 60's re-issue and mod it like Jacks , and put an original 50's p/u in it . It seems that the p/u's are the real only difference between the two. and i believe that sound factor is a MAJOR difference The trouble is finding one , i've never seen one come up on ebay ,
.... any one out there got one they might consider selling? , .... i 'll pay good money for one , so if you do have one you'd consider selling , drop me a priv. msge
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e57/hamish/jack-bruce.jpg)
thanks , dexter
-
I don't think the reissues came out until 1970, although I've seen some with claims of dates as early as 1967. They do come up on eBay, just not often. There's one up there now: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=380153016405&_rdc=1 . It won't be cheap, I won't be surprised if it brings $2000. And even if you get one at a reasonable price you might have to wait a long time to find a 50s pickup.
Jack calls his bass a "refitted EB-1." Not sure of the details, I believe it's a 50s EB.
-
I believe it's one of Felix Pappalardi's old basses that Jack had reworked. You can find the occasional EB-1 on Ebay. They've been selling in the $2700-3400 range recently. You can also look for the Epi reissue. I've had a couple of those.
-
just sold my epi eb-1...
-
It's a fifties model with the Schaller monster bridge (some routing necessary to get it as low as Jack has it), original pickup and - I think - Schaller regular tuners. I don't know whether it was Pappalardi pre-owned, but I read that Jack got it when he was touring with Ringo Starr. He first tried to go back to his old EB-3 but found that to feel too insubtantial in his hands today. He then gave an EB-1 a try and when touring with Ringo liked the way it echoed Paul's Höfner look (never mind how the EB came first). He plays the EB on the whole RAH reunion footage, only sometimes changing for his Warwick Thumb (his mock-SG look signature model from Warwick is relegated to being in a stand throughout the concert, Jack didn't think it developed enough at this point to actually use it, he did not like the sound of the pups).
-
I might be willing to sell my '53 but it's so cherry I gotta get at least 10k for her.
-
And as regards the wooden construction, there is no dif between the 50ies originals and the late sixties/seventies reissues, except for the slightly wider headstock of the later models to accomodate the regukar tuners. The difference between the pup is however night and day. Rule of thumb: You can get the 50ies singlecoil to sound mudbucker akin by dialing down treble, but have fun getting that late sixties mega-mudbucker (same one as in the EB Slotheads of the time) to sound like a fifties single coil! Won't work.
-
Mine was a lot like what Jack Bruce did.
(http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b170/gweimer/basses/EB1_3.jpg)
-
Having played many examples of both, and owned a 56, I prefer the 50s basses. The necks have an entirely different profile when compared to the ri basses, much chunkier and wider. The 50s single coil mudbucker is a better sounding and more versatile pup, that being my view at least. And the 50s basses had that massive chunk of nickel for the bridge, which is an altogether different animal to the miserable Evertilt.
I think what Jack Bruce did to his would only be condonable for a severely whupped and/or broken bass. The Schaller just isn't that desireable and needs mucho cobbing to go on, and the Schaller tuners while wonderful from the factory on a 70s Gibson are hideous and avoidable for a 50s bass. I (happily) dumped mine because someone stuck those tuners on it, and was pleased with the whopping $600 I got for it. I should have kept the pickguard or something. But for a celeb project, these would be fun. I hope more people get into them and maybe I can dump my other 460 bridges.
-
I am guilty of mounting the Schaller - ugly as it is - in tribute to JB even though the orignal bar bridge intonated alright. Of course now - Vorsprung durch Technik! - intonation ist perfekt and, mind you, this little bass has fine upper register access ... :mrgreen: To my defense: My fifties model was refinned to (a wonderful) cherry by allegedly Herr Pappalardi himself (he didn't do it, but asked Gibson) so I thought, what the hell, why not some JB influence as well? Unforgiveable, I know.
And yes, the neck of the fifties version is chunkier, I never noticed that consciously, but now that I gripped both necks in short sequence ...
-
My personal preference hands down is the 50's (original) version. I think it was 58 or 59 when the secound version plastic (godfather of mudbucker) pickup was introduced. I think the original pickup is the contender and I personally love them. You can definitly hear the unique characteristics on the RAH cd and on the recent Robin Trower cd (Bruce on bass). The 50's versions were also lighter by at least a pound and a half. I often wonder what exactly were the unique characteristics of the '53-'58 pickups because really Gibson got it right the very 1st time (not the secound or the third) next was the Les Paul Sig pups next the TB+.(o.k. I'm ready for the onslaught) Now that I said it there it lies. Back to the next EB-1 in '69...not right at all in all aspects from where I stand. To add insul to injury they all weighed in at 10+ lbs with a mudbucker! In the last 2-3 years I have not seen a decent playing/condition 50's Gibson Electric bass (violin shape with banjo tuners) and either the 1st or 2nd version pups for less than $6,500.
2 interesting points also: all the original 50's versions I've played (about 20 of them and owned 2 of them) were never neck heavy. The other point: All Hofner violin shaped basses are essentially Ho's!/cheap knockoffs!(but great in their own way nonetheless)
-
All Hofner violin shaped basses are essentially Ho's!/cheap knockoffs!
Which is why it's funny that the Epi version is shaped like a Hofner and not like a Gibson EB1. So the Epi is a copy of a knockoff.
-
HI Guys does anyone have much info on Jack Bruce's EB One Bass . i have seen various pictures ,such as this , and it looks to me like its a modified 50's bass . original pickup, different machine heads , refinished. can anyone shed more light on it ? .
Also , anyone can tell me if there is any u-tube vids where you can see /hear him on this bass ? , thanks
i wanna get me one , but it looks like if going after a 50's its gonna be big bucks , even broken , repaired and beat up ones , are expensive .
Or , i could get a 60's re-issue and mod it like Jacks , and put an original 50's p/u in it . It seems that the p/u's are the real only difference between the two. and i believe that sound factor is a MAJOR difference The trouble is finding one , i've never seen one come up on ebay ,
.... any one out there got one they might consider selling? , .... i 'll pay good money for one , so if you do have one you'd consider selling , drop me a priv. msge
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e57/hamish/jack-bruce.jpg)
thanks , dexter
That would be a realativley easy bass to build. You might be better off trying to find a local Luthier to build one.
-
My personal preference hands down is the 50's (original) version. I think it was 58 or 59 when the secound version plastic (godfather of mudbucker) pickup was introduced. I think the original pickup is the contender and I personally love them. You can definitly hear the unique characteristics on the RAH cd and on the recent Robin Trower cd (Bruce on bass). The 50's versions were also lighter by at least a pound and a half. I often wonder what exactly were the unique characteristics of the '53-'58 pickups because really Gibson got it right the very 1st time (not the secound or the third) next was the Les Paul Sig pups next the TB+.(o.k. I'm ready for the onslaught) Now that I said it there it lies. Back to the next EB-1 in '69...not right at all in all aspects from where I stand. To add insul to injury they all weighed in at 10+ lbs with a mudbucker! In the last 2-3 years I have not seen a decent playing/condition 50's Gibson Electric bass (violin shape with banjo tuners) and either the 1st or 2nd version pups for less than $6,500.
2 interesting points also: all the original 50's versions I've played (about 20 of them and owned 2 of them) were never neck heavy. The other point: All Hofner violin shaped basses are essentially Ho's!/cheap knockoffs!(but great in their own way nonetheless)
The original 53-58 single coil version is the same sidewinder design, same size, same 25,000 turns of AWG42 wire. But the difference is more than just 25,000 turns on one coil as opposed to 12,500 each on two. The original has the polepiece screws at one end directing the field all the way through the coil to a big magnet at the other end. The mudbucker has the polepiece screws in the middle directing the field through two shorter coils with a smaller magnet at each end.
I've played very few originals, but my impression is that they have more high end than the mudbuckers. Of course that's relatively speaking, neither has much going on the upper octaves.
I've played several of the reissues, though it's been almost 10 years. I don't remember any of them being unusually heavy.
-
Speaking of the weight thing, that reminds me of the old thread we had on these things ages ago - the mahogany Gibson used for them in the 50s was different. Very different, from my perspective. I advocate the old knock test if you have one - like say Uwe - next to a later EB0. The 50s bass will have a sharper fuller tone when you knock on it with your knuckle. I recall there was a general idea that Gibson was using a nice grade of Cuban mahogany, that by its nature is different. But overall it was also older and seasoned in a way they can't duplicate unless they start ripping down old dining room tables or something.
-
UWE ,am i right in assuming then , . . . that it seems that only you , (and Terry ) on this board are the lucky owners of one of these basses ...!! man ! , and a Pappalardi owned one to boot ! ........ do you gig with it Uwe ? i wanna see yours big time UWE....pictures please !
any other guys got at least 70's models ?
you gotta post some pictures please , so us other wanna be / wanna haves , can drool and fantasize ! ...please !
it seems like a few guys here used to own them , why did you get rid of em ???
...actually i can see why , when all those nice shiney sprarkling basses with the fancy pups and switches were coming out in the 80's , those old things would have seemed like some prehistoric monsters ,
different story now , seems RETRO is back in a big way .....
well ,it is for me anyway ! 8)
dexter
I am guilty of mounting the Schaller - ugly as it is - in tribute to JB even though the orignal bar bridge intonated alright. Of course now - Vorsprung durch Technik! - intonation ist perfekt and, mind you, this little bass has fine upper register access ... :mrgreen: To my defense: My fifties model was refinned to (a wonderful) cherry by allegedly Herr Pappalardi himself (he didn't do it, but asked Gibson) so I thought, what the hell, why not some JB influence as well? Unforgiveable, I know.
And yes, the neck of the fifties version is chunkier, I never noticed that consciously, but now that I gripped both necks in short sequence ...
-
Ok. First, here are the photos that made me push the Buy It Now button for 12k:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/b300/Squidley/18ee_3.jpg)(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/b300/Squidley/1a98_3.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/b300/Squidley/1fb2_3.jpg)(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/b300/Squidley/1b46_3.jpg)
'53 Gibson EB~Electric Bass. The first year they made an electric bass. The year I was born.
Now here's some pics of her made lefty:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v338/LightSnake/53GibsonEB.jpg)
Thanks to Bruce Johnson for making the lefty bridge & nut & settin' her up Southpaw.
I think he charged me 3 hun or maybe 4.
"Is that a Beatle Bass?" people ask.
I tell 'em, "No, she's a Zep Bass~ a Mountain Mama!" & a CREAM bass. :D
Here's the old strap peg hole, as yet Unplugged:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v338/LightSnake/Unplugged.jpg)
Banjo tuners:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v338/LightSnake/BanjoTuners.jpg)
Ain't she a beaut? I was surprised to find out the "soundholes" are stickers.
It's a big thick block of first class mahogany.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v338/LightSnake/53GibbyEB.jpg)
I've dialed in the sound so she's playable now, but she hums a bit.
Don't play her a lot. Got her for the MOJO mostly.
If we can make it thru this Recession/Depression together I'll have Doc Dolan move those knobs South & make her forever Southpaw.
Beans & rice get boring after awhile tho. heh 10k would probly be enuf to make me sell her.
Got the original telescoping stand that is 15" long for sitting & playing like an upright & extends to 30" for playing like an upright standing up.
Saved the original bridge if Dex or someone wants to change her back to righty.
Original hardshell case tooo
Please call me Terr. Dropped the y.
Pronounced like Tear It Up!
-
Mine isn't as Terr-ific (hey, it was "only" 5,000 bucks at the time!), but Herr Pappalardi had it refinned in a nice cherry, allegedly it's a 53 (but sans serial number which never existed or was sanded off over time you can't tell for sure):
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v615/uwehornung/untitled.bmp)
That pic was before the Schaller mount. Pappalardi wasn't obsessive about keeping it original either: The tone knob is notched and works different in the first half of the turn than in the second. In the first half it cuts the mids and emulates a mudbuckish sound with the singlecoil (though sans the mudbucker's archaic might), bit like the filter on EB-2s, in the second half it cuts what treble there is. I heard from the seller (Mark Discordia, a Pappalardi- and Nintendo/Super Mario-nut, with a Mountain website at the time) that that was a speciality of Pappalardi on all his EB-1s. Mark (who had an uncle work at Gibson in the fifties and had some background knowledge from there too) at one point must have bought three or four EB basses from the Pappalardi estate (after the "gun accident"): a 69 RI, a 55 (Pappalardi's main playing bass which he also had in Woodstock with him, and which now graces the Toronto Hardrock Café, I've seen it there behind glass, you have to pass it when you go to the loo, Mark sold it for 20,000 US bucks to them he said) and the cherry refin 1953 (?) that is now mine. There might have been another one, I'm not sure.
Here's my Pappasomething and 69 RI side by side.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v615/uwehornung/DCP_0926.jpg)
And to confuse everyone a bit: My 69 is much lighter than my 53, the wood on it sounds a lot more porous when doing the recommended "knock test". In comparison, the 53 sounds thick and dense, almost as if it were a chunk of maple (it isn't).
Ironically, the 69 also feels a lot more vintage. The neck is worn off to the sheer maho all over with only a few islands of residue fin remaining and the body has crazing like hell, it's a real relic (though surprisingly few bumps and scratches, it just peels like an old reptile!), but totally playable and even more subwoofish than a slothead EB-0 or -3 would be. The 53's refin is still pristine otoh and it feels like a well-kept 15 year-or-so bass though I've bumped it a couple of times already. Yup, I play them. Would be no good to have them if I didn't.
Actually, this thread has now inspired me to take both EBs out tonight for the rehearsal (together with my Sting P Bass and the Dimebag Darrel "assless chaps" :-[ extra-longscale monster Dean Razorback Flying V for some variety).
-
Real mahogany does vary a lot in weight, whether Cuban or Honduran. I don't think any of us have ever sampled enough of these basses to be certain if there's a real weight difference between eras. Sound difference, yes, and the wood is probably part of that but so are the hardware and pickup.
-
I got rid of mine because it had Schaller pegs. It was in VG shape - some buckle wear and the finish worn off where the arm hung over the top, and the peg was missing. I paid $300 for it, and sold it for $600. They were running less than $1500 in nm (around 1989 I recall) at collector shows, so I dumped it. It was a great playing bass, and recorded wonderfully. Also, I preferred 50s EB-2s with the single coil.
-
I'd love to own one, but I'd refin in some (tastefully) bright colour...
I can never see myself ever being able to afford one... :sad:
-
Surprised Dex didn't respond to our photos.
Maybe he drooled all over his keyboard & it doesn't work now. haha
-
Your right Terr ,
i been busy wiping away the drool and slobber off the keys , last few days ! :mrgreen:
Man ! they are some beautiful basses you guys have got, i'm so envious :sad:
Terr, yours really is something special, i doubt if you could find another bass of this vintage in such good condition , more of a keeper than a player really ,
whilst your Pappalardi is absolutely gorgeous UWE
....I just love the cherry finish on it , looks real cool.
... well , you guys have just got me on the look out for one these , ......one day i'll get my hands on one ! ;)
dexter
Surprised Dex didn't respond to our photos.
Maybe he drooled all over his keyboard & it doesn't work now. haha
[/quote
-
Get yourself a BIB, man! lol
Good luck gettin' yourself a fine EB tooo
10k seems like a lot in a way, I know, but good bassplayers make that it one night, right?
One of these lifetimes maybe we'll be that good if we just keep swingin'...
Jack inspired me to get mine, but Felix even more so.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iN5tGfXldKU&feature=related
-
One just popped up on Ebay for a realtively low BIN:
http://cgi.ebay.com/1956-GIBSON-EB-1-ELECTRIC-BASS-W-OHSC-FELIX-EB1-VIOLIN_W0QQitemZ190333717999QQcmdZViewItemQQptZGuitar?hash=item2c50c60def&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
-
There are multiple reasons for that BIN, starting with the "restamped" s/n (the original would have been inked). I wouldn't touch it, period.
-
Here's one on Gbase for $5900
http://www.gbase.com/gear/gibson-eb-1-1957-natural
(http://www.gbase.com/files/store_images/gear/1994019/p1_uvvewsztr_so.jpg)
-
There are multiple reasons for that BIN, starting with the "restamped" s/n (the original would have been inked). I wouldn't touch it, period.
You're right Dave, I didn't bother to read the entire listing. This would fall into the "buyer beware" catagory.
-
I'd love to own one, but I'd refin in some (tastefully) bright colour...
I can never see myself ever being able to afford one... :sad:
The $2250 '56 could be cool for ya.
How 'bout CAR? :D Sunburst? Arctic White?
Moonburst (Electric Blue & Midnight Blue)?
Make the seller an offer of 18 hun maybe.
The '57 ain't TOO bad. Maybe that seller would accept an offer tooo
In either case, you'd appear to have a fine looking ax from a safe distance!!
-
Terr... with my present financial constraints I'm looking forward to delving through the loft for eBay items to fund pretty much anything I wish to do...!
I'm willing to risk the "curse" of being a lottery winner, though... ;D
-
UWE, Do you know the respective wieghts of each bass
?....
how would they compare to an early , 61 -63 ish Gibson EB3 , heavier or lighter ?
i just realized i don't know the wieght of the basses i play!
Because the EB ONE has such a thicker body , and looks bigger , i'm just assuming it would be heavier ,
i could be completeley wrong , !
would you mind doing a little checking ?
thanks
much appreciated
dexter Mine isn't as Terr-ific (hey, it was "only" 5,000 bucks at the time!), but Herr Pappalardi had it refinned in a nice cherry, allegedly it's a 53 (but sans serial number which never existed or was sanded off over time you can't tell for sure):
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v615/uwehornung/untitled.bmp)
That pic was before the Schaller mount. Pappalardi wasn't obsessive about keeping it original either: The tone knob is notched and works different in the first half of the turn than in the second. In the first half it cuts the mids and emulates a mudbuckish sound with the singlecoil (though sans the mudbucker's archaic might), bit like the filter on EB-2s, in the second half it cuts what treble there is. I heard from the seller (Mark Discordia, a Pappalardi- and Nintendo/Super Mario-nut, with a Mountain website at the time) that that was a speciality of Pappalardi on all his EB-1s. Mark (who had an uncle work at Gibson in the fifties and had some background knowledge from there too) at one point must have bought three or four EB basses from the Pappalardi estate (after the "gun accident"): a 69 RI, a 55 (Pappalardi's main playing bass which he also had in Woodstock with him, and which now graces the Toronto Hardrock Café, I've seen it there behind glass, you have to pass it when you go to the loo, Mark sold it for 20,000 US bucks to them he said) and the cherry refin 1953 (?) that is now mine. There might have been another one, I'm not sure.
Here's my Pappasomething and 69 RI side by side.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v615/uwehornung/DCP_0926.jpg)
And to confuse everyone a bit: My 69 is much lighter than my 53, the wood on it sounds a lot more porous when doing the recommended "knock test". In comparison, the 53 sounds thick and dense, almost as if it were a chunk of maple (it isn't).
-
IMO , way too much money for this badly abused specimen , especially considering it does not even have the original 50' s pick up.
if it did though, i would have seriously considered it .....
dexter
http://cgi.ebay.com/1956-GIBSON-EB-1-ELECTRIC-BASS-W-OHSC-FELIX-EB1-VIOLIN_W0QQitemZ190333717999QQcmdZViewItemQQptZGuitar?hash=item2c50c60def&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
-
IMO , way too much money for this badly abused specimen , especially considering it does not even have the original 50' s pick up.
if it did though, i would have seriously considered it .....
dexter
http://cgi.ebay.com/1956-GIBSON-EB-1-ELECTRIC-BASS-W-OHSC-FELIX-EB1-VIOLIN_W0QQitemZ190333717999QQcmdZViewItemQQptZGuitar?hash=item2c50c60def&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
That one is mentioned earlier in this thread. I'll say it again, I wouldn't touch it at any price. Bogus serial number and all sorts of other issues. I wouldn't believe it's a legit '56 without a long verifiable paper trail.
-
Heya Dex~
When I got mine we had a great discussion on another bassplayer site about whether I should have it made lefty & actually play it or not.
Many were against makin' it lefty & some suggested that I have one custom made instead.
That's not a bad idea, even for a righty.
Bruce Johnson remarked about it's simplicity when he first saw it & how easy it'd be to make one.
Funny that he refused to move the knobs south when he made it lefty for me.
That's ok tho, it's fine for now. Doc Dolan-another great bass luthier-has agreed to do it for me if I ever decide to do it.
Either one of these guys could make you a great EB just as good & pretty as a Gibson!!
-
Me thinks as simple as it sounds to make the pickups on the original Gibson Electric bass might be hard to duplicate. If anyone has done it (and sat down and compare the origianl with a remake and they sound the same)I'd like to know and I would drop it in my EB-0 in a matter of secounds.
-
Me thinks as simple as it sounds to make the pickups on the original Gibson Electric bass might be hard to duplicate. If anyone has done it (and sat down and compare the origianl with a remake and they sound the same)I'd like to know and I would drop it in my EB-0 in a matter of secounds.
If anyone can do it, Bruce Johnson could. The guy's a genius.
-
"UWE, Do you know the respective wieghts of each bass
?....
how would they compare to an early , 61 -63 ish Gibson EB3 , heavier or lighter ?
i just realized i don't know the wieght of the basses i play!
Because the EB ONE has such a thicker body , and looks bigger , i'm just assuming it would be heavier ,
i could be completeley wrong , !
would you mind doing a little checking ?"
It's definitely heavier, not hugely though but noticeably so. That is in fact why Bruce switched to it for the reunion, he thought an EB-3 "felt like a toy" after years of playing Warwicks who are neither light nor small basses. In fact, Bruce's preferred Warwick bass, his signature Thumb, has a very thick and compact body too, maybe that is why the EB-1 felt like home to him. In any case, the EB-1 is the much more substantial instrument feelwise.
-
Me thinks as simple as it sounds to make the pickups on the original Gibson Electric bass might be hard to duplicate. If anyone has done it (and sat down and compare the origianl with a remake and they sound the same)I'd like to know and I would drop it in my EB-0 in a matter of secounds.
I don't think it would be hard at all. It's not as if they used any exotic wire or magnets that aren't available today. There are a number of custom pickup makers who could do it.
OTOH the 53-58 originals are rare enough in whole basses, I don't recall ever seeing a separate pickup for sale. That makes it hard to compare.
And if you got an original, it wouldn't sound the same in your EB-0 as it did in the Electric Bass/EB-1.
-
The construction is pretty crude, as you can see below. I think we went into this on the old dudepit. The bobbin is a rough cut hunk of cream colored plastic, like left-over Les Paul Standard pickguards. It is a gigantor single coil. I am sure you could have one duplicated easily enough. The cover is actually the hardest part to replicate, and the side "tabs" where they screw into the top are pretty fragile. Also, they don't line up with the way a cover for a later black plastic mudbucker or nickel/chrome cover sit on the top. I haven't seen one for sale off a bass in many years. The last time I did, I bought it, and this is it.
-
I can't remember where I snagged this pic.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v104/davepix/Basses/50sebpup.jpg)
-
Does anyone know roughly what the impedance was of that single coil? I know there are other variables involved, but I was wondering if a single mudbucker coil (http://www.vintageguitars.org.uk/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=1810) might get in that ballpark. If so, maybe that might offer an easier alternative to re-engineering one of the single coils(?).
I've never heard the sound of that single coil before to compare the two.
-
Joe, it should be about 30K, same as the mudbucker. It was 25,000 turns of AWG#42 on one coil, and when they decided to go with a humbucker, they simply did it as two coils each with 12,5000 turns with one RWRP to the other.
So no, I don't think one 12,500 turn 15K coil would be overwound enough to get the same sound.
-
i wonder if you put both mudbucker coils in the middle there in series and put both magnets up one end and the pole piece screws and bar down the other wouldnt you have a similar pickup?to get the single coil sound perhaps both coils would need to be not rwrp....weirdly my eb2 had a single coil pickup but it was only half a mud bucker i.e. one coil missing maybe it had been repaired i dont know.it was really good at picking up hum.it measures 13.9 k.
-
i wonder if you put both mudbucker coils in the middle there in series and put both magnets up one end and the pole piece screws and bar down the other wouldnt you have a similar pickup?to get the single coil sound perhaps both coils would need to be not rwrp....weirdly my eb2 had a single coil pickup but it was only half a mud bucker i.e. one coil missing maybe it had been repaired i dont know.it was really good at picking up hum.it measures 13.9 k.
The mudbucker coils already are in series.
If you did as you are asking about, and the coils weren't RWRP to each other, that would be just about the same setup as the single coil.
There is a metal blade running through each humbucker coil that conducts between the screws and the magnets. On the single coil the blade obviously has to run from one end to the other. The theory is the same, but the different path would change the sound, although I don't know exactly how.
-
thanks for the info UWE I fIgured 50'S eb ONE wieghed a significant amount more,.....it looks bigger for a start , and if its as thick as some of those 70s EB 3 Basses,it would be noticable.
hhhhhmmmm , i might have to get used to that wieght factor , as i definately want one , but the lightness factor of those early Gibsons is a real attraction for me .
i know for sure tho, i could definatley not go back to playing a 9 pound, full-scale Fender jazz bass .... ,
TERR, as for having a bass built , i suppose i could have one made , but i would much prefer to have the REAL DEAL, although the prospect of owning one of only 500 or so made is daunting.
of course if someone could pull it off , to play ,and sound like an original 50's , 'd be lining up with everyone else with my money.! ;D
dexter
"UWE, Do you know the respective wieghts of each bass
?....
how would they compare to an early , 61 -63 ish Gibson EB3 , heavier or lighter ?
i just realized i don't know the wieght of the basses i play!
Because the EB ONE has such a thicker body , and looks bigger , i'm just assuming it would be heavier ,
i could be completeley wrong , !
would you mind doing a little checking ?"
It's definitely heavier, not hugely though but noticeably so. That is in fact why Bruce switched to it for the reunion, he thought an EB-3 "felt like a toy" after years of playing Warwicks who are neither light nor small basses. In fact, Bruce's preferred Warwick bass, his signature Thumb, has a very thick and compact body too, maybe that is why the EB-1 felt like home to him. In any case, the EB-1 is the much more substantial instrument feelwise.
-
The EB-1 is about 1 3/4" whereas an early sixties EB-0/3 is a bit more than an inch. If you thought the cutaway horns of the SG shape extended (without changing direction) to actually meet in a full circle, then the body of the SG would be about as long as that of an EB-1. An EB-1 is only longer by about half the headstock because its neck is not set as deep into the body as an SG's.
-
UWE, Thanks for that detailed description between the EB ONE and ad early EB3, this is very helpful ,and should give me an idea what to expect when i finally pick one up.
I can't say that ive actually ever seen one of these basses for sale ''down under'' .... might be waiting some time .... ???
i just know i love the look, vibe ,and sound of this bass , especially a couple of tracks , with Felix P. ,..... ''Long Red '' '' Nantucket Slieghride'' , great sound!
thanks again Uwe,
dexter
-
Hey Dex (or whoever else may want possibly The World's Greatest '53 EB)~
Last chance to get my '53 for 10k! The first year Gibson Electric Basses were made!
I think there were only just over a hun made. 108 maybe? 112? You could look it up.
I'm handing her over to a broker in a coupla days who will charge 14k for her.
I'll get 12k but I'll have to wait awhile til she sells.
I'd rather have 10k NOW & give someone here a great deal!
Thing is you'd have to fly to L.A. to pick her up.
That's what the broker will do. He'll fly her First Class sharin' a seat with my Z!!
You've gotta push the button NOW tho, he's about to book a flight.
Uwe~ How 'bout you? I know you don't buy for fins, but.... ;)
L.A. is still nice & Summery.
I gotta sell my best axes, I just got devastated by bank fraud!!!
-
Thanks, Terr, but I'm full!
-
Terr , :o you are crazy to sell this bass man ! , I don't know what your collection of basses and guitars is like , but that Gibson EB One in such great condition , given the rareness of basses like it , this would be one of the last i'd let go , ... especially if your gonna let it it go at a loss ??? ..... sell your others first!.
Having said all that , i can see the reason to sell it if your backs really up against the wall, because if i was the owner , it would not be a playing bass , i would be too scared to take something like this to a gig . imo , its a collectors piece , , not a players bass.
thats just my point of view , its your bass and you'll do what you want with it , ....... good luck with the outcome... whatever it is !
..... i would love to own it !, cant afford ! , and could never see myself playing such a beautiful bass on a gig !
congrats to the lucky bastard who can afford it, :mrgreen:
dexter
-
Wow~ Looks like I can hold onto it awhile longer!
Got some big money comin' in today; a loan repaid!
-
good. to realise any decent money from the eb1 you would have to change it back to a righty. (original)
-
Maybe so but there sure ain't many lefty Gibsons in the world.
Anyway....
MINE!
That's the first word I learned. haha
-
you just flipped the nut,right?
-
No. Bruce Johnson made a cool new lefty bridge as you can see in an earlier post on this thread.
-
Wow~ Life has been a helluva rollercoaster ride lately with WILD ups & downs (mostly downs) so the IMMACULATE '53 Gibson EB is going back up for sale.
The broker I'm selling it thru is handling my Zemaitis too.
He's gonna promote it as a lefty. I think that's smart cuz there are so few lefty Gibson basses on the planet.
Mighty sorrowful to see it go but looks like it'll be leaving my hands next Thursday...
...& I don't even have a place to play it now! Alas
This economy is so bad I was in a taxi recently & the driver spoke English! Imagine that. lol
-
Sorry to hear things haven't been going well.
-
Your broker should drop Sir Paul a note about that EB-1. Almost 50 years after the fact, he'd then be finally playing the original rather than a hollow copy.
-
Your broker should drop Sir Paul a note about that EB-1. Almost 50 years after the fact, he'd then be finally playing the original rather than a hollow copy.
Hahaaa Yeah, this gentleman has already hooked Sir Paul up with 2 vintage axes!!
-
This economy is so bad I was in a taxi recently & the driver spoke English! Imagine that. lol
Funny you mention that but I was walking my dog and spied a new lawn care service where they appeared to be three white businessmen, clean cut with pressed matching uniforms (no stains or dirt) that were business casual (polos & beige dockers). They did the person's lawn like a synchronized swim team, quickly, orderly, then quickly packed up & left. We just stood there watching, it was so odd, so well performed.
Almost everyone here has hispanic yard-care services here in Chicago (very large Latino community).
Maybe they were the owners and had to lay off their workers?
-
nada englisi here, si?
-
Still have my '53.
Selling my vette instead. 8)
-
Funny you mention that but I was walking my dog and spied a new lawn care service where they appeared to be three white businessmen, clean cut with pressed matching uniforms (no stains or dirt) that were business casual (polos & beige dockers). They did the person's lawn like a synchronized swim team, quickly, orderly, then quickly packed up & left. We just stood there watching, it was so odd, so well performed.
Almost everyone here has hispanic yard-care services here in Chicago (very large Latino community).
Maybe they were the owners and had to lay off their workers?
Or maybe they were laid off and realized they could pay the bills cutting grass. If you do the work yourself you can make a decent living at lawncare - especially down here with a 9 month season!
I had a good friend that canned from a middle management job in upstate NY about 10 years ago and his prospects were bleak being 50ish at the time. Cuts grass in the warm weather and does some plow work in the winter - he's not getting rich but he's very comfortable and the stress level is low.
-
Our computer guy has a friend who started a Canada Goose chasing service (not sure he is still in business) People on lakes hate them and can make the property unusable with the droppings.
He works with his dog, a pit bull. They spend all day together. Seems like a perfect life.
Our old business investor lived on a lake and their association hired a guy to rent swans (with clipped wings) for the summer (they chase off the geese).