A new challenge

Highlander · November 18, 2010, 11:01:02 AM

Sounds pretty good for me, and the test is through your Eden rig (which I am most definitely envious of now having gigged one), at volume...

On the PC the volts naturally take the path of least resistance and the MB is bypassed by the RD pup, so at the moment I run with either the MB or the RD, not both - you need to balance the circuit with an additional resistance value - a-la-EB3 - something I'm planning at some point, but as I get two distinctly (well, five as I have the 4 options with the MB being coil-split etc) useful sounds, not a rush...

Basvarken · November 18, 2010, 11:12:21 AM

Quote from: Pilgrim on November 18, 2010, 09:28:53 AM
but soloed it sounds like the mudbucker just isn't putting out much gain.

Well, it does put out much gain. It is definitely the loudest of all combinations. That much even that it yanks the levels in the red and starts distorting those crappy Sony speakers

@ Kenny: through the Orange AD200 plus Eden cabs, the second option (G3 humbucker) and fourth option (Mudbucker) are the most favorable.

I'l take the bass to my amp doctor. See if he can work it out.

Thanx guys

jumbodbassman · November 18, 2010, 11:59:01 AM

obviously this is my opinion so take it for what it is - the g-3 hb and the g-3 hb with the mudbucker are the best combo's to me. G-3 alone sound weak. the mud alone is ok but muddy and a little weak but that may be because where it is on the bass. I still think you should go with a stacked pot and either put a volume for each set of pups or go with a vol/tone setup. I liked the different sound when turning off the tone pot and the variations it will give you and everything in between. I must admit i am a tweaker and will slightly change tone or pups sometimes from song to song. I am sure nobody hears the difference but me but i do......

drbassman · November 18, 2010, 03:01:03 PM

First two sounded great to me, different, but great none the less. Nice job!!!

shadowcastaz · November 18, 2010, 06:05:58 PM

I like position #2. That is one F#@$in awesome lookin / sounding bass! Again I am humbled.

clankenstein · November 18, 2010, 06:34:29 PM

nice bass!what works best for me is wiring the mudbucker in series with the rear pickup.they dont seem to work against each other then.and if you connect point where the 2 pickups are joined together to the wiper of a pot which is earthed at one end you have a blend control.

Psycho Bass Guy · November 18, 2010, 08:46:23 PM

I liked the mudbucker solo'ed best. Now that I know the Artec mudbucker isn't too bright, I'll have to find a home for one. I agree about series wiring for it. If you don't want the G3's eating it or vice versa, go with series wiring between them.

exiledarchangel · November 19, 2010, 12:46:58 AM

Or you could wire the mud in parallel when used with other pups, I think it can be done.

drbassman · November 19, 2010, 06:17:39 AM

Yep, you've inspired me to build my own LP on down the road!

birdie · November 19, 2010, 09:33:27 AM

Very nice, Chief!

Highlander · November 19, 2010, 09:42:28 AM

I should post what the PC sounds are like at some time - the variations are quite nice but I tend to use mostly as MB/RD - one of the (MB) variants causes the amp (Hiwatt) to misbehave (?) if I stand too close - just looses the signal completely - I thought it was the amp at first - not tried properly through the MAG...

uwe · December 30, 2010, 08:40:29 AM

Amazing things can grow in Holland and not only in greenhouses too!

I really like the G-3 sounds, but then I'm partial to those pups, but the humbucker on its own, dirty and messy as it sounds, makes an interesting alternative. It might be the position - once mudbuckers are moved backwards they lose a lot of their dinosaur power. But why not try a vintage Gibson mudbucker? Good as the arctec humbuckers are, they don't go to the - commercially today unthinkable, there would be no market for a true mudbucker sound - extremes of a true mudbucker. It sure boosted my SG-Z which always had a weakling, meek sound before. It's a time tunnel

that automatically transports it backwards three decades at least!

Oh, btw, it looks lovely too.

Basvarken · December 30, 2010, 03:58:56 PM

Quote from: uwe on December 30, 2010, 08:40:29 AM
But why not try a vintage Gibson mudbucker? Good as the arctec humbuckers are, they don't go to the - commercially today unthinkable, there would be no market for a true mudbucker sound - extremes of a true mudbucker. It sure boosted my SG-Z which always had a weakling, meek sound before. It's a time tunnel

Interesting thought.
I sort of assumed the Artec would be very similar to the original Mudbucker. Because of the construction and impedance value (both identical)
Are you saying there is a significant difference in sound between the two?

dadagoboi · December 30, 2010, 04:15:39 PM

Quote from: Basvarken on December 30, 2010, 03:58:56 PM
Interesting thought.
I sort of assumed the Artec would be very similar to the original Mudbucker. Because of the construction and impedance value (both identical)
Are you saying there is a significant difference in sound between the two?

I think most of us would say a big YES. You owe it to yourself to find out what real mud is!

Basvarken · December 30, 2010, 04:20:42 PM

Well, I have this 63 Epiphone Newport with an original mudbucker. So I guess I'm supposed to know what real mud is...
But it's comparing apples and oranges, if I compare the sound with that of my self built Brooks bass.
The Newport has the mudbucker at the neck while the Brooks has it at the bridge.