Stoner/Doom Bassists Thread Pt. 44 Magnum.. the big boys.

[Ron Now]

The OSD has more gain than an OCD, its been awhile since I owned the OCD but I know it's got more gain.

Definitely more bass response stock in the OSD. Having a clean blend added on isn't too much for the upgrade, definitely cheaper than getting a loop blender pedal.

[Road Bull]

Thanks Ron, I am definitely interested in what the OSD has to offer then. I might look into one if those bad boys. I really like the grindy sort if tone that gets close to Om youtube clips recorded at the amoeba record store in CA. Mind you, I don't rock a Rick, I play mostly fender variety basses. And I dont see myself getting giant Green amps anytime soon, so...

[Ron Now]

Hmm, yeah you could probably cop a rather passable OM tone with an OSD cranked up, with proper EQ-ing and such. Playing hard and loud helps too.

Although really an old DS-1, that really is the best OM tone I've copped over the years (which Al uses in conjunction with a dod 250, so I guess it makes sense).

[Sartori]

Originally Posted by dunwichamps

2. The Ampeg SVT Mid Range EQ
*snip*

I read all of the EQ info and it was really interesting and I know a lot more than I did.

Still have a couple questions, though.

It seems like the baxandall EQ that the SVT has, and its mid control, are sort of separate things that aren't especially related to each other? Or are they?

If they are somewhat separate, could that kind of mid control be sort of grafted onto an EQ section that uses an FMV type tone stack for the treble and bass? Or no? And if not, why not?

Third, the mid control you described seems to be the old three position one. I assume that the newer five position control would be even more complicated? Conversely, a mid control with only two frequencies, would that be less complicated, and one without the frequency selector, just pegged at 800hz would be even less complex?

[Sartori]

Originally Posted by Niff

i posted in the rickenbacker club thread asking about replacing .047 uF caps (not the .0047 uf cap) in order to get a different tone. posting in the other parts of talkbass is scary, as i feel like that may be one of those 'rickenbacker purist' issues that pops up every now again that erupts into an old man internet flame war.

Laz posts on that thread sometimes. Can't be too bad.

I do kinda wonder what would happen if you used different value caps. People use different value pots all the time.

[mc_muench]

Sub'd

Nick those EQ post were a great read.

Originally Posted by Lazarus.Bird

People who see our band for the first time always comment on how face melting it is when we all stomp into overdrive for the massive riffs. One guitarist uses a mojo hand colossus, other the drive channel in his orange amp and mine is the el oso. BB + El Oso is a wicked combo.

I really like my Mojo Hand Colossus, on guitar or bass. Use with the 3 way on the bass boost for foundation moving riffs, it starts to get into that solid synth note fuzz with infinite sustain with my setup. Its a good muff w/mods based pedal, but it may get replaced if something from the tour box tops it.

I still have some stigma about this ODB-3...it sounds great how I use it but I cant help but wonder how an Elements or El Oso would do in its place.

I also got a free Boss Metal Zone from my friend, it sounds a bit hissy like the ODB-3 but it has some super high gain, and the 3 band eq with sweepable mids are pretty cool. Makes for some great sludge tone with guitar, havent tried it with bass yet. Might make for another cool mod pedal with more wood in the new enclosure!

[Sartori]

Originally Posted by HydrasBreath

If you're looking to just replace them with the same value but of a different type I don't think that would affect things too much unless the caps you have now are somehow faulty.

I usually run my Ric wide open as well. Sometimes I'll back off on the neck volume just a bit if I'm jamming along to some old Rush or something. I've also experimented with backing off the bridge pup tone quite a bit while leaving the neck tone up. That's supposedly how Chris Squire of Yes ran his basses. Sounds interesting I guess.

But I agree with you that the overtones you get while running wide open are quite nice and generally what I prefer.

Interesting. When I play my Ric, I usually just have the bridge pickup on. The neck pickup I only use for quiet parts of songs. Usually.

[Sartori]

Originally Posted by eyeballkid

where?
nevermind... found it..

gotta admit, I agree.

What did he say about Aerosmith?

Is it funny?

[Ekimus]

http://www.avclub.com/articles/high-...ally-ha,91271/

Yes, it's quite funny

[Sartori]

Ha ha, that made my night.

[Ancient Tone]

Originally Posted by HydrasBreath

I think increasing pot value rolls off more high end if I'm not mistaken.

I'm not 100% on that info though so don't quote me on it.

Originally Posted by Sartori

I do kinda wonder what would happen if you used different value caps. People use different value pots all the time.

The lower the pot value the more high end roll off i.e; a 250k pot will have the least amount of high end (good for use with single coil pickups which are very bright), 500k will have a decent amount of high end (primarily used for humbuckers and darker singles), and 1meg has the most high end content (as close as you can get to plugging your cable straight to your pickup, primarily used for dark / muddy humbuckers and I've found that p-90's love them). I'm not 100% positive on caps and what their values do, Nick might be able to chime in on that. But if you have a muddy sounding bass / guitar the first thing i always recommend is increasing the vole / tone pot values before swapping pickups its cheaper and just as easy, alot of times manufacturers don't even consider pot values and just use the same thing for everything (fender {250k in EVERYTHING} + Gibson {500k in EVERYTHING}) even if the situation doesn't call for it (like the use of 250k pots w/ the WRHB in my tele custom, its so dark and muddied with absolutely no high end so this is my next project, upgrading to 1meg pots)

[The_Janitor]

Finished up the ODB3 mod yesterday. Only got to play it through the behringer pod & headphones, but it sounds pretty damn good. I heard a little more noise than I'd like to, but that may be due to the 10 other electronics devices plugged into the circuit I was using for power. Also the not-pod doesn't seem to like pedals that much.

I'm going to have to run through the stack and see what the deal is. My work on the 3-way switch was a bit sloppy, so I might just need to go back and fix a few solder joints.

Unfortunately I leave for Anaheim on wednesday morning so I won't get to try it out for almost two weeks.

[dunwichamps]

Originally Posted by Sartori

I read all of the EQ info and it was really interesting and I know a lot more than I did.

Still have a couple questions, though.

It seems like the baxandall EQ that the SVT has, and its mid control, are sort of separate things that aren't especially related to each other? Or are they?

If they are somewhat separate, could that kind of mid control be sort of grafted onto an EQ section that uses an FMV type tone stack for the treble and bass? Or no? And if not, why not?

Third, the mid control you described seems to be the old three position one. I assume that the newer five position control would be even more complicated? Conversely, a mid control with only two frequencies, would that be less complicated, and one without the frequency selector, just pegged at 800hz would be even less complex?

The signal chain in the SVT goes like

Input -> gain stage -> buffer -> volume control -> gain stage -> baxandall -> mid control. The Bass and Treble are before the mid control, and they are isolated.

Having 1 or 5 or more mid range positions is not consequential on the complexity. The circuit is very large and the # of positions is only determined by the LRC circuit on the bottom of the scheme. Reducing it to just 1 combination still requires 3 triode sections, dozen plus parts and lots of wiring space.

It could be stuck after or before any other EQ but it would be some what rendered less useful IMO after a FMV which has such a strong mid cut. Kind of wastes the active part of the mid EQ. However, that is kind of what Mesa did/does. The classic designs all use a Fender FMV and then right before the phase inverter they have SS graphic or parametric EQs

[dunwichamps]

I made a post in the Amps forum here on EQs for people to others to check out. There goes nothing.

[The_Janitor]

Originally Posted by dunwichamps

I made a post in the Amps forum here on EQs for people to others to check out. There goes nothing.

Oh boy. I really don't see any way that posting what you posted here would cause a flame war but I'm sure someone on TB will find a way.

Good luck to you sir.

[demon666]

Originally Posted by dunwichamps

I made a post in the Amps forum here on EQs for people to others to check out. There goes nothing.

Lets see how that turns out.

[dunwichamps]

yea it could turn into a cluster **** or go ignored forever

[demon666]

Well you know your **** so I can't see any reason for it to turn into a **** storm.



.....but you never know on here.

[dunwichamps]

i opened it up for corrections 2. See what people have to say

[father of fires]

Originally Posted by dunwichamps

i opened it up for corrections 2. See what people have to say

The only comment I would have is that James and Bax aren't the same thing. But I know you know that.

They seem to be synonymous to most people but they function completely differently.

But there's no need to muddy up a very informational post.

Thanks for putting in the work.

Is it worth mentioning the tone stack calculator?