Bartolini MK1 Pickups and EQ...anygood? - Page 2

DickyT · #21 10-02-2008, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ach

There are no EMG pickup sized MK1. Local luthier had been done a routing.

ok, that's what I thought. It looks to be the only direct replacement for the mk1 is the MK4CBC.

How did your bass sound after the re-route?

4Mal · #22 10-02-2008, 12:53 PM

I replaced those MK1 pickups in a 55-01 with Nordstrand Big Splits and thought it was a major improvement. Night and day.

I didn't care for the pre much either. Mechanically a very sound instrument but in need of tonal work IMO. YMMV of course

Willy2911 · #23 10-03-2008, 12:14 PM

I like the MK1s I think they are awsome - again, for the money... Also they look good.

edubb · #24 10-03-2008, 01:01 PM

sound good to me, but the MK2's are awesome

!. They are great sounding pickups, you can get just about any sound you want out of them and the quality of that sound is excellent. I think they are among the best I have ever heard.

Fenderjazz6823 · #25 10-03-2008, 01:08 PM

I have the cort a5
the mk1's are ok just use them till you get the money to replace them
I had to replace the preamp but I will be going to Barts mk 5's
www.bestbassgear.com brian can help you out

Ach · #26 10-08-2008, 09:53 AM

Nordstrand has replacement for mk1.
Big singles / Big splits / Fat stacks

cassanova · #27 03-09-2009, 02:37 AM

I have the MK1 package in both my Sr706 and Sr535. The combination sounds ok in both the basses, especially for the price paid for them however, I find both basses to be lacking in warmth and pressence that my 55-02, and MIA DLX Jazz and P's have.

I'm giving serious consideration to swaping out the preamp to the NTMB in the hopes that it will give my Ibanez's more pressence and kill off some of the brightness that they both have.

UncleFluffy · #28 03-09-2009, 01:39 PM

I got an SR535 for my fiancee for a birthday present and found that the Mk1s give it somewhat of a "clanky" tone. Even with a lot of EQ work it was very difficult to find a balance between the two extremes of (a) so much articulation that it sounded like someone banging on a big metal saucepan, or (b) muddy and indistinct.

YMMV, and all that...

22pauld22 · #29 03-09-2009, 04:24 PM

I found a huge difference when I swapped the mk1 pre for an audere z that I had for anther project . the mk1 pickups respond well to the z switch

all togeather a much smoother sound someone else mentioned brittle and thats quite a good description with the mk1 pre

cassanova · #30 03-09-2009, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UncleFluffy

I got an SR535 for my fiancee for a birthday present and found that the Mk1s give it somewhat of a "clanky" tone. Even with a lot of EQ work it was very difficult to find a balance between the two extremes of (a) so much articulation that it sounded like someone banging on a big metal saucepan, or (b) muddy and indistinct.

YMMV, and all that...

I think that clank is more of a technique issue than a pickup/preamp one. When I played the bass acoustically in the store I played it with a very light touch as I would normally play and though it was very bright in tone, there wasn't any clank but when I dug in and played it very aggressively there was that "clanky" tone you mention. When I finally ran it through the amp at the store the results were the same.

I've also noticed that with this bass, like my Sr706 minimal eq adjustments are needed to add any needed bass/mids/treble.

But as you said, YMMV

UncleFluffy · #31 03-09-2009, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cassanova

I think that clank is more of a technique issue than a pickup/preamp one.

Fair comment, and it's probably best phrased as being a bit of both: "both of us play fairly hard, but that particular pup/preamp combo makes aggressive playing sound clanky"

Even tried putting flats on it to smooth things off. Next experiment will be preamp/EQ replacement, methinks... Too nice looking a bass to get rid of.

cassanova · #32 03-10-2009, 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UncleFluffy

Fair comment, and it's probably best phrased as being a bit of both: "both of us play fairly hard, but that particular pup/preamp combo makes aggressive playing sound clanky"

Yes.

Even tried putting flats on it to smooth things off. Next experiment will be preamp/EQ replacement, methinks... Too nice looking a bass to get rid of.

Please post what preamp and pups you put in it and the tonalities when/if you replace. I'd like to do the same thing in both my Sr706 and 535 but am hesitant too because I dunno what it might sound like.

UncleFluffy · #33 03-10-2009, 08:59 AM

I think my first experiment will be to just take the preamp out of the circuit completely and make it all-passive. Much cheaper and easily reversible.

ashtray9 · #34 03-16-2009, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UncleFluffy

I think my first experiment will be to just take the preamp out of the circuit completely and make it all-passive. Much cheaper and easily reversible.

Yes, I did this with my SR750 and found the tone much clearer... Although I have since noticed how insanely bright the bass sounds. I wonder if this is attributed to the pickups being really unbalanced and bright, or if the mahogany, walnut, bubinga, and jatoba are having their way with the tone. I will post again as soon as I swap out the old pickups for the new.

cassanova · #35 03-17-2009, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ashtray9

Yes, I did this with my SR750 and found the tone much clearer... Although I have since noticed how insanely bright the bass sounds. I wonder if this is attributed to the pickups being really unbalanced and bright, or if the mahogany, walnut, bubinga, and jatoba are having their way with the tone. I will post again as soon as I swap out the old pickups for the new.

From my understanding Mahogany is a warm sounding tone wood.

My guess to the bright tones would be primarily due to the body design of the Sr's. They don't have much wood to them so there is less wood to resonate which I believe causes a brighter tone, couple that with the high mass bridges they use and that only increases the brightness.

I'm not sure how the walnut, bubinga, and jatoba really are for tone woods when used as a body, but it's also always been my understanding that the neck wood has a minimal effect on the tonality of the bass, and IIRC the walnut is a top wood and I've always been told that that also does not affect tonality very drastically, but then again I could be wrong as its been a while since researching this info.

ashtray9 · #36 03-24-2009, 02:07 AM

Playing at the neck joint.
Playing at Neck Pickup

Howdy, here are some sound clips of the MK1 pickups in a SR750 with the pre amp completely bypassed. I'm using DR Lowriders. I believe the sound is a more defined without the pre, but that could be my imagination. I'm low on funds, but I will post a comparison after I get the replacements.
Also, I always play at the neck joint and thus the clip playing at the pickup is muddy due to bad technique.

Anybody know a better site for posting sound clips within the browser window?

Jesse DeCarlo · #37 03-31-2009, 12:57 AM

I want to go on record as agreeing with the assessment that the Bartolini MK1 pickups are good but the MK1 preamp is not particularly good. I recently got a super deal on an Ibanez SR-900, which is a fine instrument: it is very well made and has a great unplugged tone. But I found the amplified tone pretty much unusable. Even with the onboard EQ set flat, the signal has a heavy treble boost and very unmusical compression. I suspected the preamp, so to test this theory I went ahead and bypassed it so I could hear how the pickups sound by themselves, and it's a HUGE difference. Without the preamp, the neck pickup sounds a lot like my Bartolini 8S P-bass pickup, i.e., awesome.

Now, whether or not you like the sound of the MK1 preamp is obviously a matter of opinion. Maybe it's great for some styles of music that I don't play. (I'm into classic soul, R&B, rock, and jazz.) But in my opinion an onboard preamp ought to be as transparent as possible when the EQ is flat, and that is definitely not the case here.

Furthermore, the circuit design is weird. On the wiring diagrams I looked at for a couple of different American-made Bartolini preamps (including the popular NTMB), the signal comes from the pickups, goes through the volume and blend pots, and THEN goes into the preamp and EQ. But on the MK1 the signal goes straight from the pickups into the preamp. This makes it complicated to install an active/passive switch, because if you bypass the preamp you're bypassing the volume and blend controls as well, unless you do a bunch of rewiring that I haven't sat down to figure out yet.

So, since I like the bass and the pickups, I guess I'll just yank the preamp and wire it in a passive configuration until I have an extra $150 lying around for at NTMB or something like that.

Jesse DeCarlo · #38 04-09-2009, 10:46 AM

So, I've been fooling around with my preamp-less SR-900 for about a week now and would like to amend my previous post. The MK1 pickups do have a bit of a sonic family resemblance to the Bart 8S P-bass pickup I used for comparison, but after spending more time with the comparison they're really not that similar.

On the positive side, the MK1 has a nice, airy treble response. On the slightly negative, it lacks the punch and tight definition in the low/low mid range that I like about the 8S, but that's mostly a matter of taste. The output of the MK1 is also considerably lower, but that's not really so important, because amps have volume knobs. The only thing that's really a bummer about the MK1, and maybe a deal-breaker, is that the string-to-string balance is pretty uneven.

Obviously it would be much more useful to compare the MK1 to the MK4. I have to figure out if I want to spring for a pair of MK4's -- they're not exactly cheap.

spode master · #39 04-09-2009, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesse DeCarlo

Furthermore, the circuit design is weird. On the wiring diagrams I looked at for a couple of different American-made Bartolini preamps (including the popular NTMB), the signal comes from the pickups, goes through the volume and blend pots, and THEN goes into the preamp and EQ. But on the MK1 the signal goes straight from the pickups into the preamp. This makes it complicated to install an active/passive switch, because if you bypass the preamp you're bypassing the volume and blend controls as well, unless you do a bunch of rewiring that I haven't sat down to figure out yet.

The point of doing that is to make sure the tone and volume controls do not effect the voice of the pickup, so the tonality of the pickup is consistent at all volumes, and also the quality of your cable will have no to minimal effect on the quality of the sound of your pickups.

Antone-

SGD Lutherie · #40 04-09-2009, 02:42 PM

One odd thing about Barts in Ibanez basses, is Ibanez wanted a deep sounding neck pickup, and a brighter sounding bridge pickup. Usually Bart does it the other way around for a more balanced tone.

I have an SR4000E Prestige bass here that I did some fretwork on, and it has the USA Barts. I took a look at them and they have the neck (B) pickup installed at the bridge, and vice versa!

So if the bridge pickup is too "clanky" and you want a thicker tone from it, swap the two pickups.