Pre-amps: Bartolini or Aguilar?

[*ToNeS*]

Hey guys. I've actually already installed a Bartolini pre-amp in my bass. Just got her back today. Can't even remember what pre it actually is, only that it has bass, treb, and mid (with pull-switch) controls, and can be shunted into active or passive. Cool features.

But it SUCKS. Is that what all Bartolini pre-amps sound like? It's just so boomy. This is not a sound I want. I can't even seem to dial it back, there's always this real room-filling low-end. I hate that vibe. I wanted more fundamental.

So unless I'm doing something retarded here, I'm taking her back in. Can't stand the sound. I think the bass actually sounds worse than when I had her modded. I'm thinking the Aguilar OBP-3 sounds about right. Seems like it has a lot of a character and not so much wool, as well as being aggressive. Sound about right?

Expensive mistake to make, though. I'm really bummed. My bass, by the way, is an Ibanez GWB35 with slickrounds. The tech even had to drill a hole in her to add another knob for the mid control. Woe.

[jibreel]

pickups ? strings ? bass ????

Aguilar is clearer for sure. Although there are basses I do not want a Bart pre in, never had a " to boomy " problem.

[*ToNeS*]

Originally Posted by jibreel

pickups ? strings ? bass ????

Aguilar is clearer for sure. Although there are basses I do not want a Bart pre in, never had a " to boomy " problem.

It's an Ibanez GWB35 (a fretless 5-string with a single soapbar pickup. Maybe the pickup config's an issue?). I just got some of those Ken Smith slickwound strings put on. I was using roundwounds, but they had started to chew into the board's ebonal. I miss their power!

Yerp, I find the Bartolini to have way too much thuddy low for my liking. The B-string in particular now lacks the dirty character it had with even the stock preamp, which is something I really liked about this bass. In fact, the Bart pre seems to have done a great job of ruining the instrument's tonal promise. Money well spent.

Thing is, I heard Barts were awesome. What am I not doing here?

[fruitlabor]

Some bart preamps have an adjustment on the preamp in the cavity. Check to see if that's the case. It will effect the tone as well as the volume sometimes. It depends on what model it is. Is it new or used, where did you get it, etc?

[enricogaletta]

I will defintely choose the Aguilar preamp!
Cheers. Enrico
YouTube
WebSite

[*ToNeS*]

Originally Posted by fruitlabor

Some bart preamps have an adjustment on the preamp in the cavity. Check to see if that's the case. It will effect the tone as well as the volume sometimes. It depends on what model it is. Is it new or used, where did you get it, etc?

Pretty sure it's the NTMB 2.4 A/P. It's new, had it installed by my local tech. He's really good, I just think I might've made the wrong choice here. My concept of bass is less actual bass, and more "grrr," if that makes any sense.

[mmbongo]

I wouldn't make any decisions until I replaced the pickup as well.

[JimiLL]

Originally Posted by *ToNeS*

It's an Ibanez GWB35 (a fretless 5-string with a single soapbar pickup. Maybe the pickup config's an issue?). I just got some of those Ken Smith slickwound strings put on. I was using roundwounds, but they had started to chew into the board's ebonal. I miss their power!

Yerp, I find the Bartolini to have way too much thuddy low for my liking. The B-string in particular now lacks the dirty character it had with even the stock preamp, which is something I really liked about this bass. In fact, the Bart pre seems to have done a great job of ruining the instrument's tonal promise. Money well spent.

Thing is, I heard Barts were awesome. What am I not doing here?

What kinda soapbar??

If its a naturally deep voiced pickup, and the original pre wasnt boomy....they may have voiced the stock pre amp to accomodate the pickups low voicing. That would explain why an aftermarket pre isnt working.

I think if all you change out is the Bart for the Aggie you are still going to have the same problem.

I have a bart 3.3 pre, for reference. Didnt sound a whole lot different than the MEC that came with the bass..... and btw, im sure your tech could have put a stacked knob in there somewhere and not drilled another hole in the bass

[*ToNeS*]

Originally Posted by JimiLL

What kinda soapbar??

If its a naturally deep voiced pickup, and the original pre wasnt boomy....they may have voiced the stock pre amp to accomodate the pickups low voicing. That would explain why an aftermarket pre isnt working.

I think if all you change out is the Bart for the Aggie you are still going to have the same problem.

I have a bart 3.3 pre, for reference. Didnt sound a whole lot different than the MEC that came with the bass..... and btw, im sure your tech could have put a stacked knob in there somewhere and not drilled another hole in the bass

This is my babe: Ibanez.com | Basses | GWB35

As you can see, she only comes with bass and treble controls. Pretty sure the tech had to drill that hole to physically accomodate having a mid knob to go with the new pre.

From the site, the pickup is a custom jobbie for this bass, it seems:

Bridge Pickup
Name: SFR-GWB CUSTOM
Model No: SFR-GWB
Construction: Humbucking/Passive
Magnet: Ceramic
Description: Custom wound for GWB. Quick attack, superior dynamics and highs.

Not sure if that's any help in determining whether it's a "deep-voiced pickup," but the tonal character is now completely different. I didn't think Barts coloured the sound so much. That's why I chose them in the first place (Demeter was too expensive)!

[Darkstrike]

Hmmmm, I have a Bart pre in three different basses, all Roscoes, and they never seemed boomy, in fact quite a nice pre, though I don't boost/cut andy of the dials too much. I can certainly get warm, or dark, but never boomy.

I considered changing one for an Aguilar pre once(the bass came stock with it, but it's original owner sent it to Roscoe to have the Bart installed), but from all accounts I've heard, the dials are too aggressive, as in a little turn has a big impact.

[Darkstrike]

Originally Posted by *ToNeS*

This is my babe: Ibanez.com | Basses | GWB35

As you can see, she only comes with bass and treble controls. Pretty sure the tech had to drill that hole to physically accomodate having a mid knob to go with the new pre.

From the site, the pickup is a custom jobbie for this bass, it seems:

Bridge Pickup
Name: SFR-GWB CUSTOM
Model No: SFR-GWB
Construction: Humbucking/Passive
Magnet: Ceramic
Description: Custom wound for GWB. Quick attack, superior dynamics and highs.

Not sure if that's any help in determining whether it's a "deep-voiced pickup," but the tonal character is now completely different. I didn't think Barts coloured the sound so much. That's why I chose them in the first place (Demeter was too expensive)!

Ceramic pickups usually aren't deeply voiced so much, generally pretty bright/aggressive in tone.

I'm surprised to hear the Bart is affecting the bass's voicing so much, unless the stock pre is very brightly voiced(which I heavily doubt).

[Darkstrike]

You mention changing from roundwound strings, you didn't change both strings and pre at once, did you?

[*ToNeS*]

Originally Posted by Darkstrike

Ceramic pickups usually aren't deeply voiced so much, generally pretty bright/aggressive in tone.

I'm surprised to hear the Bart is affecting the bass's voicing so much, unless the stock pre is very brightly voiced(which I heavily doubt).

Me too. From everything I'd read going in, Bartolini sounded perfect for what I wanted: a natural extension of the bass's own grunt (I covet bright and aggressive; if I could have this thing with a maple fretboard, I totally would), but bigger.

Cue pre-amp nightmare

[*ToNeS*]

Originally Posted by Darkstrike

You mention changing from roundwound strings, you didn't change both strings and pre at once, did you?

Er, yes.

[Darkstrike]

Originally Posted by *ToNeS*

Er, yes.

That may be the problem, these Slickwounds, (halfwounds, IIRC), will sound very different from roundwounds, I'd swap back to rounds, if you have a set laying about, just to test. I'd bet the string change is the bigger issue than the pre change.

[GMSweet]

I agree with DarkStrike about changing your strings before another preamp swap. Bright and aggressiveness generally equals stainless rounds. How those will work out with the ebonol neck...I don't know.

I'm not sure if you have Smith Slick Rounds on, but here's a post from Ken Smith from his own forum describing his string types/sounds:

The difference in sound between the strings - Ken's Corner (Bass Forums Sponsored By KSB)

"We have 4 basic styles. Stainless steel, Nickle plated steel (aka NPS), Compressors (Nickel Iron alloy aka 'Niron', outer layer is 'compressed' before winding) and Slick Rounds (Nickel Iron alloy aka 'Niron', outer layer is 'ground' before winding).

Stainless is brighter than Nickel in the higher frequencies but Nickel has more mids. The other two are the same metal but made differently. I would rate the brightness in the order listed."

[FaithNoMan]

Originally Posted by *ToNeS*

Me too. From everything I'd read going in, Bartolini sounded perfect for what I wanted: a natural extension of the bass's own grunt (I covet bright and aggressive; if I could have this thing with a maple fretboard, I totally would), but bigger.

Cue pre-amp nightmare

When I think of Bartolini, I don't think of bright and aggressive tones.

I had a P/J set put in with a 3 band preamp by them a long time ago. I hated what it did to that bass.

It turned a bass with bright metallic transients into a darker-voiced instrument that was probably more versatile. It was easier to cop classic P and J tones with it, but I hated it and put EMG's in that bass, which I liked(at the time) much better.

[FaithNoMan]

Originally Posted by Darkstrike

I'd bet the string change is the bigger issue than the pre change.

I agree - too many variables changed at once. You can't do that!

[Darkstrike]

Originally Posted by FaithNoMan

When I think of Bartolini, I don't think of bright and aggressive tones.

I had a P/J set put in with a 3 band preamp by them a long time ago. I hated what it did to that bass.

It turned a bass with bright metallic transients into a darker-voiced instrument that was probably more versatile. It was easier to cop classic P and J tones with it, but I hated it and put EMG's in that bass, which I liked(at the time) much better.

A lot of their pickups can do that, but they do have aggressive sounding models.

The pre-amp itself, I always assumed wasn't so strongly voiced, can't be sure though, never used the pre's without matching Bart pickups.

[fourfinger]

Put foam under the bridge, i.e. muting. It cuts overtones and gives you lots more fundamental. It also shortens the sustain, but not as much as you might expect.

I have a MM Cutlass II with active barts & bart preamp and it sounds great that way..