|  | | 
01-13-2013, 02:33 PM
|  | Registered User | | Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Puyallup, WA | | Quote:
Originally Posted by primussucks9126  I generally agree with Flux. That's what I did with my Jaguar. I had Fralin split single coil P-bass pickups installed in the Ric locations (plus one in the 70s J bass spot). It also has a maple body and neck, and a finished fretboard.
The results?
I think it sounds LIKE a Ric. I have a 4003. The Jag is in the exact same ballpark, but there are differences which can probably be attributed to many things (they sound different acoustically, which is pretty important in determining what they sound like plugged in, IMO). The Jag is brighter, more crisp, and more defined. The Ric is fantastic, but almost sounds muddy when compared to the Jag. I love both equally for different things, even if they do sound very similar (to me)  | This settles it! I'm going to do this with J pups. I would use a Ric neck pup but the cheapest I'm finding is $75 and this is a $180 bass. I can get a J pup identical to the current neck one for $10 and they sound fine to me. Would it be worth getting a new pickguard and moving the middle pickup to the correct Ric bridge pup position? How would that sound in J-bass mode (using the middle and bridge as a J bass would use them)? |
01-13-2013, 02:51 PM
|  | Registered User | | Join Date: May 2012 Location: Colorado River Basin, Arizona | | Quote:
Originally Posted by fourstringbliss This settles it! I'm going to do this with J pups. I would use a Ric neck pup but the cheapest I'm finding is $75 and this is a $180 bass. I can get a J pup identical to the current neck one for $10 and they sound fine to me. Would it be worth getting a new pickguard and moving the middle pickup to the correct Ric bridge pup position? How would that sound in J-bass mode (using the middle and bridge as a J bass would use them)? | There ya go! Now yer thinkin'! For experiments like these keep your cash investments low. If the added J pickup placed at F24 lets you discover that you are on the right track .. THEN you can go out and spend bigger cash on better pickups. That is, if you feel the need to do so. If the J pickup at F24 works great, you're done! (Well, with that part of your upgrades).
As for relocating the other pickup, let's just go with one mod at a time. The beauty of this setup is that if you do decide to cut some more wood out of the body to allow you to relocate that one pickup to F36, and it ends up sounding like ass, just go right back to the original position and cover it up with pickguard.
For your testing you don't even need to goof with a pickguard at all until you're satisfied with placement.
As for whether or not moving the J-neck pickup from it's current *half-n-half* location to F36 and wondering if it will still provide J-tones .... hmm .. dunno. I would think not, it's going to sound more bridge-pickup influenced, at least I would think so anyway! I would think the sound would tend to be like if you had the bridge pickup turned up a little louder than the neck pickup. But I could be wrong about that.
On the other hand, if you DO relocate that pickup to F36, you will then have one pickup at F24 and another at F36. Maybe if you had both of those turned on they would sound kinda like just the J-neck pickup all by itself to some degree, maybe enough so that it is satisfactory. Y'know, try a little mixing of F24 and F36, maybe they'll find some happy medium of mix that will be close enough to the J-neck pickup (when they are mixed with the stock J-bridge pickup) to make you happy.  |
01-13-2013, 02:58 PM
|  | Registered User | | Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Bronx, NY | | | You mean using just the middle and bridge pickups, correct? Doing it that way sounds similar to a Jazz bass, but it's a bit thinner, more midrangey. Sort of stingray-esque in some ways, but I wouldn't say it sounds LIKE a Ray. Good grinding rock tone. I don't really use that setting often. Not because it's bad, I just like the 2 "Ric" spots together. They sound every bit as defined as a J, but it's deeper and playing chordal stuff with it just sounds incredible.
The other switch plate engages just the bridge and middle pickups in series (or parallel, I forget. Whichever isn't standard) and that makes the sound significantly deeper, which I think sounds great in a band context, especially with some dirt or fuzz. It also has its own volume and tone controls (the wheels) because it is significantly hotter in that setting.
I'd see how you like the sound with just the neck pickup added before I would worry about moving the current neck pickup back. |
01-13-2013, 03:00 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Bronx, NY | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Flux Jetson As for whether or not moving the J-neck pickup from it's current *half-n-half* location to F36 and wondering if it will still provide J-tones .... hmm .. dunno. I would think not, it's going to sound more bridge-pickup influenced, at least I would think so anyway! I would think the sound would tend to be like if you had the bridge pickup turned up a little louder than the neck pickup. But I could be wrong about that. | This sounds about right. I'll get clips soon! |
01-13-2013, 03:31 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Puyallup, WA | | Quote:
Originally Posted by primussucks9126 You mean using just the middle and bridge pickups, correct? Doing it that way sounds similar to a Jazz bass, but it's a bit thinner, more midrangey. Sort of stingray-esque in some ways, but I wouldn't say it sounds LIKE a Ray. Good grinding rock tone. I don't really use that setting often. Not because it's bad, I just like the 2 "Ric" spots together. They sound every bit as defined as a J, but it's deeper and playing chordal stuff with it just sounds incredible.
The other switch plate engages just the bridge and middle pickups in series (or parallel, I forget. Whichever isn't standard) and that makes the sound significantly deeper, which I think sounds great in a band context, especially with some dirt or fuzz. It also has its own volume and tone controls (the wheels) because it is significantly hotter in that setting.
I'd see how you like the sound with just the neck pickup added before I would worry about moving the current neck pickup back. | Here's what my setup would be if I didn't move the J neck (soon to be the middle) pickup. 
The red switch is rear coil/both coils/front coil for the MM. As it is I can get 60'sish and 70'sish Jazz tones, albeit different because these are ceramic magnet pups - not alnico.
With an additional J pup in the 24th fret spot I'd have a pickup in the correct Ric neck position but my middle position would be forward of the 36th fret position. Is that going to be a problem? Would this just result in bassier Ric tones?
I don't mind relocating the middle pup - I would just need to get a new unrouted pickguard (Warmoth). |
01-13-2013, 03:33 PM
|  | David Schwab
Owner, SGD Music Products | | Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Bloomfield, NJ | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Flux Jetson I've always held the theory that the "Ric sound" has a lot to do with pickup placement. | A lot of it has to do with the bass itself. Ricks still sound like Ricks even with different pickups, but the signature tone is greatly diminished.
But some of this is the construction and materials. It's a shorter scale length than a Fender, and it's an all maple neck through design. And the neck and truss rods are very different. Most Ricks have bubinga fingerboards. I'm not sure how much different bubinga will sound from Indian Rosewood or maple. One of my Ricks has a tulip wood fingerboard. You find odd one off basses like that. I saw one a friend owned when I was in high school that had triangles instead of squares for the checkerboard purfling.
Anyway, the fingerboard is also very thick on a Rick.
Then you have the bridge with the aluminum saddles. It all adds up. But like Brad said, the Rick pickups have a very distinctive tone, and play a large part, no matter where they are situated on the bass.
__________________ SGD Lutherie Hand crafted pickups and electronics.
SGD Lutherie on: MySpace YouTube Facebook Ibanez Club #389 | Hartke Club #302 | Team Trace Elliot #185 | New Jersey Bassist Club #154 |
01-13-2013, 03:56 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: May 2012 Location: Colorado River Basin, Arizona | | Well I suppose it all ends up as stew when it's done, right? From what I've heard here there's a few ways to get there, or at least get into the same county. And the thing is, maybe something other than ~exactly~ like a Ric may be better -- or not. I suppose it will all end up how it ends up.
I guess the main point to keep in mind is what the OP has to work with and what his intentions are. He has that bass -- he wants Ricky sounds. Ok, fine. So, what is the most likely avenue of approach to connect the two? Keeping in mind what he said, we're working with a $180 bass here. Would there be more "Ric affect" if he put a Ric neck pickup in the existing neck pickup location? (Cost =$80+ shipped). Or will there be more "Ric voice" if he places a J-bass pickup in the Ric-neck location? (Cost = $15 shipped) From the examples provided here in this thread, I'd have to say the latter choice. I mean that video of that P with the stealthy J-pickup in the 2nd harmonic location was pretty good. Not perfect, but if you want perfect you need to spend more money. A LOT more money. I'll cite Sheehan's Attitude bass again as well (mudbucker at F24). So if he ends up liking the pickup relocation mod, he can then ramp things up and add the Ric neck pickup, or whatever flicks his thrillswitch.
So I'm sure you and Brad are absolutely correct, 100%. But the thing is, most of the aspects you've both mentioned aren't on the menu here. So the best place to begin is locating a 3rd pickup in the right area. After that, if he is then closer to what he's seeking, additional changes may (or may not) be employed. But things like thicker fretboards, exotic fretboard woods, scale length, and other such aspects aren't something he has the luxury of applying.
Context, gentlemen.
In the end, if you want ~exact~ Ric sounds .. you need a Rickenbacker.
Last edited by Flux Jetson : 01-13-2013 at 04:03 PM.
|
01-13-2013, 04:05 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Puyallup, WA | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Flux Jetson Well I suppose it all ends up as stew when it's done, right? From what I've heard here there's a few ways to get there, or at least get into the same county. And the thing is, maybe something other than ~exactly~ like a Ric may be better -- or not. I suppose it will all end up how it ends up.
I guess the main point to keep in mind is what the OP has to work with and what his intentions are. He has that bass -- he wants Ricky sounds. Ok, fine. So, what is the most likely avenue of approach to connect the two? Keeping in mind what he said, we're working with a $180 bass here.
So I'm sure you and Brad are absolutely correct, 100%. But the thing is, most of the aspects you've both mentioned aren't on the menu here. So the best place to begin is locating a 3rd pickup in the right area. After that, if he is then closer to what he's seeking, additional changes may (or may not) be employed. But things like thicker fretboards, exotic fretboard woods, scale length, and other such aspects aren't something he has the luxury of applying.
Context, gentlemen.
In the end, if you want ~exact~ Ric sounds .. you need a Rickenbacker. | It's all good. This has all been really interesting reading from a love of old Rush and Yes standpoint and from a how-does-that-bass-sound-like-that standpoint.
Truth is I'm not going to get something that sounds exactly like a Ric without playing a Ric - and even then, not every Ric sounds just like every other Ric. Truth be told, I only ever play at my church, and the sound guy tends to make my bass sound a bit like mud anyway - nothing like it sounds through my amp. I'm just looking at unoccupied pickguard real estate and - as many people here know - I can't leave well enough elone, ever.
I really like the way that the bass sounds and plays as is - so much so that it would be a stretch to justify buying anything else in the foreseeable future. If I can add another pickup to give me even more tones that would be great. I originally thought about installing a mudbucker at the neck but then I saw (and resurrected) this thread, and this idea sounds even better!
I'm sure that an actual Rickenbacker replacement pickup would work best, I'm just concerned that it would come off too mutt like. Funny thing is it's a sunburst bass with a black-blocked/bound maple neck and already has a black MM/J pickup setup. Adding a chrome Ric neck pup couldn't take it that much farther into mutt territory, could it? |
01-13-2013, 04:11 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: May 2012 Location: Colorado River Basin, Arizona | | Before I forget, there may be aluminum bass saddles available to fit standard J-bass bridges, so that might be another addition that might or might not work (considering all of the other things involved). I know there are several saddle material choices from places like GraphTech....
Titanium saddles: 
Tusq saddles: 
Graphite saddles: 
Solid nickel saddles: 
Hipshot also offers bass bridges in several materials: 
Mo' stuffs. |
01-13-2013, 04:13 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: May 2012 Location: Colorado River Basin, Arizona | | I've learned a TON of stuff here as well. |
01-13-2013, 04:14 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Puyallup, WA | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Flux Jetson Before I forget, there may be aluminum bass saddles available to fit standard J-bass bridges, so that might be another addition that might or might not work (considering all of the other things involved). I know there are several saddle material choices from places like GraphTech....
Titanium saddles:
Tusq saddles:
Graphite saddles:
Solid nickel saddles:
Hipshot also offers bass bridges in several materials:
Mo' stuffs. | Mine are brass, but that's fine with me. |
01-13-2013, 04:17 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: May 2012 Location: Colorado River Basin, Arizona | | | Whatever works, y'know? |
01-17-2013, 12:27 PM
| | Registered User
Brad @ ClassicAmplification.com | | | | Quote:
Originally Posted by primussucks9126 ...Something that James Lomenzo played in a video. I don’t know the name of it (soft fingers) | Than first bit sounded kind'a like "Come Dancing" ( Wired, Jeff Beck) |
01-17-2013, 01:02 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Puyallup, WA | | I'm encouraged by those sound clips!
This is the bass I'm looking to modify:  
So, what about this idea? I'm thinking that I could have another MM installed in place of the current neck pup (with the rear coil at the 36th fret location), and move that neck pup up to the 24th fret location. I have a switch installed right now that allows me to choose either or both coils in the stock MM - I could do the same for the new MM so that I have the rear coil (at the 36th) and the new neck pup (at the 24th). I know these wouldn't be exactly (or even nearly) like actual Ric pickups but they would be single coils in the correct spot.
This would be a monster of a bass!! I could use either MM or both, get J tones from soloed MM coils, or get Ric like tones from the rear middle MM coil and the neck pup.
The only issue I can think of is that MM pups are not quite as wide as a J neck pup. A J neck is 3.6" across and the body of an MM is 3.5, but this is a minimal issue. The only other concern would be the MM screw bump(?) on the control plate side bumping against the plate, but I don't think that's going to happen.
I would leave the electronics passive. Each pup would have their own push/push pot which would also be tone pot. I'd have to put the front/both/rear coil switch for the middle MM in the pickguard using a black toggle switch (so it didn't stand out too much).
So, what do you think? |
01-17-2013, 01:46 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: May 2012 Location: Colorado River Basin, Arizona | | Quote:
Originally Posted by primussucks9126 | Dude!!
This was MONDO helpful! What I ended up doing was opening up two tracks at once. One of the Jag, one of the Ric. Both of them were of the same configuration (Jag Neck and Ric Neck, then Jag Middle and Ric Bridge, then Jag Both and Ric Both). I'd put both of the two tracks I was A/Bing up on the screen at once, I'd play one segment of one track, pause it, then play the same segment of the other track.
So like I'd have both the Jag and the Ric "both pickup" tracks up on the screen. Play the 1st segment of the Jag track then pause it. Then I'd play the 1st segment of the Ric track, then pause it. And so on until each "pair" of tracks was done, then I'd open up two more comparative tracks and do the same thing all over again. My wife sat right here with me to listen in.
By only comparing one segment of a pair of tracks at a time it made it a LOT easier to let my ears and brain make a more accurate comparison of the two instruments.
What a telling excersize that was! I was able to directly compare both basses, segment by segment, pickup configuration by configuration.
The only time that I prefered the Ric over the Jag was during the Ric bridge vs the Jag middle, and only some of the segments at that. The Ric had a better sounding tone -- more to work with so to speak. But keeping the way I plan on wiring my own bass in mind, I know that I would easily be able to get the Jag to sound as good if not better in the same situation (I use individual outputs per-pickup, so tweaking/tuning the sound is pretty easy to do).
But in all of the other comparisons, the Jag sounded like a "processed" Rickenbacker (this is a GOOD thing!). It sounded like what a Ric sounds like AFTER you get it to sound ~right~ by using EQ adjustments and various FX applied to it. The Ric also sounded more scooped (super easy to make the Jag sound like that though!).
Now and then, the Ric would speak up a little and let itself be known to all that it was a Rickenbacker. But by and large, the absolute majority of the time the Jag sounded better. And as I said I think that tweaking the Jag slightly would put it ahead of the Ric in every instance.
Well done, good sir! Well done, indeed! The way that you did those recordings provided a pretty solid basis to do an accurate A/B of the Jag and the Ric. Same riffs, same post-processing.
Thanks a lot for your efforts here. I know what you went through to get those done, it can be a bit of a hassle and pretty time consuming. Thanks again! Your efforts have helped me along very well. I think that others will also find these useful. I'm sure they will be used in many many arguments to come in Talk Bass history.  |
01-17-2013, 02:04 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: May 2012 Location: Colorado River Basin, Arizona | | Quote:
Originally Posted by fourstringbliss I'm encouraged by those sound clips!
This is the bass I'm looking to modify:
So, what about this idea? I'm thinking that I could have another MM installed in place of the current neck pup (with the rear coil at the 36th fret location), and move that neck pup up to the 24th fret location. I have a switch installed right now that allows me to choose either or both coils in the stock MM - I could do the same for the new MM so that I have the rear coil (at the 36th) and the new neck pup (at the 24th). I know these wouldn't be exactly (or even nearly) like actual Ric pickups but they would be single coils in the correct spot.
This would be a monster of a bass!! I could use either MM or both, get J tones from soloed MM coils, or get Ric like tones from the rear middle MM coil and the neck pup.
The only issue I can think of is that MM pups are not quite as wide as a J neck pup. A J neck is 3.6" across and the body of an MM is 3.5, but this is a minimal issue. The only other concern would be the MM screw bump(?) on the control plate side bumping against the plate, but I don't think that's going to happen.
I would leave the electronics passive. Each pup would have their own push/push pot which would also be tone pot. I'd have to put the front/both/rear coil switch for the middle MM in the pickguard using a black toggle switch (so it didn't stand out too much).
So, what do you think? | I had a Carvin 6-string that had double MMs on it ...... it was .... um .. different. BUT!!! ... I was going about things in a much MUCH different way back then (2003) and I was seeking a way different sound than the midrange-heavy 70's rock tone. And as you can clearly see the pickups weren't placed in the right locations to produce those types of sounds properly. The neck pickup was basically where a P-bass pickup is located, and the bridge pickup was in the ~MM sweet spot~. So it was a kindof suck. 
It might work, it might not. I'm not a huge humbucker fan, there's something ~missing~ with humbuckers, I can't quite nail down what it is. But that's just me. I call humbucker tone a "thinner" sound, but when I do I usually get gang-tackled for my opinions.... 
You could use a Carvin MM pickup near the control plate, they don't have little ~ears~ sticking out past their perimeters like regular MM pickups do (look at the picture). That way you may have more clearance between the control plate and the pickup. I'm not certain but perhaps there are aftermarket replacement pickups for Carvin basses that don't have the little mounting ears (SD maybe? DiMarzio? Er .... ??) |
01-17-2013, 02:11 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Puyallup, WA | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Flux Jetson I had a Carvin 6-string that had double MMs on it ...... it was .... um .. different. BUT!!! ... I was going about things in a much MUCH different way back then (2003) and I was seeking a way different sound than the midrange-heavy 70's rock tone. And as you can clearly see the pickups weren't placed in the right locations to produce those types of sounds properly. The neck pickup was basically where a P-bass pickup is located, and the bridge pickup was in the ~MM sweet spot~. So it was a kindof suck.
It might work, it might not. I'm not a huge humbucker fan, there's something ~missing~ with humbuckers, I can't quite nail down what it is. But that's just me. I call humbucker tone a "thinner" sound, but when I do I usually get gang-tackled for my opinions....
You could use a Carvin MM pickup near the control plate, they don't have little ~ears~ sticking out past their perimeters like regular MM pickups do (look at the picture). That way you may have more clearance between the control plate and the pickup. I'm not certain but perhaps there are aftermarket replacement pickups for Carvin basses that don't have the little mounting ears (SD maybe? DiMarzio? Er .... ??) | I'm not sure how often I would use either MM with both coils on, but this way I could get Jish tones and Ricish tones using different pickups and coils. If I'm not mistaken if I install the middle MM so that the front MM coil is in the same spot as the current J then I should be able to use the mid MM front coil and either of the bridge MM's coils for variations on J tones, and the rear mid MM coil with the neck pup for Ric tones. The only concern now would be polarity between the coils I would want to match. I would think I would want to wire the mid MM's coils so that the front coil is RW with the front coil of the rear MM (for hum-free 60's J tones), and the rear mid MM coild RW with the neck pup (for hum-free Ricish tones). |
01-17-2013, 02:16 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: May 2012 Location: Colorado River Basin, Arizona | | | Oh .. well ok. Hmm ... I think I still go back to "it may work it may not". And I think someone with more experience on the impedances of those MM pickups (when split) needs to tackle this one. I'm out of my element on this setup you've worked out. Maybe if we can get David (member "SGD Lutherie") to have a go at it, let me see if I can get his attention on this one. |
01-17-2013, 02:21 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Puyallup, WA | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Flux Jetson Oh .. well ok. Hmm ... I think I still go back to "it may work it may not". And I think someone with more experience on the impedances of those MM pickups (when split) needs to tackle this one. I'm out of my element on this setup you've worked out. | Yeah, the impedances are a concern as well. I might have to go with pups all from one maker - like GFS. If I went with two GFS MM's and a GFS J then the MM's would be 8.4k and the J would be 10K. I don't know how well they would work together, especially when the MM is split.
I really is a maybe it works, maybe it doesn't thing, though.
I had originally thought to move the current J neck back to the 36th fret spot and install another at the 24th fret, but then I thought about this idea. | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | |
