Show us your 3 pickup basses!

[Jamie Mallender]

I fell in love with this bass because it has the 3 classic pups I love the sound of, but the strat style switch allows the obvious 2 blends. It's one of the toughest, best built instruments I've ever played and whilst the body looks big and heavy, it's contoured at the back and is really comfy to wear. Some people have commented that the lack of tone controls is a drawback, but in a live playing environment - certainly when playing rock, most tone controls stay on 10 anyway.

[Flux Jetson]

Originally Posted by Jamie Mallender

I fell in love with this bass because it has the 3 classic pups I love the sound of, but the strat style switch allows the obvious 2 blends. It's one of the toughest, best built instruments I've ever played and whilst the body looks big and heavy, it's contoured at the back and is really comfy to wear. Some people have commented that the lack of tone controls is a drawback, but in a live playing environment - certainly when playing rock, most tone controls stay on 10 anyway.

Ok .. soooo .... what is it?

Agreed about the tone controls, I don't have them on my bass either. I can't think of a reason why I'd need to darken the sound of the passive pickups on it. Active basses are an entirely different issue though.

[Thumper]

I have to get on my old computer to get photo's of this one with the P neck on it. Still waiting on someone (with 3 initials) to help me cleanly include a tone pot

[Stealth]

I don't have 3 initials, but I'll give it a shot. If all three of those are volume pots, use a stacked pot for the Jazz volumes, leave the second volume for the Precision and turn the third into a tone pot.

[BarkerBass]

Originally Posted by Jamie Mallender

I fell in love with this bass because it has the 3 classic pups I love the sound of, but the strat style switch allows the obvious 2 blends. It's one of the toughest, best built instruments I've ever played and whilst the body looks big and heavy, it's contoured at the back and is really comfy to wear. Some people have commented that the lack of tone controls is a drawback, but in a live playing environment - certainly when playing rock, most tone controls stay on 10 anyway.

It's a Fret King bass from here in the UK. I used to endorse one of fret king's sister companies and so got to play a few of their basses and they weren't for me. The one I played looked like yours but without the mudbucker in the neck position, just a P/J set, I remember the P being dark, like tone control all the way off dark, and the jazz being bitey but thin and when blended it sounded ok but either on their own were useless to me so I passed on it and went to jazz basses but I'm glad you like your 3 pickup beast. I must admit, if I had money I'd definitely give one a try again.

[Jamie Mallender]

Originally Posted by Flux Jetson

Ok .. soooo .... what is it?

Agreed about the tone controls, I don't have them on my bass either. I can't think of a reason why I'd need to darken the sound of the passive pickups on it. Active basses are an entirely different issue though.

Sorry! It's a Fret-King Blue Label Ventura 80. Fret-Kings are designed by Trevor Wilkinson, the former Fender guy, renowned parts manufacturer and the brains behind every design released by Italia, Vintage and Fret-King.

Totally my thinking by the way - active bass - give me eq possibilities - more the merrier, but on a passive I'll just turn 'em all to 10.

[Thumper]

Originally Posted by Stealth

I don't have 3 initials, but I'll give it a shot. If all three of those are volume pots, use a stacked pot for the Jazz volumes, leave the second volume for the Precision and turn the third into a tone pot.

Yes, all three are volume pots. I'd also like to get rid of one of the input jacks and incorporate some sort of PUP selector. Granted, with my Bassbone, I can just use channel 2 which has a 3 band eq., so I can maybe pass on that, but I still would at least like a PUP selector rather than turning off my wireless and changing input jacks, or using the TU-2 to mute the amp so I can change jacks. Unlike many of you, I am not electronically inclined or knowledgeable.

[Stealth]

Hm, I only saw the second output jack now.

Thumper, I'll send you a PM about the wiring variants to keep the clutter away from this thread.

Meanwhile, to stay on topic, here are two of my basses that will undergo a third-pickup installation soon.


Start with a Jazz bass and add a P in between - except I changed my mind and will mount a reverse-P. Wiring will be a passive Stu Hamm - blend J, three-way blend-both-P switch, master volume, master tone, mono out.


Going with a Sheehan-like mod with the extra neck mudbucker or wide humbucker, and an insane wiring schematic courtesy of tubby.twins here on TB.

[Thumper]

Sweet, I love the mudbucker in the neck position. If you can get close to Mel (Grand Funk) or Barry Oakleys' sound you will get one of my all time favorites.

Looking forward to the PM.

[Flux Jetson]

Ok, so what's the deal with the humbucker at the neck position that a definite number of players so love? To get the rude-assed 70's rock bass tone, is that a helpful asset?

I've been chasing my tail trying numerous methods of ~getting there~ but using a humbucker in the way-up-there neck position combined with the standard bridge/neck pickups hasn't been one of the methods I've tried.

I've been avoiding aproaches that involved cutting wood, but it seems more and more like it's something I need to bear down and git-toit.

Is there/are there pickguard people that can provide a nicely done Jazz bass pickguard that would have the right pickup holes to accomodate adding a 3rd pickup?

This all coming from the Flux Jetson Duh-Whut department (a currently very overloaded division of Flux Jetson Inc.).

[Stealth]

Originally Posted by Flux Jetson

Ok, so what's the deal with the humbucker at the neck position that a definite number of players so love? To get the rude-assed 70's rock bass tone, is that a helpful asset?

For that combination I'm inspired by Billy Sheehan, a master bassist who, in the early days, wanted to have the deep sound of a Gibson EB0 at the same time as his P-bass sound. He runs his bass through stereo outputs and two rigs, the neck clean, the mid dirty. Gives a very distinct sound which I want to reproduce and mold to my own idea.

[Flux Jetson]

Hmmm .. I have heard a bunch of Sheehan's sound in his work with Niacin. I'm a Hammond freak (since 1977) so naturally Niacin is one of the trios I listen too. I have four of their CDs. Sheehan's sound is SOOPER midrangey, not in a bottom-with-midrange-voice type sound, but more of an ALL MIDS sound (totally ~frowned~ EQ curve). And mondo-mega compressed as well.

I suppose it's safe to assume the compression is all outboard, as is most of his tonal processing (I've seen a number of pics of his graphic EQ settings .... total frown-sound). So I am not sure I can really go by his tone to give me a representation of what the J+J+Humbucker setup would sortof sound like. I know the pickup placement on his Yamahas is roughly the same type as a Ric, which explains a few things about the sound.

I've also seen a number of the videos with him on You Tube. I've also got "Bass Day '97" (I think it's 97) on VHS where he talks quite a bit about his bass and his rig, way back before he bailed on Ampeg (can't blame him, given the circs).

BTW, his 2-channel Yamaha Attitude bass was part of the inspiration that helped me along when I did the 2-channel mods to my own Jazz.

2 channel modification on a J (many pictures).

It was ridiculously easy to do.

[Jamie Mallender]

Like many bass players. I've struggled with finding "that sound" for many years - you know, that sound that is fat enough and ballsy enough without being too wooly, yet cuts through a wall of guitars and keys - so the listener can hear the notes without me turning up too loud. I'm a huge Sheehan fan but wasn't really taking his sound into consideration with relation to solving my own problems, because I felt that he played in a situation designed for the bass to be loud and prominent. I'm a jobbing player, I play in lots of different situations. But i was listening to Billy talk about sound and one thing he said really stuck with me. he was trying to explain that the bass frequency that cuts is not the fat lows or the bright highs - but the midrangey round, brown sound - which is found just below the neck. The humbucker just below the neck on an Attitude is a power-charged EBO - and that, added to the precision sound we all love - sounded like the perfect combination to achieve the cut, and the punch i needed. I bought an attitude but ran both pups to one jack as it's unrealistic for me to contemplate amplifying through 2 separate rigs at every gig, and achieved the sound I wanted. It worked far better than my previous approach of a big loud humbucker at the bridge, adding top end and volume. I then found the Fret-King Ventura, which gave me the 3 pup option and worked even better towards achieving "that sound," but with the addition of a jazz pup near the bridge - should I need that sound, which is rare for me, but no harm in having it - so I sold the Attitude and I'm now as happy as a dog with 3 sets of private doggy parts with my sound.

I'm not saying this is the way to go for everyone, but the info might be of use to someone. I think the secret here - is the correct source sound first, rather than adding a whole spectrum of other sounds, effects and possibilities.

[Flux Jetson]

Originally Posted by Jamie Mallender

Like many bass players. I've struggled with finding "that sound" for many years - you know, that sound that is fat enough and ballsy enough without being too wooly, yet cuts through a wall of guitars and keys - so the listener can hear the notes without me turning up too loud. I'm a huge Sheehan fan but wasn't really taking his sound into consideration with relation to solving my own problems, because I felt that he played in a situation designed for the bass to be loud and prominent. I'm a jobbing player, I play in lots of different situations. But i was listening to Billy talk about sound and one thing he said really stuck with me. he was trying to explain that the bass frequency that cuts is not the fat lows or the bright highs - but the midrangey round, brown sound - which is found just below the neck. The humbucker just below the neck on an Attitude is a power-charged EBO - and that, added to the precision sound we all love - sounded like the perfect combination to achieve the cut, and the punch i needed. I bought an attitude but ran both pups to one jack as it's unrealistic for me to contemplate amplifying through 2 separate rigs at every gig, and achieved the sound I wanted. It worked far better than my previous approach of a big loud humbucker at the bridge, adding top end and volume. I then found the Fret-King Ventura, which gave me the 3 pup option and worked even better towards achieving "that sound," but with the addition of a jazz pup near the bridge - should I need that sound, which is rare for me, but no harm in having it - so I sold the Attitude and I'm now as happy as a dog with 3 sets of private doggy parts with my sound.

I'm not saying this is the way to go for everyone, but the info might be of use to someone. I think the secret here - is the correct source sound first, rather than adding a whole spectrum of other sounds, effects and possibilities.

(My post seems long --- I read only as fast as I can speak, and it took me about 5 minutes to read it. Just sayin')

I need a 3rd pickup..... (well, it might end up being only two, but in better positions)

Jamie I want to thank you for your super concise input here. Very well said and eloquently expressed. I think I'm beginning to gain a better understanding of that Sheehan rig.


FOUNDATION LAID:
I have adopted a hybrid setup that allows me all of the experimental and adjustability freedom of the full-on 2-channel bass rig without having to be enslaved to actually using two amplification systems. While I do use two amp systems, my 2-channel bass doesn't require them both to still take full advantage of both of the pickup channels. I've had a number of people ask me why I don't separately amplify both pickups, your description best explains exactly why I've avoided that overly-obvious setup. A second reason is that if I select only one pickup I have removed a full 50% of my amplification from the mix.

I think too many times people see 2-channel basses and they automatically think "OH YEA! ONE AMP PER PICKUP BABY!!" Personally I think that is a mistake. It's like --- just because you CAN use two amps doesn't necessarily mean it will be the best choice. Your comments eloquently describe "why" in very few words (a talent I am not blessed with, sadly -- I need to use what have been described as "acres of copy" to get a point across).

Anyhow, I've discovered the utter joy of the 2-channel bass guitar. I'm getting very close to (ahem) ~that sound~ ... but it's been a struggle. It reminds me of drag racing. The first 10 seconds is easy, it's the subsequent tenths of seconds that start to cost tons of money and is difficult to produce. A "ten second bike" isn't too hard to build, but a 9.9 second bike begins to get more costly. A 9.8 second bike is tougher, and 9.7 seconds is three times tougher yet (you get the jist). Well, I am at 9.8 seconds right now, and that next tenth of a second I want is a certified sumbunnabeetch.

So I have the right idea, but I think I'm beginning to understand where I need to refocus some of my efforts ......

It's all about pickup placement:
I've always thought that the Ric had the best placement setup. The Attitude uses that same placement. The combination of what I call "fret 24" and "fret 36" positions. You called it "just below the neck" and "the neck". Same thing. If you look at a mathematical approach to the positionings, "just below the neck" would be the 24th fret, and "the neck" is where you would place the 36th fret (I think F36 is actually called the 3rd harmonic -- 3 octaves above "open". F12 is one octave, the F24 is 2 octaves, and the hypothetical F36 is at 3 octaves).

If you look at the P-bass pickups it's like they (Fender) were trying to get the "24+36 sound" without actually using two pickups by placing one pickup between the F24 and F36 positions. (NOTE: As has been said in this thread already, the coils were so big that Fender was forced to split the pickups into two gangs -- so the split pickup wasn't so much about tonal choices as it was about mechanical practicality .. so let's just discount that aspect for the moment to prevent sidetracking the discussion.) Anyhow, that P pickup is placed pretty much between the 2nd harmonic and the 3rd harmonic (the "24th fret" and the "36th fret"). Perhaps as an attempt to capture a combination of those positions while only using one pickup. And most folks will agree that by and large the P sounds pretty danged good all on it's own. Uh ... kinda. It's close. Really close. But not quite. So that idea backs-up what you said about using pickups in those places. The P-bass is a nod to that idea.

Along comes Ric, they do it up for real and put an actual pickup at "fret 24" and another actual pickup at "fret 36". BANGO! Instant rock bass tonal bliss. Well, almost. Now we only have to use two separate processing rigs -- one for each pickup. (Not so much one amp per pickup, but two separate processing chains).

Sheehan ... I believe ... saw the wisdom of the "24+36 potential". He essentially built a Ric out of his Yamaha in a hotel room with a screwdriver and a shoe. Using the screwdriver as a wood carving chisel and a shoe as a mallet, he gouged out a pickup cavity in the "fret 24" position and added the humbucker there. A few years of 2-channel experiments later .. and BANGO ... we got us the Sheehan sound ... the bass players' rendition of "brown sound". Lots and lots of attention to the 500hz to 1khz range.

FFWD to PRESENT DAY:
So here I am in 2013, goofing around with these same old rehashed ideas, I'm just using a less-than-optimal placement of pickups. I've squeazed "every tenth of a second" out of the stock J-bass design ethos, working with essentially a stone-stock Squier J. I specifically chose the Squier due to it's pricetag. I knew I'd be hacking on a bass body and I didn't want to (potentially) screw up a more costly bass to do these experiments.

IT'S TIME FOR A DIFFERENT BIKE! I need to start with a 9 second bike and then start working it up!
I've squeazed all I can out of the 36th fret and 48th fret design (the standard "36x48" Jazz Bass). I think when I add my own years-long observations of Geddy Lee and Billy Sheehan, with the excellently worded explanation of yours here, as well as what nearly everyone in this >2-pickup bass thread has said -- I'm beginning to see the light -- I NEED A THIRD FRIGGIN PICKUP!!!! And placement is E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G! The last place I need to put it is near the bridge. I have all the "bridge" I can handle right now. I need more gnards. And .. because I am who I am ... I'll need discrete outputs for each pickup, at least until I can work out some of the mixing/blending details. Using individual outputs is undeniably easier for doing R&D. With the objective of ultimately narrowing the final setup down to just two outputs once the "magic power" is finally arrived at. Much of what I end up using outside the bass can be installed IN the bass after I work out most of the issues.

CLEAN BENCH, CLEAR HEAD, ALL NEW APPROACH:
So ... thanks TONS Jamie. Somehow, your short post got through, really helped clear the "fog of research" in my head that gets created from having TOO MUCH data having been gathered.

I think I'm beginning to see which direction I need to go. I need to practice a bit with that router I got for x-mas, and then cut a cavity that will reside under the pickguard where I can try various "3rd pickups" .. and of course I'll make that cavity large enough to be able to mess with placement a bit, so I can move the pickup a smidge if I feel it's needed. Start with adding an oversized 3rd pickup cavity (not worry about even using a pickguard for the time being), and also rout-out a larger control cavity with the idea of ultimately using the Marcus Miller type pickguard (so I can load it up with pickup routing option switches and goofball controls and output jacks -- yummy!)

If I get it to all work out like I hope, I'll then begin to build up another Warmoth, applying what was learned on the Squier R&D bass to it.

Thank you Jamie. Uh .... sorry for the overweight post. It's what I do.

[Flux Jetson]

While searching for Fret King Ventura Blue Label bass videos (like hunting for chicken teeth!) I have discovered something ....

Trevor Wilkinson is a mad-genius! Oh hells yes he is!!! The ~stuffs~ that dude has come up with is frikkin NUTSO cool!

The Super-Matic self tuning bridge is a wonder all on it's own. (c'mon .. little electric motors and gear heads on each saddle to tune the guitar automatically? THAT IS SO COOL!!!)

The Vari-coil tap/untapped coil pot. The list of things is amazing.

And also the Ventura Blue Label 80 isn't nearly as expensive as I had anticipated.

Wow. I do think I may be becoming a Trev Wilkinson fanboy.

[Doner Designs]

But, does he use three pickups?

Originally Posted by Flux Jetson

While searching for Fret King Ventura Blue Label bass videos (like hunting for chicken teeth!) I have discovered something ....

Trevor Wilkinson is a mad-genius! Oh hells yes he is!!! The ~stuffs~ that dude has come up with is frikkin NUTSO cool!

The Super-Matic self tuning bridge is a wonder all on it's own. (c'mon .. little electric motors and gear heads on each saddle to tune the guitar automatically? THAT IS SO COOL!!!)

The Vari-coil tap/untapped coil pot. The list of things is amazing.

And also the Ventura Blue Label 80 isn't nearly as expensive as I had anticipated.

Wow. I do think I may be becoming a Trev Wilkinson fanboy.

[Doner Designs]

I have never listened that closely, but he does run two outs into two amps I think. Must use the mudbucker very selectively or eq it quite a bit with the separate amp.

Originally Posted by Flux Jetson

Hmmm .. I have heard a bunch of Sheehan's sound in his work with Niacin. I'm a Hammond freak (since 1977) so naturally Niacin is one of the trios I listen too. I have four of their CDs. Sheehan's sound is SOOPER midrangey, not in a bottom-with-midrange-voice type sound, but more of an ALL MIDS sound (totally ~frowned~ EQ curve). And mondo-mega compressed as well.

I suppose it's safe to assume the compression is all outboard, as is most of his tonal processing (I've seen a number of pics of his graphic EQ settings .... total frown-sound). So I am not sure I can really go by his tone to give me a representation of what the J+J+Humbucker setup would sortof sound like. I know the pickup placement on his Yamahas is roughly the same type as a Ric, which explains a few things about the sound.

I've also seen a number of the videos with him on You Tube. I've also got "Bass Day '97" (I think it's 97) on VHS where he talks quite a bit about his bass and his rig, way back before he bailed on Ampeg (can't blame him, given the circs).

BTW, his 2-channel Yamaha Attitude bass was part of the inspiration that helped me along when I did the 2-channel mods to my own Jazz.

2 channel modification on a J (many pictures).

It was ridiculously easy to do.

[Doner Designs]

So far I have only used a sidewinder/mudbucker at the far neck, but would also like to try other pickup types in that position. I think the tone has more to do with location than construction.

I would like to A/B/C.. compare what you can do with changing tone via pickup location (passive or flat EQ) vs using a sweet spot pickup placement and doing all the adjusting with a 3 or 4 band onboard preamp.

My hypothisis is that one approach or the other is enough for musicians but both is preferable for nut jobs like me.

Originally Posted by Flux Jetson

Ok, so what's the deal with the humbucker at the neck position that a definite number of players so love? To get the rude-assed 70's rock bass tone, is that a helpful asset?

I've been chasing my tail trying numerous methods of ~getting there~ but using a humbucker in the way-up-there neck position combined with the standard bridge/neck pickups hasn't been one of the methods I've tried.

I've been avoiding aproaches that involved cutting wood, but it seems more and more like it's something I need to bear down and git-toit.

Is there/are there pickguard people that can provide a nicely done Jazz bass pickguard that would have the right pickup holes to accomodate adding a 3rd pickup?

This all coming from the Flux Jetson Duh-Whut department (a currently very overloaded division of Flux Jetson Inc.).

[Doner Designs]

I LOVE both of these and have a couple q's if you dont mind...

Can you comment on the tone of the Model One vs a traditional mudbucker/sidewinder?

For the Stu Hamm clone, does your method of putting a P between two J's match the placement on the Fender Stu Hamm bass?

How does the 3 way blending work? I could never quite picture how the Stu Hamm wiring is working.

Do you normally play it in pure J or pure P mode? How does the P sound blended with the J's?

Originally Posted by Stealth

Hm, I only saw the second output jack now.

Thumper, I'll send you a PM about the wiring variants to keep the clutter away from this thread.

Meanwhile, to stay on topic, here are two of my basses that will undergo a third-pickup installation soon.


Start with a Jazz bass and add a P in between - except I changed my mind and will mount a reverse-P. Wiring will be a passive Stu Hamm - blend J, three-way blend-both-P switch, master volume, master tone, mono out.


Going with a Sheehan-like mod with the extra neck mudbucker or wide humbucker, and an insane wiring schematic courtesy of tubby.twins here on TB.

[Doner Designs]

Nice. Let us know how that J sounds up closer to the neck and how the string spacing works out.

Originally Posted by Thumper

I have to get on my old computer to get photo's of this one with the P neck on it. Still waiting on someone (with 3 initials) to help me cleanly include a tone pot