What is the most versatile Sadowsky NYC?

Pietzsa · #1 07-04-2010, 07:08 AM

As a guy getting ready to put an order in for an NYC Sadowsky I thought I'd ask what most think is the most versatile model? I've owned an RV4 metro and liked it but ended up selling it for financial reasons. I play in a 7 member P&W band as my main gig and I'm not set yet on a pickup config. I'm not a set "p" or "j" guy and am not more opposed to one over the other so I could do a pj. Also any thoughts on 60s vs 70s jazz spacing would be appreciated.

**Joelc73** · #2 07-04-2010, 07:15 AM

That's sort of a tough one to answer as any bass can be as versatile as you need if you're creative about it.

With that said, the PJ5 model covers the most ground for the gigs that I'm doing. Between those two pickups, the treble and bass bands, and the VTC I can get almost anything I need.

Still, I could probably get 80% of the same out of my JJ NYC's if I had to.

I love the Modern 24 model but that one has the most pronounced and distinct voicing of the bunch.

Hope that helps.

JC

**NOLA Bass** · #3 07-04-2010, 08:42 AM

The Will Lee might be a good choice with the mid boost switch for some added tone modification.

I find my NYC (vintage with single coils and VTC) to be really versatile. It is far and away the most versatile bass I own. My guess is you could not go wrong with almost any NYC as far as having a bass that can cover alot of ground.

J. Brooks · #4 07-04-2010, 10:37 AM

because of the great preamp and the option of running the bass passive, every model is versatile. They are the most versatile basses I've played. You should decide if you like a split coil p sound or a straight jazz sound better and get either a p/j or a jazz, and if you need a 5th string get a 5 string. or call the shop, they'll help you.

-Timothy- · #5 07-04-2010, 10:53 PM

I'm not a P or Pj guy, so a J5 is the main axe for any working gig of mine, need no echo those great function on a Sadowsky bass..if I need some P sounding, I simply using neck pu/VTC to simulate that sounding.

Agree.. A WL model seems even more versatile to me... WL5 please...

cripula · #6 07-05-2010, 12:56 PM

What's a P+W band?

I would make a case for the P/J as most versatile, in 5 string form if you need it.
Does a great solo P tone, blended it does it's own thing, and the J solo'd with the bass boost turned up a bit gives a great J tone.

Ultimately they're all incredibly versatile instruments - the variety of tones on tap is pretty amazing.
I don't have much experience with the modern/soapbar models, just the J/J and P/J.

BartmanPDX · #7 07-05-2010, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cripula

What's a P+W band?

I would make a case for the P/J as most versatile, in 5 string form if you need it.
Does a great solo P tone, blended it does it's own thing, and the J solo'd with the bass boost turned up a bit gives a great J tone.

Ultimately they're all incredibly versatile instruments - the variety of tones on tap is pretty amazing.
I don't have much experience with the modern/soapbar models, just the J/J and P/J.

P&W = "Praise & Worship."

I have a PJ and a Will Lee and find them both to be very versatile, though the P bass tends toward the more warm, round, and full end of tone, while the WL tends to be more aggressive. But either covers a huge part of the spectrum -- I'm quite happy using the WL for blues or the PJ for grindy rock.

The preamp helps a lot.

john nam · #8 07-05-2010, 01:16 PM

They're all versatile, but this would be the order from most versatile to least, IMO: Modern 24-5, P/J, Jazz, P. The NYC 24-5 has an unusually wide range of useable sounds unlike any other soapbar, P/J, jazz or P that I've tried. Most people with the 24-5 pretty much dial in the Ken Smith tone, but it has an authentic and aggressive P sound that's really unexpected too. You can also completely reshape the contours of the highs with a turn of the VTC knob, so it's really unlike a lot of the other one-trick-pony modern soapbar/humbuckers out there. FYI, my favorite sound is an aggressive P-bass sound.

Fran Diaz · #9 07-05-2010, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cripula

What's a P+W band?

I would make a case for the P/J as most versatile, in 5 string form if you need it.
Does a great solo P tone, blended it does it's own thing, and the J solo'd with the bass boost turned up a bit gives a great J tone.

Ultimately they're all incredibly versatile instruments - the variety of tones on tap is pretty amazing.
I don't have much experience with the modern/soapbar models, just the J/J and P/J.

+1

Asher S · #10 07-05-2010, 01:43 PM

Short answer: 24-fret 5 string, with nickel wound strings

Long answer: It depends... on your skill level, personal goals, etc etc.

If your goal is to be a studio bassist you'll likely need several different basses to cover many demands, i.e. fretted, fretless, 5-string, some strung with flats, some with rounds etc.
If your goal is to be the greatest funkmeister since Marcus Miller, then that's a different matter and may require different tools.

WaskoDS · #11 07-05-2010, 02:00 PM

Fretless 5-string PJ?

Chasarms · #12 07-05-2010, 03:32 PM

I love my PJ5. In full blend active, the bass has a great hi-fi kind of vibe. Oddly similar to my Modulus. And, with the blend, VTC and bybass, you can dial up some highly-respectable, more classic rock tones. Great bass.

FWIW, mine has the reversed P configuration. After a great deal of contemplation, I have come to decide that it is an awesome idea.

john nam · #13 07-05-2010, 11:59 PM

Chasarms, can you elaborate on why you think the reverse P worked out good?

Chasarms · #14 07-06-2010, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by john nam

Chasarms, can you elaborate on why you think the reverse P worked out good?

I recently bought my Sadowsky used. It is an NYC from 2002. It came to me with the PU in the reverse position, but it is universally routed so that you can configure it either way. I recently ordered a new pick guard for it and converted it to the conventional alignment. I was very surprised at a how stark the differences were with this particular bass.

My primary reasons for wanting to change it were 1) the E string seemed choked and I was attributing this to the PU placement. 2) I was struggling with the dynamic balance of the bass, especially the D and G verses the lower strings. I thought the alignment was the culprit here also.

But After going through all of the hassle of changing it out, my assumptions turned out to be false.

The B string, while killer in either position, was certainly thicker, more rounded and less articulate after the change. In the reverse position, it is very tight (tonally, it obviously feels the same either way) and punchy. Quicker if you will. I think that it matches better tonally with the other four strings.

As for the E, my impressions are the the same as with the B, only to a lesser extent. Oddly, when I removed the strings to do the work, I discovered that the E string was twisted pretty badly. When I swapped everything back to the reverse design, much of the choking issue seemed to be gone. Maybe I am just wanting to hear this, but it certainly seems different than before all of this started.

The reverse also warms up the top strings a little bit. I am often hesitant to use them because on many basses they sound thin. With this configuration, the open G better matches tonally to the fifth fretted D if that makes sense.

I did lower the high string PU a bit to get better dynamic balance. Although, I admit that part of this is probably technique on my part as I noticed it to some degree even in the other configuration. The bass is EXTREMELY dynamically sensitive, which is a good thing. I just need to clean up my right hand a bit.

I really don't think you could go wrong with a bass like this. And finally, I'm posting a pic of it -- because it's awesome!!!!