Yep. Along with those, the mic pre and the impact of tape saturation also create the tone.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
60's era jazz bass
- Thread starter Musicman1901
- Start date
"Flats for that thumpy wooden tone, play closer to the neck, roll the tone back a bit, favor the neck pickup, etc, etc..."
THIS!!!
any decent bass with decent PU's with this "technique" will get you good results.
Do it through a B-15 with a decent mic, and you got it.
THIS!!!
any decent bass with decent PU's with this "technique" will get you good results.
Do it through a B-15 with a decent mic, and you got it.
Can't you just hit a button on Pro Tools for that?
Recording Technology, amps, cabs, MP3, playback speakers... it's all changed. But, IMO and IME, keeping things simple is key. A 60s J bass (old or new) into a 12ax7 pre into your recording console sounds good yesterday and today. Ya know what I mean?
Stay passive, my friends
Closest I got to nailing that 60's Jazz bass tone was a Squier Classic Vibe Jazz.... very authentic.
If you really want the pre-CBS tone, I say buy some pre-CBS P/Us. If you want close to that tone, CS, Roadworn, and SD Antiquties (and some others) will do the job, like others have mentioned.
In my own experience, the newer replica P/Us don't sit in the mix exactly like real pre-CBS P/Us do. They take a lot more EQing on the amp to sit in that happy spot, and never quite get there 100% - more like 95% IMO. There's just something to how pre-CBS P/Us retain this brightness without giving up the lows (and vise-versa). At least that's how my ears think.
In my own experience, the newer replica P/Us don't sit in the mix exactly like real pre-CBS P/Us do. They take a lot more EQing on the amp to sit in that happy spot, and never quite get there 100% - more like 95% IMO. There's just something to how pre-CBS P/Us retain this brightness without giving up the lows (and vise-versa). At least that's how my ears think.
i totally agree with your assessment on old fender pickups but with what hes saying his tone goals are, all the nuance and subtleties old fenders provide are lost when youve got flats and mutes engaged imo. that woody thump will be there with any semi quality and up jazz.
I agree with this point, and while there are many great luthiers and manufactures of quality basses and pickups out there it still comes down to the operator, just getting a nice bass is not gonna make you sound like your favorite bass player, as an example I have heard/seen chris squire playing a lakeland P bass that sounded just like his venerable Rickenbacker, they arent really the same instrument at all, so why do they sound so similar ? amplification... perhaps, strings?... probably, but the one constant is Chris himself. I,ve seen Oteil Burbridge switch between a fodera and a precision bass, and I'll be damn if I could tell the difference from where I was sitting, Oteil could make a rubber band and a wash bucket sound good.
I agree that the strings,amps,cabs, eq'ing, and the hands of the player make up a huge amount of the tone but all basses still sound different. That's just a fact. My p-bass will never sound like my warwick. It's just not gonna happen haha. Maybe i'll try to find some pre-cbs pickups and just toss them in my mexican jazz bass with flats and see how far it gets me.
If your talking a sound that was recorded, technology may be your worst enemy.
Back in the early 70's I was recording in a studio that had 2 ampex 8 track recorders. used 2 inch tape. electric bass was recorded pluggeg into a d/I...routed thru a compressor that I believe might have been tube powered....maybe not. then it went on to 2 inch tape. Any fender plugged in sounded awesome! Sometimes gibsons or other brands had to be tweaked a good bit.
So if your listening to music recorded in that era, and maybe its been converted to digital, todays reproduction techniques are a world removed. Who back in those days would have thought you could walk around with little square device in your pocket that you could talk to your friends...send them messages, surf the internet.....wait a minute. what's an internet?
As the owner of a 63 p I can say this. It weighs a whole lot less than any bass I have ever picked up. Pretty sure its because the wood has "dried" over the decades. I'm sure the wood interacts with the tailpiece that interacts with the strings that interacts with the pick-ups which are routed thru wiring and pots that doesn't spec near as well as some of the stuff available to us today.
Ever compare the sound of a 50-60 yr old martin guitar to a newer one? The bass strings on the older one will jump out and slap u in the face. The newer one just sounds nice.
The sound u r looking for may be as simple as a pedal.
Just saying. I been chasing "that tone" for 42 yrs.
Came close a few times. Its a journey.
Back in the early 70's I was recording in a studio that had 2 ampex 8 track recorders. used 2 inch tape. electric bass was recorded pluggeg into a d/I...routed thru a compressor that I believe might have been tube powered....maybe not. then it went on to 2 inch tape. Any fender plugged in sounded awesome! Sometimes gibsons or other brands had to be tweaked a good bit.
So if your listening to music recorded in that era, and maybe its been converted to digital, todays reproduction techniques are a world removed. Who back in those days would have thought you could walk around with little square device in your pocket that you could talk to your friends...send them messages, surf the internet.....wait a minute. what's an internet?
As the owner of a 63 p I can say this. It weighs a whole lot less than any bass I have ever picked up. Pretty sure its because the wood has "dried" over the decades. I'm sure the wood interacts with the tailpiece that interacts with the strings that interacts with the pick-ups which are routed thru wiring and pots that doesn't spec near as well as some of the stuff available to us today.
Ever compare the sound of a 50-60 yr old martin guitar to a newer one? The bass strings on the older one will jump out and slap u in the face. The newer one just sounds nice.
The sound u r looking for may be as simple as a pedal.
Just saying. I been chasing "that tone" for 42 yrs.
Came close a few times. Its a journey.
Yeah, I suppose you're right. Mutes especially would kill the subtleties.
On a side note, if you don't want to spend the big $$ on pre-CBS P/Us, I think early '80s Fullerton P/Us (from the early AVRIs) sound the most like pre-CBS's.. more so than any other reissue P/U. I bought a 1983 '57 RI Precision P/U on ebay a while back and it kills my other Precisions, including a 1973 and a '66 clone w/ SD Antiquity IIs.. and those basses sound damn good too. I have the '57 Fullerton P/U in a '59 RI I built ('57 AVRI body w/ a '59 Custom Shop neck). It nails the Motown thing so good.
Hi fellows. I did this track with a 61 J bass with concentric Knobs and rotosound flatwound strings(bought in 1970 at Manny's in NY). Check out the sound . Later.
Scott Edwards
Scott Edwards
If I had a dollar for every time I saw someone post that they were now gigging their Road Worns and leaving their actual 60's basses at home I could buy a new Road Worn. I'd say buy one of those and go from there, maybe throw a set of Fralins in it.
You are allowed to change those strings once every other decade, you know. I think you're about due!
I would sooner guess that Fodera's are regularly sold because people think they're gonna make them play better, then they realise they don't. You can't really think that an instrument plays no role in the players sound and that, for examples sake, Janek Gwizdala would sound just the same on his Fodera as he does on a P bass.
Im always amazed by the incredible nit picky disection people here will go to. It seems you have to define every single thing you say here to a webster dictionary definition or you will be immeidiatly thrown into the shark tank, I would think some of you anyway would get the "Gist" of its the player, not the bass. Of course there are factors like strings,amps,recording techniques of the time period that factor into the 60's sound. But how you play is just as important as what you play it on. I use to be of the opinion it was the bass as well, than I saw a few people disprove that theory.
Sure, everyone gets the gist. Everyone gets the gist every time "it's the player, not the instrument" is ever posted. It's just hardly constructive. 99% of people know the importance of the personal touch over the equipment, but how does responding to every question about how to achieve a certain sound, via equipment, with that old trope help anyone? It's common sense.
Also, if you're going to make an argument, it's wise to make sure you have properly defined your argument.
Man..the bridge cover and pickup covers...I will never understand why people install them. IMHO, they look fricken ugly.
As mentioned, the technology of recording today is way more advanced than the lo-fi sounds that were recorded with gear 3-4 decades ago. Also JPJ generally plucked up closer to the neck. He still does when you watch him play in Them Crooked Vultures.
For your current Jazz, start with strings like halfs or full flats. My 69 Jazz is an absolute chainsaw with rounds on it, but I like it that way!
whose argueing ? Go ahead and spend a pile of money chasing the elusive tone, its your money. I could care less, just giving my 2 cents worth, I know what I know, your results may vary.
Tube pre's and 2" ampeg tape are hardly "lo-fi" anymore than vinyl is more "lo-fi" than CD, or an SVT is more "lo-fi" than a class D SS amp.
Modern digital technology makes everything easier, cheaper, faster, and far easier to reproduce without degradation, but little of it has more fidelity than the professional equipment of the decades just before the digital revolution, if even as much.
The issue at hand was not that the old stuff was lower fidelity than current equipment, but that the tones that equipment created are difficult to reproduce without using comparable equipment.
