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.
Having owned several jazzes with bridge pickups in both positions I would say that the 70's spacing seems to provide a little more bite and growl. The 60's position seems to have a little smoother overall sound.
The difference is nothing to write home about imo. I have a MIJ 70s with an ash body but the 60s pickup placement, 2 more jazzes with the '60s position and an all original '78 Fender Jazz. The reason Fender changed the position had nothing to do with sound, it was pure cosmetical: they didn't want the pickup to be seen when the bridge-cover is installed.
There might be a small difference, but PUs, PU distance to the strings, the kind of strings you use and nearly everything else have far more impact on your sound imo.
There might be a small difference, but PUs, PU distance to the strings, the kind of strings you use and nearly everything else have far more impact on your sound imo.
There are lots of threads on fingerboard and body woods. I doubt you'll find a general consensus either way...but lots of opinions. My opinion is that maple boards seem to allow a LITTLE more brightness to come through in the note over the rosewood boards. The difference is very minor IMO and IME. Like DirkP mentioned, strings, setup, pickups, etc. all have a larger impact in this area. I hear a bigger difference in tone from body wood than I do from fingerboard wood.
IMO the 70's position does lend itself to more agressive tone, but it is part of the equation and not all of it. Players with a light touch, high action, and flats probably will notice the difference the least, whereas players with a heavy hand, low or moderate action, and roundwound steel strings will see the biggest difference.
...'60's for fretless; '70s for fretted.
I prefer the 60's spacing. I feel it has a more defined sound...I notice a difference in tone...in fact, I have a MIJ Geddy Lee Jazz and I decided to swap the body out. I found an identical '91 MIJ black body on EPay (that was in better shape than my original body) and even the neck fit better too. It plays like it (melts in your hands) butter now, it seems more versatile with the 60's spacing. The 70's spacing may give the Jazz more aggressive treble tone, and the classic 70's funk slap tone with both pickups at full and is thinner sounding when the bridge solo'ed (on the 70's spacing) compared to the 60's spacing.
I also prefer 60's spacing, alder and rosewood. IMO, the mids sit more nicely that way. I like playing with the bridge pickup soloed, and that sounds bit too thin and nasty with 70's spacing.
With that said, I love a lot of the classic 70's recorded jazz tones, so what do I know...
With that said, I love a lot of the classic 70's recorded jazz tones, so what do I know...
I really enjoy the 70's recordings as well. I wonder how many were done on basses with 60's spacing.
+1. There is definitely a bit more of a mid scoop on a 70's Jazz when the pickups are both dimed than on a 60's Jazz. The mids that are bit more scooped on a 70's Jazz are the middle mids (like around 500hz). This will get rid of some of the roundness/fullness out of the tone (*), but will accentuate the upper mids for a more aggressive tone.
@ric4682 I would think a 70's Jazz would sound closer to a Rick 4001/3 with both pickups on and the vintage circuit enabled than a 60's Jazz. Not sure which way you're looking to go, but thought this may help you.
+1 to @smeet 's comments as well. If you're going for a good solo bridge tone (a la Jaco), you want a 60's Jazz.
(*) Don't confuse this with a lack of bass response, the bass and lower mid frequencies will still be in tact, but the more aggressive tone of the bridge pickup will seem to dominate the tone a bit... Rolling off the bridge pickup a bit is a good thing, IMO.
Last edited:
@Matthew_84 My main bass is a recent 4003 so since you're making that comparison I'll probably go for the 60's since it'll give me a little more variety. I'll have the Ric for rock and such and I plan on using the Jazz for more, well, jazzy or funk stuff.
I heard that 60s spacing has a bit more low end and mids while the 70s spacing has more brightness.
Correct me if I'm wrong
Correct me if I'm wrong
I have 3 MIJ Fender Jazzes, 2 with 70's and 1 with 60's spacing. All are maple board ash bodies.
I anchor my thumb on the bridge pickup and play finger style exclusively.
The 70's spacing gets my fingers closer to the string tension from the bridge which in turn gives me a tighter more focused "hi-if" sound. Nice and upfront in a mix.
The 60's spacing to me has a more fuller mid type of sound. Almost like how a p bass would sound if it were a jazz. Haha!
Love em both but prefer 70's for playability with my bridge thumb anchor. All my jazzes growl to some extent since they all have the same strings and setups.
I anchor my thumb on the bridge pickup and play finger style exclusively.
The 70's spacing gets my fingers closer to the string tension from the bridge which in turn gives me a tighter more focused "hi-if" sound. Nice and upfront in a mix.
The 60's spacing to me has a more fuller mid type of sound. Almost like how a p bass would sound if it were a jazz. Haha!
Love em both but prefer 70's for playability with my bridge thumb anchor. All my jazzes growl to some extent since they all have the same strings and setups.
Sounds that way to me also. Definitely more midrange in the 60's spacing. Lows are a little more loose in the 60's where as the lows are tight on the 70's.
Yeah. MY Geddy Lee Jazz has a lot of cutting power and brighter than any 60s style Jazz I've played
I don't think it is anything significant. May be slightly more bite with the bridge pickup closer to the bridge.
For those that anchor and play at the bridge pickup, more power to you. String tension is way too taut for me. I play by the neck pickup or in between the 2.
