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.
AudioKinesis Cabs Part VI...
- Thread starter Thor
- Start date
EMG has some fairly new pickups out (in the last few years) that don't sound like the old EMG's.
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,516
- 19,951
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
The TH500 can get a bit congested-sounding, too. Maybe try tweaking the AGS, or adjusting the balance between that unusually low 40hz bass control and the mids?
Thanks for the clarification on this.
Do you happen to know what model EMG Fodera uses?
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,516
- 19,951
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
I think Vic has used a PAX and both a JAX and JVX in recent years (and another bass with Seymour Duncan dual coils - correct me if I'm wrong on any of this). Don't know if that's what's on the standard models.
My first (and still main) bass had EMGs in it when I got it, so that's what I started with and what I played up until this year. Several players who told me that they hated EMGs also told me that they loved the sound of my bass (a simple, old Japanese Fender). With passive pickups (and 500K pots with smaller caps) in it now, I do hear some details - windings of the string and such - that I didn't before, and I feel that real subtlies of touch come across a little better - I can just brush the string and that's a viable sound, live. But I've played passive basses with which those details were less present than with the EMGS.
People say that EMGs make everything sound the same, but I don't think that's the case. I don't think my bass sounded like Vic's even though we had the same P/J set in there for awhile. I do hear some coloration now - some tone shaping/rolloff in the EMG pre, but that's the case with a lot of passive pickups, too, just arrived at differently. There might be some compression going on in the old pickups (maybe the new ones, too, but I don't have much experience with those) but, again, they were more dynamic than a lot of passive pickups. People have said that they sound too perfect/clean and kind of boring in that regard - I guess I can see that. They can get growly for sure, but I don't hear them as getting very rough or hairy, even when you dig in.
I'm not saying that they're the perfect pickups - I've heard sets of theirs that I didn't like, at least not in the instruments I heard them in, and that brought to mind some of the stereotypes people have about thin, processed sounding tone - and if I didn't want to explore more, I wouldn't have started experimenting with passive pickups after all these years. I come from playing bowed strings (cello and doublebass, primarily), and there is a certain, woody naturalness, detail, and dynamic feel that I'm chasing (all that in a package that doesn't hum, please
), but I digress. The EMGs served me well for years - felt they responded well to technique and took EQ at the amp well - and I didn't feel restricted to just one sound with them, even without an onboard pre. I might not be the most objective about that, though!
Er... What thread am I in again? (Sorry, Duke!)
My first (and still main) bass had EMGs in it when I got it, so that's what I started with and what I played up until this year. Several players who told me that they hated EMGs also told me that they loved the sound of my bass (a simple, old Japanese Fender). With passive pickups (and 500K pots with smaller caps) in it now, I do hear some details - windings of the string and such - that I didn't before, and I feel that real subtlies of touch come across a little better - I can just brush the string and that's a viable sound, live. But I've played passive basses with which those details were less present than with the EMGS.
People say that EMGs make everything sound the same, but I don't think that's the case. I don't think my bass sounded like Vic's even though we had the same P/J set in there for awhile. I do hear some coloration now - some tone shaping/rolloff in the EMG pre, but that's the case with a lot of passive pickups, too, just arrived at differently. There might be some compression going on in the old pickups (maybe the new ones, too, but I don't have much experience with those) but, again, they were more dynamic than a lot of passive pickups. People have said that they sound too perfect/clean and kind of boring in that regard - I guess I can see that. They can get growly for sure, but I don't hear them as getting very rough or hairy, even when you dig in.
I'm not saying that they're the perfect pickups - I've heard sets of theirs that I didn't like, at least not in the instruments I heard them in, and that brought to mind some of the stereotypes people have about thin, processed sounding tone - and if I didn't want to explore more, I wouldn't have started experimenting with passive pickups after all these years. I come from playing bowed strings (cello and doublebass, primarily), and there is a certain, woody naturalness, detail, and dynamic feel that I'm chasing (all that in a package that doesn't hum, please
), but I digress. The EMGs served me well for years - felt they responded well to technique and took EQ at the amp well - and I didn't feel restricted to just one sound with them, even without an onboard pre. I might not be the most objective about that, though!Er... What thread am I in again? (Sorry, Duke!)
Hey Mark,
Valid points there Mark and it does reinforce what I was stating about emg's, it really depends on the wood of the bass. They do bring out everything on your bass so the wood is a key factor.
Your bass will not sound like Victor's due to the variation in wood comparing your bass to his. But IME I have found that in off the shelf basses I have played with active emg's they always seemed to be aggressive sounding. Perhaps they were harder woods, perhaps preamp, who knows??
Perhaps just my limited experience with them. I never tried the passives.
However I do think they sound great in the Yin Yang Fodera. I hated them in a Spector I had. But different strokes for different folks.
Valid points there Mark and it does reinforce what I was stating about emg's, it really depends on the wood of the bass. They do bring out everything on your bass so the wood is a key factor.
Your bass will not sound like Victor's due to the variation in wood comparing your bass to his. But IME I have found that in off the shelf basses I have played with active emg's they always seemed to be aggressive sounding. Perhaps they were harder woods, perhaps preamp, who knows??
Perhaps just my limited experience with them. I never tried the passives.
However I do think they sound great in the Yin Yang Fodera. I hated them in a Spector I had. But different strokes for different folks.
Begone, GAS!!!
I've been toying with the idea of picking up a 1203 to complement my first-gen 112AF. The only thing holding me back, was the need for a 2-ohm capable head, or a second amp.
Then Mesa comes along with the Subway, which looks like the only thing head that could stand a chance of toppling my MB Fusion off it's perch, and sells for a very non-Mesa price.
The stupid thing is that I'm rarely getting to use the Thunderchild these days, due to a silent stage policy at both of my main gigs. Even if I found the funds for an upgrade, I'm really not sure what I would be doing it for...
I've been toying with the idea of picking up a 1203 to complement my first-gen 112AF. The only thing holding me back, was the need for a 2-ohm capable head, or a second amp.
Then Mesa comes along with the Subway, which looks like the only thing head that could stand a chance of toppling my MB Fusion off it's perch, and sells for a very non-Mesa price.
The stupid thing is that I'm rarely getting to use the Thunderchild these days, due to a silent stage policy at both of my main gigs. Even if I found the funds for an upgrade, I'm really not sure what I would be doing it for...
similar nonsense going on here. Fwiw, I gig the H1203 all the time, the TC112 (8 ohm) goes out on larger/louder gigs underneath the H1203. Great combination, and the Mesa sounds really good with the TC112.
I have the TC112 V1 and I agree that the Mesa sounds really REALLY good with it. Sounds really good with the 1203 as well with the usual comparison results (a smidgen more mids, less bottom but tight). If I'm using one cab with the Mesa, I prefer my TC112 over the 1203.
Funny, I had an interesting result when using both cabs with the Mesa at the 2 ohm setting. I noticed a slight drop in the mids. I've never noticed this happening when used with my Read pre or Monique 700. I was able to dial the mid loss back in but my first impression was I liked the cabs more separately than combined with the Mesa. After making the mid adjustment the combination was fine. I'm wondering if something is going on tonaly when running the amp at the 2 ohm setting.
I have not tried it with both 1203's yet.
Funny, I had an interesting result when using both cabs with the Mesa at the 2 ohm setting. I noticed a slight drop in the mids. I've never noticed this happening when used with my Read pre or Monique 700. I was able to dial the mid loss back in but my first impression was I liked the cabs more separately than combined with the Mesa. After making the mid adjustment the combination was fine. I'm wondering if something is going on tonaly when running the amp at the 2 ohm setting.
I have not tried it with both 1203's yet.
Yes, those D-800 clips you made in the Mesa thread with the TC112 & the H1203 - I really liked the sound of both cabs, but I think the ThunderChild would be more my cup-of-Tea!!! [Those K.Smiths sound really good as well!]similar nonsense going on here. Fwiw, I gig the H1203 all the time, the TC112 (8 ohm) goes out on larger/louder gigs underneath the H1203. Great combination, and the Mesa sounds really good with the TC112.
OK! Have finally made some progress towards tonal Nirvana. I have just acquired an Eden wt-550 which will do 2 ohms. This way I can keep my Thunderchild Tc112 4 Ohm which I love to death and then later pair it up with a Hathor 8 Ohm. My thought it is that I'll the tonal pallet of the Hathor available for rock n roll and then the TC112 for jazzier stuff and then the two together if serious ass needs to be kicked. I thought about the Eden wt-800 which will drive two cabs at 400 ohms each, but for now I think the Wt-550 will be enough volume as they tend to be conservatively rated. If that ends up being too polite of a tone, I'll check out the Mesa D-800 which is so reasonably priced its hard to believe, but I prefer a/b amps in general. Thanks NoStatic for the idea.
Last edited:
You will love the 550 with the TC-112. I have used both the 550 and the 405 with the TC-112.
I really miss the eq of the Eden heads. Really lets you fine tune your tone.
Sweet! I hope so. I really need it to cover a lot of ground, say for amplifying an upright in a jazz combo and then driving a loud rock band. I have been using GK 1001rb but I am starting to find that head TOO upper mid grindy. I hope the Eden won't be too polite. I do have a TC Spark Booster that I use for subtle overdrive that will add attitude to any smooth rig.
