• 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.

Chi-love Club

#201
Grateful said:
Both are gorgeous! The LH-3 pre with the Chi's is an amazing combo. I think I'm gonna break tradition and try some Stainless on her. I was thinking Long Necks, Ken Smith Compressors or MTD. Thoughts? I'd like them as 'smooth' as possible. Also don't wanna tear up frets.
Click to expand...

Longnecks are like sandpaper for a week or so, 'til they get dirty.... usually tear pieces of my calluses away on the first day. But, I LOVE THEM! I've got some MTD SS strings that I'll be trying next. I had a US JO5 w/ a semi-used set on it, I really liked 'em A LOT, but don't know how abrasive they were when new.
 
#202
Grateful said:
I'm already #3 with the JO5. This is Chi #2!



I've got Lakland Flats on the JO5 CS. With the active pre, I want to peel some paint with this one..
Click to expand...

That thing is so beastly...you get two numbers!:-) He he he! Whoops!

I have ball on all of my basses right now. Always loved those strings. For flats...the TIs and Chromes are way more modern sounding that Lakland Flats. The Chromes have a lot of low mids.
 
#203
JEDI BASS said:
:eek: for real?? AWESOME!! :D The older Lakland BEM necks have a darker honey color to them, which is a huge plus.... I despise bright yellow plain maple like you see on the new MM basses. I'm talking purely about aesthetics here, tonewise I'd pick maple over RW most of the time no matter how it looked :D. I've often wondered if they used a tinted oil back in the day on the BEM :confused:?? One exception... I prefer RW when the FB is blocked and bound, especially on white basses.

IMG_1861.jpg
Click to expand...

I like rosewood feel better. I don't think there is much of a tone difference though....not like body woods. It would be cool to mix it up a little though...maybe someday...Nice basses BTW!
 
#204
MarkusBass said:
That thing is so beastly...you get two numbers!:-) He he he! Whoops!

I have ball on all of my basses right now. Always loved those strings. For flats...the TIs and Chromes are way more modern sounding that Lakland Flats. The Chromes have a lot of low mids.
Click to expand...

I've tried the TI Flats on a fretless, and the tension was really low for me so I sold them. They are sooo pricy that I would hate to repeat the experiment with the same results. I have Chromes on a cheapie PJ that are nice. The Lakland flats are silkier to the touch and seem to have more low-end thud.
 
#205
JEDI BASS said:
Longnecks are like sandpaper for a week or so, 'til they get dirty.... usually tear pieces of my calluses away on the first day. But, I LOVE THEM! I've got some MTD SS strings that I'll be trying next. I had a US JO5 w/ a semi-used set on it, I really liked 'em A LOT, but don't know how abrasive they were when new.
Click to expand...

I swear by my MTD nickels. They're on the Proto bass now, but I was thinking of putting them back on the JO5 CS.

Please let me know what you think of the MTD SS. If they don't work out for you, maybe I'll take them off your hands...
 
#206
Grateful said:
I've tried the TI Flats on a fretless, and the tension was really low for me so I sold them. They are sooo pricy that I would hate to repeat the experiment with the same results. I have Chromes on a cheapie PJ that are nice. The Lakland flats are silkier to the touch and seem to have more low-end thud.
Click to expand...

Yeah...that's true. I tend to like more mids, like the Chomes. TI's are very low tension...I liked at first, but going back and forth between basses got annoying.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back