• 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.

Club Alleva Coppolo (Part 10!)

Status
Not open for further replies.
#941
KJung said:
Unless you want a 70's spec tone:p:smug: You can play a Hofner Beatle bass on a funk gig, if that's the tone you want.
Click to expand...
True, but I think that's taking the analogy a bit far. :)

I guess an interesting question might be, and maybe really what this all boils down to, is how many folks feel the LM/70's spec is best for pop/funk, and how many folks prefer the LG/60's spec for stuff like that... maybe even more interestingly, how many people moved from one to the other and why.

I haven't done a poll, but it might be interesting to at least have people here generally chime in on it... especially noting I've also generally come from the ash/maple 70's spec preference, but over the last year or so, I've really been enjoying the more 60's spec'd stuff a lot more than in the past.

Maybe even more interestingly, and this one might be unique to me but, the fact that I'm still generally more of an ash/maple kinda' guy, but with Jimmy's basses, I'm currently the opposite.
 
#942
Vic said:
I guess an interesting question might be, and maybe really what this all boils down to, is how many folks feel the LM/70's spec is best for pop/funk, and how many folks prefer the LG/60's spec for stuff like that... maybe even more interestingly, how many people moved from one to the other and why.
Click to expand...

Meaningless question to me. My guess is, it would be 50/50, especially since 'pop/funk' is such a wide description as to be almost meaningless. It's the old 'do you like Larry Graham's tone or Marcus Miller's tone' thing? (or Louis Johnson's MM tone versus the more 'Meters funk' PBass thing). All are great... just depends what you want, how much top end you want in your sound, your preference for grind versus growl, etc., etc., etc.

All those basses (MM, P, 60's J, 70's J..... regardless of who is playing them) will result in quite different and recognizable tones (IME and IMO), and again, it would be surprising to me that most wouldn't have a favorite. For me, (since you asked!) I'm totally done with anything having to do with a Music Man tone and hate the dull thud of a PBass in general. For me personally, I need that upper treble and strong upper mid gank to get my tone out in a busy mix (again, that probably isn't very interesting to people, since we all have our own tone goals), so I gravitate toward the more 70's J side of things, although I require single coil pickups which add some nice mid punch versus most of the split coils and HC's J pickups I've played. I also totally dig the more 60's alder/RW thing for certain contexts where I'm not slapping (hate that slap tone personally) or not digging in for grind, but want a more nuanced, polite growl and smoothness to my tone. Nothing sounds better to me than an LG in a light pop or even mainstream rock context!
 
#943
KJung said:
Meaningless question to me.
Click to expand...
Really? I would say what you immediately followed this with (below), makes it both meaningful and interesting for discussion here. Just MHO tho. :)

It's the old 'do you like Larry Graham's tone or Marcus Miller's tone' thing? (or Louis Johnson's MM tone versus the more 'Meters funk' PBass thing). All are great... just depends what you want, how much top end you want in your sound, your preference for grind versus growl.
Click to expand...
Exactly, and I guess at least I thought this was worth talking about.

...For me, (since you asked!) I'm totally...
Click to expand...
Thanks. This IS what I was after. Now how about others? :)
 
#944
Here's a related question also along the lines I'm driving at here, and maybe more interesting to hear people chime in about...

Are you an LG or an LM guy? And whichever you are, do you feel there are certain types of music that your preference just doesn't quite fit well enough such that you GAS for the other?

This is my thing. I could potentially budget an LM at some point, but I keep flip flopping because every time I "think" I need to have one, I hear either myself or another person playing an LG, and even across a very wide spectrum of music, I kinda' just go "done." :D
 
#945
KJung said:
That is quite a unique spec. As I posted above, it kind of sat in a different tonal space again versus the LM and the LG... the less big and warmer low end of the LG (versus that big, wide ash/maple low end of the LM), but a very sweet alder/maple top end that was much more sizzly than the my LG.... the RA has quite a bit of space between the upper treble and the mids (versus the grindy, ganky upper mid bump in a 70's style instrument).

The RA was an interesting voice, but had very little similarity with the LM to my ear... more like an LG with a more pure sizzle up top. Not my thing, but a very nice tone. Hard to put your finger on that tone though... it doesn't bring to mind classic recordings or a 'classic J tone' to me (even though there were Fenders made with that spec in the early 70's from what I understand).
Click to expand...

The RA that I bought off Ken is exactly like he stated. More like an LG than the LM. To me, it's the perfect mix though and I've been using it consistantly in about 90% of my gigs because it sits so well in the mix. I do pop, church, and jazz gigs. I really get the tone I've been looking for my jazz combo which amazed me the most. Just an amazing instrument. I also bought an LG4 recently and it was great as well, but yet I just don't use fours as much, so I parted with it last week to make room for some other gear. Ken I know I've said it before, but THANK YOU!
 
#946
MDFreeze said:
The RA that I bought off Ken is exactly like he stated. More like an LG than the LM. To me, it's the perfect mix though and I've been using it consistantly in about 90% of my gigs because it sits so well in the mix. I do pop, church, and jazz gigs. I really get the tone I've been looking for my jazz combo which amazed me the most. Just an amazing instrument. I also bought an LG4 recently and it was great as well, but yet I just don't use fours as much, so I parted with it last week to make room for some other gear. Ken I know I've said it before, but THANK YOU!
Click to expand...

:D Any time. It is a beauty, and even though that exact voice wasn't for me personally, it is a beautiful voice... unique... warm and growly down low, with a beautiful 'ping' of treble up top. If someone said I had to sell all my basses and use that RA for the rest of my life for all my gigs, I would pause for about 5 seconds, and then say 'OK, no problem':bassist:
 
#947
Vic said:
Here's a related question also along the lines I'm driving at here, and maybe more interesting to hear people chime in about...

Are you an LG or an LM guy? And whichever you are, do you feel there are certain types of music that your preference just doesn't quite fit well enough such that you GAS for the other?
Click to expand...

I can't answer your question until my LM5 gets delivered and I get enough gigs under my belt with it to really know. But the reason I ordered an LM instead of an LG is because in theory (really just based on the 3 gigs I played with Ken's) I think that the LM will cover a wider spectrum of the music I play based on my style and tone goals.

Also, I see what Ken is saying about the actual "type" of music not being as relevant as our own tone goals. For example - in my jazz quartet we play alot of stuff that was originally played on a P Bass, whether it's the Headhunters stuff we do (Paul Jackson), or the soul covers we do (James Jamerson). Then another good chunk of the music we play wasn't originally played by a bass player at all, but by an organist or keybass player (the Josh Redman stuff that Sam Yahel played or the Soulive stuff which is all organ). However, in all of that stuff, I love the sound of a nice jazz bass playing those basslines, because that's the type tone that I'm really digging right now. So it isn't really about the LM or LG being right or wrong for certain genre's.

This is my thing. I could potentially budget an LM at some point, but I keep flip flopping because every time I "think" I need to have one, I hear either myself or another person playing an LG, and even across a very wide spectrum of music, I kinda' just go "done." :D
Click to expand...

Did you just ask if you "need" to have one? :p "Need"?????? lol...if that's what you're asking then you can definitely save the $$$ because you and I know that with all those killer basses in your stable you don't need anything else at all. :bassist: I doubt that you're ever gonna be out at a gig playing your LG (or one of your other basses) and be on stage thinking to yourself "man, I wish I had bought an LM5 because it would sound so much better on this tune!"
 
#948
Vic said:
Here's a related question also along the lines I'm driving at here, and maybe more interesting to hear people chime in about...

Are you an LG or an LM guy? And whichever you are, do you feel there are certain types of music that your preference just doesn't quite fit well enough such that you GAS for the other?

This is my thing. I could potentially budget an LM at some point, but I keep flip flopping because every time I "think" I need to have one, I hear either myself or another person playing an LG, and even across a very wide spectrum of music, I kinda' just go "done." :D
Click to expand...

I can't answer completely like Jason my LM is currently on order. I do obviously have an LG5 and a ash/Maple Metro UV70 and did own a 70s jazz in the past.

My take is that the LG5 sounds wonderful when playing at home and very good on a gig but in some cases a little to dull for certain things. In other cases when playing blues, motown and other thumpy type tones I really love the LG and it works perfectly. I have used SS strings on my LG5 (honduran board) and that does change the tone profile a bit.

My experience with a 70s J I used to own ('73) and my UV70 are less sweet and warm sounding especially at home tooling around. That more agressive sound in many cases as Ken and Jason have suggested cuts better on a lot of gigs and I prefer the slap tone of the 70s style.

For me it seems to be a little easier to dial out the top end on a 70s bass by pulling back the tone control or favoring one pickup. Adding that top end back in on a 60s bass seems to be more challenging for me.

That all being said I totally love my LG5 and if I had to have one bass I'd probably slap a set of Hi Beams back on it and cover a little bit of both.

I am looking forward to getting my LM5 and hope to report back with more details SOON...For the past 20 years I almost always brought one bass to a gig and for a long time only owned one bass at a time:rollno:, recently between all the threads on TB about having a back up and some more important $ gigs I feel more comfortable bringing two basses these days. So I look forward to being a LG/LM guy and only having to choose based on what seems to be coming up in the set.
 
#949
Jeez; who'da thunk this was that contentious;)

I've tried 70's spec stuff over the years. From a 1975 ash maple Jazz that was really pretty and really heavy, to most recently a beautifully executed Valenti ash/maple JJ5 with SAdowsky HC and preamp. I've not tried the Alleva LM, but if it's in the same sonic family, it wouldn't be for me. To me, the 70's spec is too thin in the middle, too clanky on top, and ends up sounding scooped, and bottom/top heavy.

Yeah, I know, you can eq it this way and that way.

To me, and for my uses, the 60's alder-r/w spec ends up sounding more solid, fatter, organic, and still plenty of presence for clarity in the mix and snap when I want it; especially when you can now factor in basses like the fantastic LG that integrate a very natural sounding preamp.

Your mileage, needs, and sonic goals probably vary from mine;)
 
#950
God help us all with this discussion.

Let me summarize it, and hopefully get back on track with the A-C.

For those who like a wider, more aggressive tone... deeper lows, more aggressive gank in the upper mids, etc., a 70's spec ash maple will probably float their boat in general. To those guys, the 60's alder/RW will tend to sound a touch dull up top, and maybe a bit compressed down low.

For those who like a bit more compressed low end, a more smooth top end, and a bit more 'growl' than 'grind', a 60's spec would probably float their boat. To those guys, the ash/maple 70's spec will tend to sound a bit hollow, and have an unpleasant aggressiveness in the upper mids.

For those of us with enough cash who find both of these tone profiles pleasant and useful in certain contexts and for various playing styles, they will probably own one of each.

:hiding::cool::p


Next topic..... please!
 
#951
vision said:
I can't answer your question until my LM5 gets delivered and I get enough gigs under my belt with it to really know. But the reason I ordered an LM instead of an LG is because in theory (really just based on the 3 gigs I played with Ken's) I think that the LM will cover a wider spectrum of the music I play based on my style and tone goals.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and from what I know about you, I know that's gonna' be dead solid perfect for you, and I can't wait for first vids/clips! Then again, as I've said before in one way or another, you don't really need a $3K+ bass to sound great, either. :D

Also, I see what Ken is saying about the actual "type" of music not being as relevant as our own tone goals.
Click to expand...
As do I, and that's really more of what I'm interested in discussing... our tonal goals and how we apply them. I just think its interesting, and especially in the case where someone might assume one spec would work best, and then finds another spec does after some gig time. This is what happened to me. I don't mean to try and state/restate what defines a certain spec. I think that's already been done enough.

Did you just ask if you "need" to have one? :p
Click to expand...
Yeah, my bad on that. ;) :D :D
 
#953
I'll let someone else have the honor of starting the next A-C thread, since we are almost at 1000. Can someone contact a mod and have this done! I did my duty last time.

You can just start a new thread, and then PM one of the bass mods to shut this one down.

Hopefully, we can leave the rather goofy discussion above here and not carry it over.
 
#957
KJung said:
Dude, lighten up. It was a goofy discussion (I was just as much a part of it as anyone). Plenty of those on TB!
Click to expand...
It wasn't the goofy classification that bothered me. It was your request that we discontinue the conversation I was trying to start up.

I just don't think it's so weird (or in your words, uninteresting and meaningless) to ask folks what their prefs are... especially if they find their prefs end up being different than what they may have initially thought.

Just MHO tho. :hmm:
 
#958
narud said:
like what color to order on the next bass or the virtues of what string:D seriously, if this stuff isnt talked about , whats left? you could always hang out in the general instruction forum and talk theory:smug:
Click to expand...

:D It's all pretty silly, I agree.

However, since a branded thread is about helping provide purchase info to those who are unable to try a bass, I would hope that anyone considering a $4,000 jazz bass pretty much knows the general difference between a 60's alder/RW spec and a 70's ash/maple spec. I guess maybe I could be wrong, but god, I hope not!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back