Paul Turner with his LG5 at a club concert in germany:
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
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.
- Status
I've never looked at an AC thread before today. My God those are amazing looking instruments. EVERYONE of them is stunning, some even jaw dropping. 
Well, I had a great '63 P that I bought from Jimmy C and about 4 years later swapped him for my KBP4 which is classic 3-tone with tortoise guard and have never looked back or regretted it. The A/C is the better bass in every way. It has all the good qualities the Fender did but with much better pitch focus and evenness of response.
TimothyGroovy
Commercial User
- Aug 3, 2000
- 2,374
- 2,097
- Disclosures
- Owner: Uni•Sound Endorsing Artist: Sadowsky Guitars, Olinto Bass, LaBella Strings
Been asked Jimmy about this before, that's an Aguilar 3 band preamp on his bass.
Hey Joel,
I just put up one more clip with the LM with one of the LDS 15/6/1's. It sounds killer also if you are interested hearing the bass through a wider, bigger and smoother sounding rig.
nice , that sounds good , I have played ash maple and alder rosewood primarily for quite a while , one of the coolest things I have discovered with the ash maple combo is going for a deeper tone , I never really went for that with this combo , kind of used my alder rosewood p bass for that dubish kind of tone , but recently discovered pulling down the passive tone control , turning up the active bass and rolling back the treble a bit below half way and plucking the strings at the end of the neck brings an amazing tight punchy sort of deep solid round warm focused tone , dont know why I never really tried this with the ash maple before , it is a never ending journey of learning and growing with these darn basses , and sooo much fun !
Chef
In Memoriam
+1 Lot's of different sounds in these specs. I find the only thing you can't do (or at least I can't do!) with the LG (versus the LM) is that upper mid brite grind thing, and the only thing the LM can't do (versus the LG) is that warm, growly upper bass thing). That is why I own both... those two 'classic' tone profiles that really defines those two specs for me. There is a different 'feel' off the board when slapping and digging in also, with the LM spec kind of throwing your thumb back off the thump, versus the more relaxed feel and tone of the LG.
Otherwise, you can get each of them to do quite a few things with hand position, pickup blend and the passive tone control combined with the active circuit.
Geesh I'm kinda scratching my head on this ?
a. Does a passive mode AC LG5 sound better with an AGUILAR OB3 or a stock AC preamp. Like does it matter IF one is only using the bass in passive mode ??????
b. If one were only, or mainly going to use an AC in active mode ( cuz let me tell ya CUZ's they sound plenty awesome right there in good old passive mode alone, and I employ this setting mainly myself now, in small club settings ). Why opt for an Aguilar OB3 over the AC preamp ?
I can only logically conclude that when Paul Turner wants that active sound and tonal flexibility he would rather stomp on the Aguilar than the Alleva Coppolo.
Hummh I don't know what to think of this ?
Chef
In Memoriam
Not too difficult to fathom, I don't think:
The Ag preamp sounds pretty different than the AC preamp.
So, if he likes that diff when using active mode, there ya go.
The Ag preamp sounds pretty different than the AC preamp.
So, if he likes that diff when using active mode, there ya go.
I agree with Chef. He probably like the active circuit of the Aguilar. The passive mode gives him the sound of the old Fender Jazz that you can see in the background of the pics. Which is probably his '66 Fender Jazz that he loves to use.
+1 The Alleva preamp is quite subtle and basically sounds like the passive bass with the classic buffering impact of a 'flat' active circuit (a touch more deep bass, a touch of smoothing in the mids, and a bit more sizzle than grind up top). Even when you crank the A-C pre a bit, the bass never sounds 'goosed' to me, or particularly active.
The Aguilar is much more voiced and sounds more 'active' when the tone controls are boosted and or cut.
So, just a different choice. I like it that the A-C pre allows my A-C's to still sound pretty 'old school' when engaged, and that I can add some fatness down low with the bass boost without totally changing the vibe of the instrument.
If someone mainly plays passive, then possibly a more goosed/aggressive pre with some additional tone shaping options (cut/boost, mid EQ, etc.) might bring something nice to the party (per Chef's hypothesis).
I very highly doubt it, at least in a humanly perceivable way.
Personal preference, as always. Someone may just simply like them better, be more familiar with them, etc. In my case, with a bass like this, I want to realize the designer's vision and not try to augment it with my own alterations, so I took it just exactly as Jimmy offers it.
I'd say all this confusion is probably just us not knowing the whole story... maybe he used it actively for a while and really likes the Aggie best, but then later decided to just play passively, maybe even that info isn't accurate. Who knows. Doesn't really matter tho, 'cause that'd just be HIS prefs anyway, and not necessarily applicable to anyone else.
IMHO.
svtb15
Inactive
- Mar 22, 2004
- 13,004
- 4,741
- Disclosures
- I play it all. Whatever works for the gig. Q+
Yes it is the aguilar.. Although.. I asked Paul about it,, and he used the bass in passive mode.. And the new bass has the normal Alleva Coppolo Preamp
- Jan 7, 2008
- 2,196
- 224
- 39
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: Olinto, La Bella, JuleAmps, Epifani
I very highly doubt it, at least in a humanly perceivable way.
Personal preference, as always. Someone may just simply like them better, be more familiar with them, etc. In my case, with a bass like this, I want to realize the designer's vision and not try to augment it with my own alterations, so I took it just exactly as Jimmy offers it.
I'd say all this confusion is probably just us not knowing the whole story... maybe he used it actively for a while and really likes the Aggie best, but then later decided to just play passively, maybe even that info isn't accurate. Who knows. Doesn't really matter tho, 'cause that'd just be HIS prefs anyway, and not necessarily applicable to anyone else.
IMHO.
Yeah I say who cares haha....I've had the pleasure of experiencing all three options at different times (had a jazz with an aguilar pre, have a jazz with an AC pre, and now have a passive KBP5) and when I had to choose it was always just a preference thing. Honestly, my favorite sound is just the passive KBP5. I think Jimmy really nailed that early CBS P-bass tone and it just translates unbelievably well from the wood and construction all the way through the electronics. His pre IMO, is really just a more powerful vintage passive sound so it's great to have live if you're still aiming for a more vintage tone like Paul does with Jamiroquai. The aguilar to me sounds way more like an active bass but I loved the bass control on it....super fat....but not as authentic jazz bass as the AC, so it makes sense Paul would slowly gravitate towards it.
- Status
