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
+1Beware The Orange Juice Rebelliion.........
Jimmy says it's his most popular finish right now.
Yeah man, I'll do a little of that, but I think it's got nickels on it, so I wanna' play it judiciously between now and the gig Friday.
Ken recommended I do the UL410/LMII rig, so I'm gonna' do that...
...pause...
OMFGOSH... I love my life!
I bounced back and forth between my Sadowsky J5 and the LG5. The diffs are obvious, but I gotta' say part of this has to be because of the string diffs too, so take that into account. The Sadowsky has SS LoRiders, btw.
First, the Sadowsky has more going on somewhere in the low mids... I'm thinking circa 400Hz. It's also got more going on in the low treble range... I'd say circa 2K or so... maybe a tad higher.
The LG is a lot smoother up top... not dull... at all... just "sweeter". It's also got bigger lows... I'd say down near 100Hz or so. Maybe also a bit more going on in the higher treble ranges like circa 4K or so... either that or simply a bit less going on around 2K.
The bass EQ on the LG is a lot more usable. It's voiced at 100Hz, and really, you don't need any unless you're soloing the bridge... maybe when favoring, but depending on how much of that big neck pickup you have blended in. On the Sadowsky, the bass control seems about 4x more powerful than it needs to be. Still very useful and musical for soloing or strongly favoring the bridge pickup, but jeez, be careful.
I really can't justify using the treble EQ on either one of these, tho they both do about the same thing... add a bristly, possibly even brittle, high end. Just not necessary with SC p'ups IMHO.
The AC preamp has a little bit of a notch at 1K, and you can hear it when you kick the preamp in from passive mode. The cool part is, it's either very narrow and/or fairly shallow. It doesn't suck the meat out of the bass at all. It's a "perfect scoop" IMHO.
The VTC seems to be a bit stronger on the LG, and possibly also a bit more linear, but they both are quite comparable and VERY useful. I use this control A LOT. Anybody with a J style bass with no ability to cut the high end, IMHO, is just crazy, and at least for authenticity, I prefer the VTC over an active treble cut... especially if the bass has a passive mode, 'cause then you still have some tone control in that mode.
Speakin' of passive mode, it's nice that both basses work fully in passive mode even with no battery present. I think most systems are like this, but not all.
They both play like a total f'n dream. I'd classify the Sadowsky as being a little more snug and tighter sounding down low while the LG is just a bit bigger sounding. Not that the Sadowsky lacks depth at all, but it's a bit more focused and aggressive down there is all. Also, not that the LG is missing any highs, it's, again, just not quite in an as aggressive range.
Also, just for a quick fun test, I plugged the Eden 405 in. Another winner. Sorry, I know Edens aren't the latest thang, but I still TOTALLY dig that head. Best one they ever made IMHO.
I CAN NOT WAIT to try these bad boys together live with this rig.
Nice post, Vic!
I find that I agree with you 99% of the time and I own 2 Sads and an LG5. The only things I disagree with you on is the treble boost, which I find helpful when I (rarely) decide to slap and want my LG5 to pretend it's not an Alder/Rosewood affair from the mid 60s. But hey, if I really want to slap (or, god forbid, tap) I can pull out the ash maple sad.
I will agree with you that both basses will "work fully" in passive mode, but there is only one of the three that I would actually want to use running passive, and do so on a regular basis. Both my Sad J and PJ (metros, keep that in mind) can barely pull their own weight when in passive mode with the VTC so sensitive, unless I do a full setup on them for this purpose. These wonderful basses sound relatively dead/lame/cheap in passive mode. To me, passively, they sound either too brittle or straight up dead in the mix (2 Guitars, Keys, Multiple Vocals, drums, percussion). They aren't totally unusable, but they are not ideal and barely even sound good (this means they sound 'good', but am I wrong that high end basses should sound great all across the spectrum?). Roger Sadowsky, himself, even admitted here that his basses had the passive switch as an on stage life-line, rescue option.
Personally, sometimes I want a modern, steroid jazz thing and sometimes I need the classic goodness. Weekly, I play in groups from every style on the FM dial...even if noone else is listening to the bass, I gotta do it right! I digress, I love the cut of Sadowsky Basses when you add that preamp, even set flat, you get the wow you want (at least from folks I know!). But for passive...not so much (as far as my experience goes).
So, now I find myself selling off anything other than my AC, my Sad Jazz, and my tried and true Leo Basses which do what they do so well.
Great Review Bud, my soundman would be impressed!
I'm turning into a passive junkie as of late. I wonder when the "modern" phase will begin, all over again? 
Matt
I find that I agree with you 99% of the time and I own 2 Sads and an LG5. The only things I disagree with you on is the treble boost, which I find helpful when I (rarely) decide to slap and want my LG5 to pretend it's not an Alder/Rosewood affair from the mid 60s. But hey, if I really want to slap (or, god forbid, tap) I can pull out the ash maple sad.
I will agree with you that both basses will "work fully" in passive mode, but there is only one of the three that I would actually want to use running passive, and do so on a regular basis. Both my Sad J and PJ (metros, keep that in mind) can barely pull their own weight when in passive mode with the VTC so sensitive, unless I do a full setup on them for this purpose. These wonderful basses sound relatively dead/lame/cheap in passive mode. To me, passively, they sound either too brittle or straight up dead in the mix (2 Guitars, Keys, Multiple Vocals, drums, percussion). They aren't totally unusable, but they are not ideal and barely even sound good (this means they sound 'good', but am I wrong that high end basses should sound great all across the spectrum?). Roger Sadowsky, himself, even admitted here that his basses had the passive switch as an on stage life-line, rescue option.
Personally, sometimes I want a modern, steroid jazz thing and sometimes I need the classic goodness. Weekly, I play in groups from every style on the FM dial...even if noone else is listening to the bass, I gotta do it right! I digress, I love the cut of Sadowsky Basses when you add that preamp, even set flat, you get the wow you want (at least from folks I know!). But for passive...not so much (as far as my experience goes).
So, now I find myself selling off anything other than my AC, my Sad Jazz, and my tried and true Leo Basses which do what they do so well.
Great Review Bud, my soundman would be impressed!
I'm turning into a passive junkie as of late. I wonder when the "modern" phase will begin, all over again? Matt
Now THAT's what I'm talkin' about! Vic, bro, you can WRITE. Nicely done. It will be truly telling to see if that bigger low end of the AC is too big with the Epi UL410 and the LMII. Although I'm guessing it's just going to RULE!
Thanks for the great post.
Thanks for the great post.
Yeah man, I'll do a little of that, but I think it's got nickels on it, so I wanna' play it judiciously between now and the gig Friday.
Ken recommended I do the UL410/LMII rig, so I'm gonna' do that...
...pause...
OMFGOSH... I love my life!
I bounced back and forth between my Sadowsky J5 and the LG5. The diffs are obvious, but I gotta' say part of this has to be because of the string diffs too, so take that into account. The Sadowsky has SS LoRiders, btw.
First, the Sadowsky has more going on somewhere in the low mids... I'm thinking circa 400Hz. It's also got more going on in the low treble range... I'd say circa 2K or so... maybe a tad higher.
The LG is a lot smoother up top... not dull... at all... just "sweeter". It's also got bigger lows... I'd say down near 100Hz or so. Maybe also a bit more going on in the higher treble ranges like circa 4K or so... either that or simply a bit less going on around 2K.
The bass EQ on the LG is a lot more usable. It's voiced at 100Hz, and really, you don't need any unless you're soloing the bridge... maybe when favoring, but depending on how much of that big neck pickup you have blended in. On the Sadowsky, the bass control seems about 4x more powerful than it needs to be. Still very useful and musical for soloing or strongly favoring the bridge pickup, but jeez, be careful.
I really can't justify using the treble EQ on either one of these, tho they both do about the same thing... add a bristly, possibly even brittle, high end. Just not necessary with SC p'ups IMHO.
The AC preamp has a little bit of a notch at 1K, and you can hear it when you kick the preamp in from passive mode. The cool part is, it's either very narrow and/or fairly shallow. It doesn't suck the meat out of the bass at all. It's a "perfect scoop" IMHO.
The VTC seems to be a bit stronger on the LG, and possibly also a bit more linear, but they both are quite comparable and VERY useful. I use this control A LOT. Anybody with a J style bass with no ability to cut the high end, IMHO, is just crazy, and at least for authenticity, I prefer the VTC over an active treble cut... especially if the bass has a passive mode, 'cause then you still have some tone control in that mode.
Speakin' of passive mode, it's nice that both basses work fully in passive mode even with no battery present. I think most systems are like this, but not all.
They both play like a total f'n dream. I'd classify the Sadowsky as being a little more snug and tighter sounding down low while the LG is just a bit bigger sounding. Not that the Sadowsky lacks depth at all, but it's a bit more focused and aggressive down there is all. Also, not that the LG is missing any highs, it's, again, just not quite in an as aggressive range.
Also, just for a quick fun test, I plugged the Eden 405 in. Another winner. Sorry, I know Edens aren't the latest thang, but I still TOTALLY dig that head. Best one they ever made IMHO.
I CAN NOT WAIT to try these bad boys together live with this rig.
I guess I can see your point but at least IME, most of the time when I slap I actually cut the high end to smooth it out. I leave the treble alone and drop the PTC/VTC down 25-50%. You apparently like a slap tone that's a lot brighter than I prefer.
I must admit, to "test" this I just compared the passive output levels with the "flat" active levels to make sure there's enough output to operate without having to necessarily change amp settings in a given situation. I didn't do a lot of tonal testing. I'll have to spend a little more time on this with my Sadowskys because while I haven't spent a lot of time with this mode, I have done it a few times (just for yuks... the battery was fine) and don't remember disliking the performance/tone.
I'm right there with you. My main gig, the one I'm doing all this with, literally plays everything from Van Halen Eruption/YRGM to YMCA and Butt Scootin' Doggie
. Seriously. Then you roll both my different worship gigs in, and the blues band, I generally cover a lot of ground, too. Again, I have to really revisit the passive thing, but definitely you and I are on the same page in MANY ways!
Thanks dude... means a lot... you clearly know your stuff.Great Review Bud, my soundman would be impressed!
Oh, and for the record, even though I'm seriously gettin' into all this, I still love the modern stuff too.
Thanks, and no prob.
While I do think the Sadowsky might cut a bit better, I don't get the sense that the lows on the LG will be problematic. I just think it's gonna' be a big beautiful classic sounding bass (though with modern advancements to improve performance while preserving that tonal foundation.)
Nice comments Vic! I guess the way I always sum up the difference between the A-C's and Sadowsky's is how much the A-C sounds like a true Fender J Bass, whereas the Sadowsky, even with single coils and passive (and even acoustically) still always has than unique Sadowsky flavor (which is a credit to both Jimmy and Roger, since that seems like what each of them is trying to do, with Roger putting his own unique stamp on a 'modern J' tone, and Jimmy doing everything he can to mimic how Leo Fender was making them on the workbench in the 60's).
While I rarely use it, the treble boost seems much more musical and sweet than the Sadowsky(which I've never, ever used). And, even though both bass controls are spec'd at 40 hz, the Alleva does seem much tighter and more subtle, which I like a lot (it almost sounds like the Sadowsky bass boost is shelving starting at 40hz, and the Alleva is a more traditional bass boost, centered at 40 hz, and impacting more above 40hz than below). The Sadowsky sounds much 'bigger' in the low end with just a touch of bass boost than the Alleva's do. Just a little boost when slapping the Alleva just totally fattens the E and B string with no boom at all, while not really impacting the voicing of the G and D string at all. Pretty cool!
Nice stuff!
Edit: My comments on the bass control above are what prompted me to recommend Vic use the 410UL versus his AE210x2 stack with the Alleva. I find the Sadowsky bass control just perfect for fattening up and extending the low end of the AE line of cabs (amazing with about a 20% bass boost with the Sadowsky pre!). Since the Alleva stays much tighter down low (i.e., much more passive sounding versus the big, modern, active vibe of the Sadowsky with a touch of bass boost), I've found the Alleva sounds better with a wider, more evenly voiced cab with a more 'natural' low end extension like the Epifani410UL. And, the higher ratio of mids to lows that the Alleva has versus the Sadowsky works very well with the more mid polite Epi line of cabs to my ear. Of course, it sounds great through any rig, but something about the Epi/MB combination allows that 'Fender passive' vibe to really shine through. IMO there, and this is based on my LM, which is probably a touch thinner and brighter than the LG Vic currently is checking out.
While I rarely use it, the treble boost seems much more musical and sweet than the Sadowsky(which I've never, ever used). And, even though both bass controls are spec'd at 40 hz, the Alleva does seem much tighter and more subtle, which I like a lot (it almost sounds like the Sadowsky bass boost is shelving starting at 40hz, and the Alleva is a more traditional bass boost, centered at 40 hz, and impacting more above 40hz than below). The Sadowsky sounds much 'bigger' in the low end with just a touch of bass boost than the Alleva's do. Just a little boost when slapping the Alleva just totally fattens the E and B string with no boom at all, while not really impacting the voicing of the G and D string at all. Pretty cool!
Nice stuff!
Edit: My comments on the bass control above are what prompted me to recommend Vic use the 410UL versus his AE210x2 stack with the Alleva. I find the Sadowsky bass control just perfect for fattening up and extending the low end of the AE line of cabs (amazing with about a 20% bass boost with the Sadowsky pre!). Since the Alleva stays much tighter down low (i.e., much more passive sounding versus the big, modern, active vibe of the Sadowsky with a touch of bass boost), I've found the Alleva sounds better with a wider, more evenly voiced cab with a more 'natural' low end extension like the Epifani410UL. And, the higher ratio of mids to lows that the Alleva has versus the Sadowsky works very well with the more mid polite Epi line of cabs to my ear. Of course, it sounds great through any rig, but something about the Epi/MB combination allows that 'Fender passive' vibe to really shine through. IMO there, and this is based on my LM, which is probably a touch thinner and brighter than the LG Vic currently is checking out.
I dunno, my Alleva tends to be looser in the low end than my Sadowsky. Not that either one is a problem, but I do tend to get more lows and the can become boomy in some circumstances with the LG. I've experienced this with both my amps, but granted neither one of them is quite comparable to what Ken plays though (I use a DB750 for goodness sake). This never an issue, as I don't boost the bass on the LG except for the very infrequent slap lick.
I plan to add the proprietary bridge to my LG to make it less "wide" sounding in the low-end.
PS. is there anything to these Danelectro 9volts?
I plan to add the proprietary bridge to my LG to make it less "wide" sounding in the low-end.
PS. is there anything to these Danelectro 9volts?
Interesting. That sure wasn't the case with MikeBass's (Tommix's) LG, and is definitely not the case with my LM. One of the things I like most about the Alleva's that I've played is that they don't get so big down low (as many have posted, they sound quite passive throughout their range, versus the goosed low end of many active basses).. However, every bass is different, and playing style and rig match-up can have a huge effect.
I do agree that the Alleva's seem to sound more full and even in passive mode than the Sadowsky's I've played. It seems that Roger spec's his pickups with his preamp in mind, whereas Jimmy is going for the best passive sound he can get, and voices his preamp to subtly fatten or widen that inherent passive tone (which again, to me, is what makes these basses so unique among other boutique J's). So, that might be the difference we are hearing. My comments are based on the settings that most seem to use with both the Alleva and Sadowsky basses... pretty much flat but with a very slight bass boost (10% to 20%). The Sadowsky gets much bigger quickly with that pre versus the A-C.
I've always found the DB750 way too loose on the low end in a live setting (at least for my tone goals), and could see where you would never want to boost the low end on any on-board pre with that amp. Through a head with a more 'neutral' voice, you can really hear the difference in the low end performance of these two pre's, and the inherent low end of each bass. I like both voicings a lot!
And finally, a bridge change will IMO and IME be so subtle on the low end as to be not worth the time and money IMO. Not saying you won't hear anything, but it surely is not going to significantly change the nature of the low end.
vision
It's all about the groove!
- Feb 25, 2005
- 3,988
- 618
- 47
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: MTD Basses, La Bella Strings, and 64 Audio IEMs
+1...I'm a guy that LOVES sizzle and zing, but I do this exact same thing when slapping on a jazz bass. If it's a naturally bright bass (like my ash/maple Celinder) then when the passive treble control is wide open it will give you a toothache when you slap aggressively. The PTC/VTC will smooth that out without giving you a "blanket over the cab" type tone that you can get when cutting a normal active treble control.
In general, I agree, although that active zing treble boost that is programmed into the Celinder is a different thing than the more passive vibe of the Sadowsky and especially the A-C basses. I never dial back the VTC when slapping or digging in with the Sadowsky (although it sure is nice to have for other contexts like playing straight ahead, etc.). With my particular Alleva (ash/Maple) there is that classic upper mid/lower treble sort of bump in the voicing of that bass which can get a little much (especially when slapping... that dreaded 1K 'gank'). So, I do use the passive tone control to soften that a bit at almost all times, per your comment. It can really grind up there!
- Status
