Club Alleva Coppolo (Part V)

[esoxhntr]

Actually, there's no refresh required - this was relatively unplanned. Totally unplanned to be accurate. But as we all know, no pics = no bass right? Even worse, in this case no bass = no bass. :scowl: When I get it I'll post pics. I don't want to further jinx UPS, they seem to have enough trouble on their own.

 

[Phillip Jordan]

Shhh thanks Alleva-Holics!!!!!!!

 

[KJung]

Hey guys!

I've had fun really getting to know the LG compared to my LM. It's really something. The LM really channels that somewhat aggressive, upper mid grindy, quick response late 70's J thing, and the LG REALLY channels that lightweight, airy, warm, mellow, 'round' sounding mid 60's J thing. It almost has a 'chambered' sounding vibe to it... super resonant, and 'woody' sounding. When you then add the period accurate paint methods and neck feel, they really start to fool you into thinking you are playing period instruments.

As we've been discussing above, the other LG that I've played that Pete owns now is an amazing bass, but is more similar to the Sadowsky MV versus RV thing in comparison to my LM, where there is a 'hint' of the alder/RW versus Maple/ash thing, but they sound and feel more similar than different (even with the different bridge pickup positions). The one I have for some reason is much more 'period accurate' to my ear and hands (for better or worse, depending on what you want). I again dig it!

Jimmy's work is really impessive, and it again amazes me that I can have relatively 'vintage period' accurate basses in 5 string format. I assume his P's are the same.

Edit: I'm still also quite amazed by the Indian Rosewood board (the standard 'no upcharge' board from what I understand). Trust me guys, there is NO reason to feel like you have to pay even a small upcharge for some upgrade to the board on the LG's. This board is simply amazing, and looks and feels 40 years old, and sounds and feels just like the ones I've played on 60's Fender's. Wonderful!!!!

 

[mothra2]

Hey guys!

I've had fun really getting to know the LG compared to my LM. It's really something. The LM really channels that somewhat aggressive, upper mid grindy, quick response late 70's J thing, and the LG REALLY channels that lightweight, airy, warm, mellow, 'round' sounding mid 60's J thing. It almost has a 'chambered' sounding vibe to it... super resonant, and 'woody' sounding. When you then add the period accurate paint methods and neck feel, they really start to fool you into thinking you are playing period instruments.

As we've been discussing above, the other LG that I've played that Pete owns now is an amazing bass, but is more similar to the Sadowsky MV versus RV thing in comparison to my LM, where there is a 'hint' of the alder/RW versus Maple/ash thing, but they sound and feel more similar than different (even with the different bridge pickup positions). The one I have for some reason is much more 'period accurate' to my ear and hands (for better or worse, depending on what you want). I again dig it!

Jimmy's work is really impessive, and it again amazes me that I can have relatively 'vintage period' accurate basses in 5 string format. I assume his P's are the same.

Edit: I'm still also quite amazed by the Indian Rosewood board (the standard 'no upcharge' board from what I understand). Trust me guys, there is NO reason to feel like you have to pay even a small upcharge for some upgrade to the board on the LG's. This board is simply amazing, and looks and feels 40 years old, and sounds and feels just like the ones I've played on 60's Fender's. Wonderful!!!!

NIce....sounds like you've got a special bass there, Ken.
On the fretboard thing, I hear what you're saying and what you've experienced, but I've also talked to others that own both builds, (Indian and DN) and they hear the early 60's thing more prevelently on the DN. Perhaps we've come back to the earlier observation you made regarding each build being it's own thing and 'is what it is'...
Wood is indeed a strange beast.

 

[KJung]

NIce....sounds like you've got a special bass there, Ken.
On the fretboard thing, I hear what you're saying and what you've experienced, but I've also talked to others that own both builds, (Indian and DN) and they hear the early 60's thing more prevelently on the DN. Perhaps we've come back to the earlier observation you made regarding each build being it's own thing and 'is what it is'...
Wood is indeed a strange beast.

+1 Every bass is different, and it's hard to attribute a more 'vintage' thing on any one attribute of the instrument (especially when comparing a sample of one each of two different woods on different basses with different weights, etc., etc.). Does my bass sound so much 'older' than Pete's LG 5 because of the Nitro finish I think not... but it would sure be easy to attribute it to that

I sure do like that LG that Pete has though. It sits kind of right in the middle between my LM and LG. That's a nice 'sonic space' for a main instrument. I could be very happy with that one as my only instrument. It's a little fatter sounding than my LM, and a touch brighter and 'quicker' than my LG. That's a nice combination for a 'one instrument does it all' sort of thing.

 

[Ace Of Bass]

and[/I] DN) and they hear the early 60's thing more prevelently on the DN. Perhaps we've come back to the earlier observation you made regarding each build being it's own thing and 'is what it is'...
Wood is indeed a strange beast.

+1.......very cool you ended up with an LG that seems to cop the 60s vibe (for you) even moreso than Peter's bass did (for you), Ken......... you and your bass selections have really been on fire as of late.......

 

[KJung]

+1.......very cool you ended up with an LG that seems to cop the 60s vibe (for you) even moreso than Peter's bass did (for you), Ken......... you and your bass selections have really been on fire as of late.......

I have kind of 'drank the giddy cool-aid' on these. Sorry for all the 'gosh, gee, golly' posts, but man do these things just speak to me

Edit: Also, I don't mean to imply that the DN board is not a worthwhile upgrade. My point is that most of us either can't afford that sort of upcharge or are not willing to pay that kind of upcharge for a board. So, for those who are concerned that they might not be able to achieve the full mid 60's vintage vibe without it, I can say for sure that they should not be worried or shy away from the 'stock' LG spec.

 

[Andrew Jones]

I own both.....Indian and DN in a four string I also have had the fun of playing with the real deal for the last week.

I have a 66 fender /white matching headstock. I also have Jimmy's White maching/ Blocks and binding bolth of these basses have Indian rosewood.

I also have a 63 sunburst and jimmy's four string sunburst bolth of these basses have Brazilian.


There IS a difference in the tones and there are parallels between the sets. The Indian is tighter sounding more aggressive.The DN more mellow and Warmer sounding.This is true with the two sets.


What I'm saying is IMHO "60's vibe" is not descriptive enough I'd prefer to hear early/ late as 2 different things.


Aj

 

[mothra2]

...Does my bass sound so much 'older' than Pete's LG 5 because of the Nitro finish I think not... but it would sure be easy to attribute it to that...

Well, we all share our personal observations and theories here based on our own thoughts and experiences which is great, but I think that's why in the end, we also have to rely on the experience and feed back from the guy who builds them and
has played hundreds of them to establish trends and likelihoods of character.
No guarantees, for sure, but it would help us all keep from reaching potentially arbitrary conclusions like the one you've eluded to above.

 

[Andrew Jones]

Hi


I'm noticing Kens use of "MId"60's

So, for those who are concerned that they might not be able to achieve the full mid 60's vintage vibe without it, I can say for sure that they should not be worried or shy away from the 'stock' LG spec.

I hear you but I'd assume they are worried about nailing the pre CBS vibe.




Aj

 

[KJung]

Hi


I'm noticing Kens use of "MId"60's





I hear you but I'd assume they are worried about nailing the pre CBS vibe.




Aj

Correct. I'm surely not an expert on early Fenders, but I think the CBS thing was in the later 60's if I remember correctly (Edit: 65!). And, this LG surely isn't that very early stacked knob sort of vibe with that exposed 'ground' strip at the bridge and all of that stuff. I'm not sure what it is closest to... Edit: Just got out my Fender Bass book... I guess what I'm talking about is the 62 and later J's... so you are right, not necessarily mid 60's... I was just trying to communicate the 'non stacked knob pre-CBS second generation J models (if I finally have that right). So, 62-65 seems to be where my LG sits.. right in between the original stack model and the later 'post CBS' models. I should have done my homework before posting!

Not sure exactly, but my point being it does a great job of the generic sort of feel and tone many of us associate with a 60's era Fender build spec.

 

[mothra2]

I own both.....Indian and DN in a four string I also have had the fun of playing with the real deal for the last week.

I have a 66 fender /white matching headstock. I also have Jimmy's White maching/ Blocks and binding bolth of these basses have Indian rosewood.

I also have a 63 sunburst and jimmy's four string sunburst bolth of these basses have Brazilian.


There IS a difference in the tones and there are parallels between the sets. The Indian is tighter sounding more aggressive.The DN more mellow and Warmer sounding.This is true with the two sets.


What I'm saying is IMHO "60's vibe" is not descriptive enough I'd prefer to hear early/ late as 2 different things.


Aj

Can you/have you posted a pic of that 63...

 

[KJung]

Well, we all share our personal observations and theories here based on our own thoughts and experiences which is great, but I think that's why in the end, we also have to rely on the experience and feed back from the guy who builds them and
has played hundreds of them to establish trends and likelihoods of character.
No guarantees, for sure, but it would help us all keep from reaching potentially arbitrary conclusions like the one you've eluded to above.

+1 all the way.

And thanks to all above who prompted me to go back and do some homework. I've played quite a few 'three knob' 60's Fender J's (again, due to the lucky fact that I am buddies with a guy who does appraisals), and really never noticed a systematic tone difference among them, so never went to school on if they were 63's or 66's! They all obviously had subtle tone differences that each bass (even spec'd identically) has from any other bass due to different pieces of wood, etc., but they all had that vibe that many of us probably too loosely describe as '60's'

 

[Andrew Jones]

Ken

First of all, I agree I think the Indian is a great wood and builds wonderful sounding basses.I also question the upgrade cost.If your saying that basic spec LG is very close to full blown decked out and arguably better in some ways,I'd agree.

I'm also agreeing with your terms.There allot of details but I'll hear "mid 60's" as "post CBS"and what the Indian is trying to give you.


Aj

 

[KJung]

Ken

First of all, I agree I think the Indian is a great wood and builds wonderful sounding basses.I also question the upgrade cost.If your saying that basic spec LG is very close to full blown decked out and arguably better in some ways,I'd agree.

I'm also agreeing with your terms.There allot of details but I'll hear mid 60's as post CBS and what the Indian will give you.


Aj

I'm a real noobie on the subtle differences in the vintage Fender era basses, so again forgive me for my loose usage of various years and terms that are sacred to some.

 

[Vic]

I'm surely not an expert on early Fenders, but I think the CBS thing was in the later 60's if I remember correctly (Edit: 65!).

True, and while I don't want to get OT on this, 65 and even some of 66 were still considered transition years where a lot of "pre-CBS" parts were still being used and those years are still highly "desirable" by collectors, tho still not as much as 65 and especially prior. Also, if I remember correctly, the quality issues didn't show up until the 70's.

 

[KJung]

True, and while I don't want to get OT on this, 65 and even some of 66 were still considered transition years where a lot of "pre-CBS" parts were still being used and those years are still highly "desirable" by collectors, tho still not as much as 65 and especially prior. Also, if I remember correctly, the quality issues didn't show up until the 70's.

It all gets so nebulous! Since we are iced in here in Detroit, I'm just cruising around the web today. I've done a bunch of searches on the original Brazilian Rosewood (DN) used on the early Fenders, and the Indian Rosewood (DS) used starting in, from what I could figure out, the later 60's (gradually phased in as the Brazilian was phased out). Roughly half of the posts I found swear the DN is 'brighter' than the DS (Indian), and, you guessed it, the other half or so felt the opposite, on the blogs, etc. I found.

I know Jimmy believes, in general, the Indian variety is a touch 'brighter' than the old Brazilian. I have a feeling body weight and subtle differences in the 'hand wound' pickups and pickup heights, I assume customized for each instrument, explain most of the tonal variations between Jimmy's basses, but who knows. I like them all so far!

 

[Vic]

On the whole Indian vs DN, and the different flavors of LG's out there... interesting because when I had Tony's (totally and completely smokin') LG, I really felt it was more like the LM I had than unlike it... per my previous post, yeah, a touch less grind up top, but not enough to really say it had a significant amount less. In other words, to most generally describe it, I'd say it sounded mostly like the LM but with a lot more going on in the low end, as opposed to like the LM except a lot less going on in the high mids.

Reading this thread, without having that experience, I'd pretty much write off the LG for my tastes, and especially the DN board... even if it was not such an expensive upgrade, but unless Tony's LG is really super unusual, (hope not, for my sake!), I guess the short version is, I hear more aggression in the LG's than seems to be described here.

Yeah, they're primarily about the pillowy more classic J tone, but IMHO, I think the LG's do have more going on in the "definition" range than a typical older 60's J. I may not have played as many of those as others here, but I have played several over the years, as a huge J bass fan from the beginning for me, which was about '76. That disclaimer out fo the way, I've never been able to find an earlier 60's J I really was nearly as happy with as I am the LG. That's why I've always gravitated towards the 70's models... either alder or ash... didn't matter as much as the pickup placement.

However, I've avoided buying a genuine vintage 70's Fender because 1.) they're MASSIVELY expensive these days, and 2.) due to the spotty quality in those days (especially with necks) it taks a damn long time to find a good one that's not ridiculously priced, AND you have to really be able to trust the source big time. In short, too risky for me.

Here comes Tony's LG... blows my mind... first "J style bass" that has all the sweetness of the 60's tone that I've always wanted, but haven't been able to get without sacrificing the definition I crave.

I went into that "eval" fully expecting to dig the LM more and not send it back to Jimmy, but Tony's LG just killed me. It "had it all". I PRAY my LG is comparable.

 

[mothra2]

On the whole Indian vs DN, and the different flavors of LG's out there... interesting because when I had Tony's (totally and completely smokin') LG, I really felt it was more like the LM I had than unlike it... per my previous post, yeah, a touch less grind up top, but not enough to really say it had a significant amount less. In other words, to most generally describe it, I'd say it sounded mostly like the LM but with a lot more going on in the low end, as opposed to like the LM except a lot less going on in the high mids.

Reading this thread, without having that experience, I'd pretty much write off the LG for my tastes, and especially the DN board... even if it was not such an expensive upgrade, but unless Tony's LG is really super unusual, (hope not, for my sake!), I guess the short version is, I hear more aggression in the LG's than seems to be described here.

Yeah, they're primarily about the pillowy more classic J tone, but IMHO, I think the LG's do have more going on in the "definition" range than a typical older 60's J. I may not have played as many of those as others here, but I have played several over the years, as a huge J bass fan from the beginning for me, which was about '76. That disclaimer out fo the way, I've never been able to find an earlier 60's J I really was nearly as happy with as I am the LG. That's why I've always gravitated towards the 70's models... either alder or ash... didn't matter as much as the pickup placement.

However, I've avoided buying a genuine vintage 70's Fender because 1.) they're MASSIVELY expensive these days, and 2.) due to the spotty quality in those days (especially with necks) it taks a damn long time to find a good one that's not ridiculously priced, AND you have to really be able to trust the source big time. In short, too risky for me.

Here comes Tony's LG... blows my mind... first "J style bass" that has all the sweetness of the 60's tone that I've always wanted, but haven't been able to get without sacrificing the definition I crave.

I went into that "eval" fully expecting to dig the LM more and not send it back to Jimmy, but Tony's LG just killed me. It "had it all". I PRAY my LG is comparable.

Sorry if i missed...Tony who, and what was that build ...Indian or DN??? Thanks.

Also, when do you expect to receive yours (Indian I believe)?

 

[Ace Of Bass]

Sorry if i missed...Tony who, and what was that build ...Indian or DN??? Thanks.

Also, when do you expect to receive yours (Indian I believe)?

Tony (XavidmanX) has my bass' twin, pretty much, except I think he has the bent plate bridge and I have binding around my board.........I think we both have DN...............