• 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 Sadowsky!!!

#21,121
Fuzzbass said:
My hunch is that the pickguard is altered on PJ basses so it surrounds the split-P pickup more elegantly, and this would give the illusion of the J pup being farther from the bridge.

Or maybe it's just that treble coil on the P pickup causing the illusion.
Click to expand...

You may be onto something.

In fact, I think maybe the whole control plate is pushed back farther to accomodate the PG. My eyes were looking at how the PU was much closer to the control plate and thus, I thought it was closer. But it may be that the control is what is not in the same place.
 
#21,122
Chef said:
Every time I bring these to work, I smile, the band smiles, the crowd smiles.
Love 'em:

IMG_1676.jpg
Click to expand...

Man Chef I love the look of that thang..If you ever want to move it drop me a line...
 
#21,124
anezthes said:
I'd say they're different. At least if you compare their position in regard to the 3rd knob seen from the bridge towards the neck.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the J on my rev. PJ5 was actually closer to the bridge than on my (60's spec) MV5 (which I don't own anymore)

So I just measured the distance from the 12th fret (taking the control plate placement out of the equation) to the "beginning" of the bridge J on both my rev PJ5 and on my (70's spec) UV.
The difference is that the distance of the UV's bridge PU is exactly 1 cm more to the 12th fret (which is the typical 70's difference to the 60's J location).

This leads to the conclusion that the J bridge PU is the same on my rev. PJ than on the MV.

Or did I mess up completely?
 
#21,125
gillento said:
I was under the impression...
Click to expand...
My understanding, and I think confirmed by your measurements, is that all the bridge pickups in the normal vintage/standard JJ and PJ configs, including reverse PJ's, is the same... 60's position. Only the UV's (and custom orders with the option selected) will have the 70's spacing.
 
#21,126
Jerry Ziarko said:
I finally got to try (live setting) the SC's I got from Mike, in my MV5. While some pickups may work better with certain basses, these seem like they were made for mine. The difference between the HC's that were in it and the SC's, is very noticeable. So much so, more than one person in the band made mention of it without knowing about the change. Besides the fact they are very quiet, (even when slightly favoring the bridge pickup) I LOVE they way they sound on my particular instrument.
As a side note, I had changed the 250k volume pot to a 500k with nice results when I used the HC's. After a A/B session with both with the SC's, the 250k sounded better with my particular wood combo. I'm sure with others the 500k might be the ticket.
Click to expand...

Win/win for us Jerry!
I love the HC's I got from you in my bass. PERFECT for it.

GLad you like the pick-ups.

What did the 500K pot do for the HC's?????
 
#21,127
MikeBass said:
What did the 500K pot do for the HC's?????
Click to expand...
Roger's intent, which I think was truly realized, was to help the HC's sound a bit more like the SC's. IMHO, that means emphasize the lower treble region that seems a bit stronger in the SC's vs the HC's. I found it did work, but how significantly it affected things may be debatable. My overall feeling is, it's a good move for Roger as a new standard config, but I wouldn't shout from the mountaintops everyone needs to jump on it unless they're unhappy with the sound they're getting now (unlikely!!) and are already considering swapping HC's for SC's... just simply do this as a first (much simpler/cheaper) step.
 
#21,129
jonno1707 said:
Does everybody swap to Rogers single coils or has anybody tried Old Fender's or Nordy's-Duncans? Talking 4 string here...
I want to put a good set of singles in this killer Vintage 4 I recently picked up:

5209_full_lg.gif
Click to expand...
Are you unhappy with it as it is? From what I understand, the 4 string version of the HC's is more popular tone-wise than the 5 string version. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the HC5 isn't a great pickup... it is... no doubt... just seems like the HC4's get more props is all, so I'd think the temptation to put SC4's in there would be minimal.
 
#21,131
jonno1707 said:
Does everybody swap to Rogers single coils or has anybody tried Old Fender's or Nordy's-Duncans? Talking 4 string here...
I want to put a good set of singles in this killer Vintage 4 I recently picked up:
Click to expand...

At one moment I put nordy NJ5 SCs into my MV5 and I really liked the added lowend. But after a few months I got back to the more articulate Sad. SCs and preferred it that way.
 
#21,132
Vic said:
Roger's intent, which I think was truly realized, was to help the HC's sound a bit more like the SC's. IMHO, that means emphasize the lower treble region that seems a bit stronger in the SC's vs the HC's. I found it did work, but how significantly it affected things may be debatable. My overall feeling is, it's a good move for Roger as a new standard config, but I wouldn't shout from the mountaintops everyone needs to jump on it unless they're unhappy with the sound they're getting now (unlikely!!) and are already considering swapping HC's for SC's... just simply do this as a first (much simpler/cheaper) step.
Click to expand...

So, the 500K pot puts it closer to SC land eh?
The 250K retains more of the that HC smoothness I assume??

Again, all subjective and most likely only really evident in more controlled situations, but interesting none-the-less.
 
#21,133
MikeBass said:
So, the 500K pot puts it closer to SC land eh?
The 250K retains more of the that HC smoothness I assume??

Again, all subjective and most likely only really evident in more controlled situations, but interesting none-the-less.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that was my take on it... but I think how significant the effect was was fairly debatable. I think there were those who thought it made a bigger difference than I heard.

Here are my clips from a while back. You can definitely hear it, but IMHO not a night/day thing. The 250K version is definitely a little bit sweeter and the 500K one is definitely a tiny bit more aggressive.

You'll appreciate the selection, as well... :)

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
 
#21,134
Slightly off topic perhaps, but I just happened upon a B52s appearance on Jay Leno from a few years back. Dunno who the bass player is, but she is rockin the house with a killer bassline and a great sounding Sadowsky J. Sounds awesome. Thought someone here might be interested...

 
#21,135
danclaro said:
Slightly off topic perhaps, but I just happened upon a B52s appearance on Jay Leno from a few years back. Dunno who the bass player is, but she is rockin the house with a killer bassline and a great sounding Sadowsky J. Sounds awesome. Thought someone here might be interested...



Roger
Click to expand...
 
#21,137
MikeBass said:
So, the 500K pot puts it closer to SC land eh?
The 250K retains more of the that HC smoothness I assume??

Again, all subjective and most likely only really evident in more controlled situations, but interesting none-the-less.
Click to expand...

The beauty of it is, it's only $6 for the pot. The only minor, and I do mean minor downside, is you have to slightly enlarge the hole in the plate. The 500k shaft is a bit larger. If you don't like the change, the 250k goes back in with zero issues. In my bass the 500k did make a noticeable difference. It kept the HC smoothness just fine. The tone did get a bit more aggressive.
As far as win, win, I couldn't agree more. As I commented, some pickups just work better with some basses. You know what you were trying to achieve, and it seems like you did just that!
 
#21,140
Jerry Ziarko said:
The beauty of it is, it's only $6 for the pot. The only minor, and I do mean minor downside, is you have to slightly enlarge the hole in the plate. The 500k shaft is a bit larger. If you don't like the change, the 250k goes back in with zero issues. In my bass the 500k did make a noticeable difference. It kept the HC smoothness just fine. The tone did get a bit more aggressive.
As far as win, win, I couldn't agree more. As I commented, some pickups just work better with some basses. You know what you were trying to achieve, and it seems like you did just that!
Click to expand...

Actually, I DON'T want it any more aggressive.
I'll stay right where it's at. They REALLY make this bass IMO.
Thanks again!
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back