I never find myself wishing for a mid control on my Sadowskys. I got a mid control on my Nordy -- just because I could, I guess -- but never use that either.
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.
I never find myself wishing for a mid control on my Sadowskys. I got a mid control on my Nordy -- just because I could, I guess -- but never use that either.
Part of this "lack of mid control" concern people get from time to time may just be due to the increased presence of the 3 band preamps out there. My experience is quite to the contrary. I am constantly a bit edgy about my sound not quite being there with my 3 band Zon and Tobiases, and happy as a pig in mud whenever I get back to the Sadowsky preamp. Roger just completely nailed the tone I like to use on a J style instrument. Zero mid issues there for me. Those 3 band Bart and East circuits OTOH; (how do I put this?) I end up with the sound I want, but I am constantly twiddling that mid, which I find to be a major distraction. IMO.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Roger's pre designed so that as you boost treble/bass you also are boosting the 300hz-area frequency? Could've sworn that I read that somewhere.
No need for a mid control here either...I've never wanted or needed for more onboard complexity with a bass. For gigs, I set the amp where I think I'll want the bass 90% of the time and then boost the lows and/or highs on the bass when/if I need to depending on the song.
Hey guys,
Recently picked up my 3rd Metro, so I guess I should "join the club".
1. Bought this Hybrid HPJ brand new in late 2007 (my first Sadowsky) and then had to sell it in late 2010, for financial reasons. :-(
2. In early 2008, I picked up this 2004 RV5 in a trade (from TBer ric426) and it became my main gigging bass:
3. And around the first of this year, I bought this 2009 MV5PJ (from TBer fudgegf) and fell in love all over again:
*Note to self: these basses deserve better photos - add to To-Do list.
Recently picked up my 3rd Metro, so I guess I should "join the club".
1. Bought this Hybrid HPJ brand new in late 2007 (my first Sadowsky) and then had to sell it in late 2010, for financial reasons. :-(
2. In early 2008, I picked up this 2004 RV5 in a trade (from TBer ric426) and it became my main gigging bass:
3. And around the first of this year, I bought this 2009 MV5PJ (from TBer fudgegf) and fell in love all over again:
*Note to self: these basses deserve better photos - add to To-Do list.
Not quite. What you are remembering is that when you boost the broad band highs and lows, it effectively creates a mid cut curve centered at 300hz, which is what creates that strong but uncluttered sound.
Question about the pot values in the HPJ. I read somewhere that Sadowsky changed from 250k to 500k pots in the Metro HPJ's sometime in the 2000's. First off, is this true? And secondly, my NYC JJ with singles has 500k pots which brightens it some. What would be the result if I were to change my HPJ pots to 500k? Would it be as noticeable in a mix as with my JJ? And what would happen to the straight P tone on my HPJ?
That makes sense. So it stands to reason that if you LOWERED the bass and treble and boosted the overall volume of your bass in the mix, you'd have in effect a kind of mid boost. Or do I have that wrong? I've never had a shortage of lowmid thickness in my PJ5 so it's kind of a non-issue for me. For myself, when I dial that blend knob forward (which is backwards of course and puts it on the bridge pickup) I imagine it as kind of a midboost. Add in some more bass and it's 'Jaco slathered in bacon grease'.
Chef
In Memoriam
The Sadowsky preamp is boost only, so, you kind of can't lower bass and treble, at the bass.
Unless you're already running them boosted all the time.
Unless you're already running them boosted all the time.
Unrelated to current topics: awhile back it was mentioned by me (possibly in response to someone else) that the Thomastik Infeld Jazz Flat B string could pull through the Sadowsky bridge even when seated properly. My emergency workaround was to thread a paper clip through the ball end a couple of times, twist, and cover the excess with electrical tape to prevent scratches on the body.
Note that my set of TIs is now 10 years old, used previously on a Fender RBV, and is now strung for the 2nd time on my CAR/Brazilian Sadowsky P5. I had speculated that the TI ball ends were not large enough -- the ball end on the B was barely larger than the B string itself. Turns out my hunch was correct. I just got a new TI B string and its ball end is larger and does not pull through.
I'm probably not the only five stringer who keeps flats on one bass, so I'm posting the update. I love TI Jazz flats, B string included... but of course they are expensive. That's why I replaced just the one string: the B had died, but the EADG still sound great, nicely broken in.
Back to the regularly scheduled program...
Note that my set of TIs is now 10 years old, used previously on a Fender RBV, and is now strung for the 2nd time on my CAR/Brazilian Sadowsky P5. I had speculated that the TI ball ends were not large enough -- the ball end on the B was barely larger than the B string itself. Turns out my hunch was correct. I just got a new TI B string and its ball end is larger and does not pull through.
I'm probably not the only five stringer who keeps flats on one bass, so I'm posting the update. I love TI Jazz flats, B string included... but of course they are expensive. That's why I replaced just the one string: the B had died, but the EADG still sound great, nicely broken in.
Back to the regularly scheduled program...
Have you tried the LaBella flexible flats?
Very TI-like IMO and less moolah.
I'm a flats guy, so we can go off in our corner and talk flats if you like.
Very TI-like IMO and less moolah.
I'm a flats guy, so we can go off in our corner and talk flats if you like.
Well aware of that, it just seems that from my recollection the 'where's my mids crowd?' who have complained in the past were typically boosting a lot of bass and treble. Could be mistaken though. I know that for ME, leaving the bass/treble flat, turning up the volume in the mix, is in effect a kind of mid boost. It's a leaner, brighter sound and another arrow in the Sadowsky quiver. My current NYC PJ5, which is a heavy, unchambered sucker, is SERIOUSLY thick with just a smidge of bass boost.
When I got my first Sadowsky I freaked out a little when I plugged it in, but quickly remembered that the EQ was boost only.
Some bassists know how the Sadowsky EQ works and still claim that the mids aren't as present. I chalk this up to "no bass will please everyone". It's all relative: to plenty of us, a Sadowsky is nice and smooth with no mid hump. The Sadowsky P-bass might not please a passive P-bass purist, but it gives me the P-bass tone I always wanted.
I did try the new LaBellas, just before I put the TIs back on. The LaBellas have the flexibility of TIs, but are smoother in two ways: tone and feel. I'm not quite a flats guy, but tone-wise the LaBellas seem to emphasize the fundamental while the TIs seem more complex in the mids. Interesting that the LaBellas have little or no gap between the windings and are polished shiny, almost mirror smooth, whereas the TIs have more texture. I don't mean to imply that feel is related to tone, just making the observation. I have no preference for feel. I prefer the TIs for tone, but I like the LaBellas too, so I'm keeping them around.
See how I appended this to Sadowsky content? Call me Congressman Fuzzbass.
We can continue "offline".
I have a J5 with HCs and a J4 with SCs.
I've never used the treble gain and occasionally have the bass gain 10-15%.
The SCs give me the sound I want for jazz and 60-70s stuff while the HCs give me cleaner G down to B evenness and clarity.
My ears can only aspire to match Roger's with his R&D and experience too.
You're always going to get a customer wanting orange wallpaper and a brown carpet with red leather lounge tho' . . . .
I've never used the treble gain and occasionally have the bass gain 10-15%.
The SCs give me the sound I want for jazz and 60-70s stuff while the HCs give me cleaner G down to B evenness and clarity.
My ears can only aspire to match Roger's with his R&D and experience too.
You're always going to get a customer wanting orange wallpaper and a brown carpet with red leather lounge tho' . . . .
This may have already been answered somewhere in the gazillion previous posts, so forgive me if so...
I did the first string change on my NYC fiver (http://[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]) last night, and the nut was not glued in place- it came out of the slot. Is this now a standard Sadowsky feature (not a sarcastic dig)?
I kinda wish I hadn't changed the strings, cuz other than the strings being a little thuddy, this was the best feeling bass I've experienced to date. Changing to Hi Beams didn't do much for the bass; going back to Sadowsky Blue Steels. Though the Hi Beams were supposedly the same gauge as the Blue Steels, the action got all jacked up (too high), and I guess the Blue Steels had been smoothed a bit by my fingers. Gotta love the *ping* of the ebony, too.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
I did the first string change on my NYC fiver (http://[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]) last night, and the nut was not glued in place- it came out of the slot. Is this now a standard Sadowsky feature (not a sarcastic dig)?
I kinda wish I hadn't changed the strings, cuz other than the strings being a little thuddy, this was the best feeling bass I've experienced to date. Changing to Hi Beams didn't do much for the bass; going back to Sadowsky Blue Steels. Though the Hi Beams were supposedly the same gauge as the Blue Steels, the action got all jacked up (too high), and I guess the Blue Steels had been smoothed a bit by my fingers. Gotta love the *ping* of the ebony, too.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Last edited:
no, you get the prize though. did you know there was a prize?
ok, joking aside, could have been an oversight, or could have been deemed not needed because the fit was so snug. either way, I have only ever heard of a drop or so of glue being used to secure most nuts.
stunning bass, by the way.
ok, joking aside, could have been an oversight, or could have been deemed not needed because the fit was so snug. either way, I have only ever heard of a drop or so of glue being used to secure most nuts.
stunning bass, by the way.
Last edited:
Yeah, I'm familiar with just a touch of glue being used to hold them in place. I have heard more than one luthier friend lament/curse repairing guitars with too much glue in the nut slot. The nut on 5956 was neither snug nor loose; perfect is the word I'd use to describe how it fit. No biggy; I was just wondering if Sadowsky had decided to simply do away with glueing them in place altogether.
I was applauding the new string tree design while swapping out the strings, and loved the practically effortless string removal that the bridge design provides. I felt like I would have made a Nascar pit crew proud with quickness of the string changes.
Last edited:
That happened to me last year on a one of my NYCs that is pretty new. I called Roger and he said they normally use a spot of glue to hold it in place, but if it comes loose, just use a little glue to hold it. I used just one very small drop in the center of the groove. Worked fine.
Last edited:
