• 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!!!

#41,621
I had my first studio session today with my SC equipped Metro JJ5. My goodness- does this bass sound incredible. I have done some home recordings, but to hear the bass through massive studio monitors... just clear as a bell and sounding huge, it was an experience..., Lol. The Sadowsky pre shines in the studio. I took 3 signals; one direct (older GT Brick tube DI), another post EQ on my Mesa D800 and we also mic'd one of my Mesa Subway 115's.

To say the bass sounded good is putting it lightly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bucephylus, FunkSheep08, Joeykun and 5 others
#41,622
number six said:
PS I usually go along with what Roger uses for standards.
For example,
HC pups. I prefer them on my J5 but like SC's on my J4.
Click to expand...

Interesting because most of us on here prefer HC on the JJ4s and SC on the JJ5s.
I love the HC pups on my Standard 4s. But, when I had a Standard 5 I switched the pups to SCs and thought they sounded better.
 
#41,624
Personally I really like SCs in a 70s style as I'd often use that with both pickups on. Where an alder rosewood 60s with HCs allow for favoring the bridge ala Jaco or trying to cop a P with the bridge pickup; and doing either without hum.

That was my preference when I had a couple of Sadowskys.
 
#41,625
Sadowsky said:
Hi Everyone,

I am looking for a few volunteers to evaluate a prototype string set for me. Must be someone who currently uses our Black Label Bright Nickel .45 strings. Please email me directly at [email protected] and provide your shipping address. Please include your phone number as well.
Click to expand...

Thank you to all who responded. I do not need any more volunteers!
 
#41,628
Well, maybe I shouldn't have said most. :whistle:
But, the HC/SC debate comes up often. The cool thing is whether HC, SC or Soaps you can't go wrong!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MattB88
#41,630
Joeykun said:
Interesting because most of us on here prefer HC on the JJ4s and SC on the JJ5s.
I love the HC pups on my Standard 4s. But, when I had a Standard 5 I switched the pups to SCs and thought they sounded better.
Click to expand...

IMHO this has changed with the latest version of the HCs. The 5 string set sounds great so it's probably more about the woods and what you want to do with each bass. The old version 5 string HCs were pretty scooped so they were more polarizing. I have the old singles in my RV5 and the new HCs in my mv5-24, those both sound great to me. I don't like the new singles nearly as much as the old singles ...
 
#41,631
pickles said:
IMHO this has changed with the latest version of the HCs. The 5 string set sounds great so it's probably more about the woods and what you want to do with each bass. The old version 5 string HCs were pretty scooped so they were more polarizing. I have the old singles in my RV5 and the new HCs in my mv5-24, those both sound great to me. I don't like the new singles nearly as much as the old singles ...
Click to expand...


When was the "new" version introduced?
 
#41,633
number six said:
Hi,
I saw the string beta test invitation and noted it's for .045" which seems to be the norm.
I usually use .040" light gauge Sadowsky Black or Blue but was wondering . . .
Has anyone used .035" or other extra light gauges from other brands on their Sadowsky basses?
If so, what were the results or opinions?
Thanks!

PS I usually go along with what Roger uses for standards.
For example,
HC pups. I prefer them on my J5 but like SC's on my J4.
The pan control goes the right way for me (my local luthier annoyingly swapped the direction on a cheap bass I have . .grrr)
The mid boost I don't need at all. What Roger describes makes perfect sense.
So I guess there's a reason he doesn't make super light strings a la Wooten/King.
Click to expand...
Wooten is known to use lights (.040), King is known for using super lights (.030). I would suspect there just isn't the demand for Sadowsky strings lighter than.045. Simple as that. :)
 
#41,635
Can someone from the U.S. do me a favour and check if any of the videos in my signature link work? They don't work for me ("video not available") so I need to know if this is a regional thing or a Youtube problem in general. I figured this was as appropriate a place to ask as any since a couple of Sadowskys were used for the recordings. Thanks!
 
#41,636
bass12 said:
Can someone from the U.S. do me a favour and check if any of the videos in my signature link work? They don't work for me ("video not available") so I need to know if this is a regional thing or a Youtube problem in general. I figured this was as appropriate a place to ask as any since a couple of Sadowskys were used for the recordings. Thanks!
Click to expand...

_Flight 714_ loaded fine, played fine. Nice stuff!
 
#41,639
pickles said:
IMHO this has changed with the latest version of the HCs. The 5 string set sounds great so it's probably more about the woods and what you want to do with each bass. The old version 5 string HCs were pretty scooped so they were more polarizing. I have the old singles in my RV5 and the new HCs in my mv5-24, those both sound great to me. I don't like the new singles nearly as much as the old singles ...
Click to expand...

I feel the same way. I loved the frist SC's in both 4- and 5-strings (the ones with the sharper edges on the corner of the PU-shell). The newer ones (with the more rounded edges) didn't do it for me. I sold the PU's and bought the older version SC-pickups from the shop. Installed them and I'm in tone-heaven again.
 
#41,640
Musicfreak1988 said:
I feel the same way. I loved the frist SC's in both 4- and 5-strings (the ones with the sharper edges on the corner of the PU-shell). The newer ones (with the more rounded edges) didn't do it for me. I sold the PU's and bought the older version SC-pickups from the shop. Installed them and I'm in tone-heaven again.
Click to expand...

I have no experience with the older SC. Anyone know what's the difference? I have a set SC5 with round edges that were absolutely terrible! No highend whatsoever. Also in active mode I could not dial in any sparkle just grind no sparkle. The Bass band became also very boomy. I found them a terrible match to the Sadowsky Pre because it became really unusable. They were usable in passive mode. However I could not get any highend sparkle and there were just too dark for slap or any articulation.
Hence swapped back to the HC. But I kept disliking those for slight chorousy sound, artificial compression and poor string to string balance..... So i went back to the SC. They recorded nicely in passive mode. Excellent string to string balance but just too dark. If they just did not screw with the Eq points of the Pre. Then it dawned on me that you cannot boost what its not there in the first place. I concluded that these SC must be seriously overwound. I took them apart and knocked off a considerable amount of windings like maybe 20%. E Voila the neck PU turned out excellent. The Bridge PU is still a little dark but that is not necessarily a bad thing. (Sounds kinda like a regular Jazz Bass with 50%tone). At least I am now much happier then with the HCs. But still room to be improved.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: jedicollector

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back