• 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!!!

#44,501
I came across something in the way of explanation. "Each string used a double pole to reduce the unwanted “beat” effect common in pickups with single magnets." Perhaps this indicates that centring the string between the two is unnecessary. If we can come to terms with that, the aesthetics of misalignment is cool.
B.
edit: Maybe the aesthetics of having the ends of the covers line up under the strings to give an overall balanced appearance is more pleasing than that of the pole alignment. (?)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Fuzzbass
#44,502
P. Bass said:
The pickup pole alignment with the strings on my Fender is the almost same as the Sadowsky. The 2 sections could be spread to achieve alignment.
The pup distance from the bridge is a calculated measurement so you would think the pickup poles were originally placed with that in mind. The only variable seems to be the spread between the 2 sections. Perhaps Roger could chime in on this. It's not gonna change the sound surely , but puzzling just the same.
B.
Click to expand...

Hopefully Roger will weigh in on this matter. While the strings may not be centered perfectly between pole pieces on the basses pictured above, the alignment is consistent between the two instruments. Here is another NYC P with similar string/pickup alignment:
d8cluzxkrjahyyesw95r.jpg


FWIW, this alignment would allow for slightly tighter string spacing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: P. Bass and Fuzzbass
#44,503
This same “mis-alignment” exists on the mid to late 50’s P’s. So, I would conclude that Leo, operating mainly on empirical results simply decided things sounded best that way.

I have full confidence in Leo’s technical decisions. He rarely, if ever, got it wrong.

As with many empirical results, you could possibly get into deep computer modeling yadda yadda yadda, and in the end it might explain what he simply decided by trying and listening. Science is great; but, most often it simply ends up explaining what was already right there in front of us.

Anyhow, that’s the way I would think about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mckendrick, Fuzzbass and P. Bass
#44,504
P. Bass said:
I came across something in the way of explanation. "Each string used a double pole to reduce the unwanted “beat” effect common in pickups with single magnets." Perhaps this indicates that centring the string between the two is unnecessary. If we can come to terms with that, the aesthetics of misalignment is cool.
B.
edit: Maybe the aesthetics of having the ends of the covers line up under the strings to give an overall balanced appearance is more pleasing than that of the pole alignment. (?)
Click to expand...

Again, I'm not an engineer, or a historian for that matter, but my hunch is that double-pole is essentially the same as Music Man's "really large single polepiece" solution, but cheaper -- cheaper because Fender could use their existing stock of smaller magnets.

I'm not saying there's no difference between double-pole and large single-pole, all else being equal, but I would never assume that there must be a difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: P. Bass
#44,505
bucephylus said:
This same “mis-alignment” exists on the mid to late 50’s P’s. So, I would conclude that Leo, operating mainly on empirical results simply decided things sounded best that way.

I have full confidence in Leo’s technical decisions. He rarely, if ever, got it wrong.

As with many empirical results, you could possibly get into deep computer modeling yadda yadda yadda, and in the end it might explain what he simply decided by trying and listening. Science is great; but, most often it simply ends up explaining what was already right there in front of us.

Anyhow, that’s the way I would think about it.
Click to expand...

As much as I'd like to accept that reasoning, there is photographic evidence to the contrary. Alignment seems to be all over the place back in the mid to late 50's. Among other examples, "The Fender Bass - An Illustrated History" shows a couple examples of this inconsistency. At that time the pickup was covered & was therefore not an obvious point of contention. Q.C. has to be considered here don't you think ? Idealism is out the window in mass production.
B.
 
#44,506
Regarding this discussion....... Our default 4 string spacing is 20mm, so the string alignment will not be perfect. Please remember that all of these pickups are designed for the more normal 4 string spacing which is 19mm (¾") at the bridge. Our 5 string spacing is on the wide side as well, at 19mm. Also, we do not do even string to string spacing at the nut. Our nut is cut so the "spaces" between the strings will be the same, not the distance from center to center on the strings themselves. We allow a little more clearance on the G string from the edge of the fingerboard, to prevent slipping off the edge from bends and pull offs. We also push the limits on our humcancelling 5 string J pickups in terms of how wide we can get the pole pieces to the end of the pickup cover. So factor all of this together and perfect visual alignment with the pole pieces and fingerboard dots become impossible. However, as has been addressed earlier, none of this has any effect on the response of the strings to the pickups.

I could switch to solid covers, but then it becomes difficult to radius the pole pieces as we do for more even tonal response.

Roger
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fred312b, BIGEJ2, wmmj and 21 others
#44,507
Hey Roger very interesting to hear that you guys take into account making sure the g-string doesn't slip off the edge of the fingerboard.

I've had this problem on so many basses in the past, and I was actually testing my Sadowsky the other night to see if I could make the G string slip off the edge of the board and it was very difficult to do. So great job! :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fred312b, Spidey2112, puff father and 4 others
#44,508
phillipkregg said:
Hey Roger very interesting to hear that you guys take into account making sure the g-string doesn't slip off the edge of the fingerboard.

I've had this problem on so many basses in the past, and I was actually testing my Sadowsky the other night to see if I could make the G string slip off the edge of the board and it was very difficult to do. So great job! :D
Click to expand...

These are the little details we sweat and I'm glad you appreciate it.

Roger
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fred312b, Spidey2112, HawgDriver and 10 others
#44,509
Sadowsky said:
Regarding this discussion....... Our default 4 string spacing is 20mm, so the string alignment will not be perfect. Please remember that all of these pickups are designed for the more normal 4 string spacing which is 19mm (¾") at the bridge. Our 5 string spacing is on the wide side as well, at 19mm. Also, we do not do even string to string spacing at the nut. Our nut is cut so the "spaces" between the strings will be the same, not the distance from center to center on the strings themselves. We allow a little more clearance on the G string from the edge of the fingerboard, to prevent slipping off the edge from bends and pull offs. We also push the limits on our humcancelling 5 string J pickups in terms of how wide we can get the pole pieces to the end of the pickup cover. So factor all of this together and perfect visual alignment with the pole pieces and fingerboard dots become impossible. However, as has been addressed earlier, none of this has any effect on the response of the strings to the pickups.

I could switch to solid covers, but then it becomes difficult to radius the pole pieces as we do for more even tonal response.

Roger
Click to expand...

a more complete explanation I daresay has ne'er been offered
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spidey2112, kevk, kobass and 1 other person
#44,515
projectapollo said:
I guess I should get a number..... I've traded many many basses here in TB trying all different brands and builds. I stopped trading when I acquired my Metro MV4 in classic olympic white, then decided to make the (irreversible) move to a 5-string and the MV5 became my regular player.
Click to expand...

Thank you for making my day!
Roger
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hounddog, kevk, puff father and 3 others
#44,517
I've got 2 basses now with Sadowsky pickups and preamp and I've come to this conclusion:

The Sadowsky preamp is the ideal preamp for those players who typically love passive basses.

Every other active bass I've ever owned sounded a little "too active" and I would spend lots of time tweaking the knobs. On my Sadowsky, I always start a session by turning everything off - but still keeping the preamp activated. Then, I'll usually play with the VTC at somewhere between 0 and 10%. Then a slight bump in the bass to warm things up. Every once in a while I'll bump the treble control to get a little more sizzle on a slap tune.

Other than that, I get the most out of the Sadowsky preamp with very subtle tweaks so it ends up sounding like a great passive bass that has a bit more oomph to it. Like seasoning a filet mignon, a little goes a long way.

I've also discovered that the Sadowsky soapbars are probably my absolute favorite pickup ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ezon55, SadowskySteve, danclaro and 4 others
#44,518
phillipkregg said:
I've got 2 basses now with Sadowsky pickups and preamp and I've come to this conclusion:

The Sadowsky preamp is the ideal preamp for those players who typically love passive basses.

Every other active bass I've ever owned sounded a little "too active" and I would spend lots of time tweaking the knobs. On my Sadowsky, I always start a session by turning everything off - but still keeping the preamp activated. Then, I'll usually play with the VTC at somewhere between 0 and 10%. Then a slight bump in the bass to warm things up. Every once in a while I'll bump the treble control to get a little more sizzle on a slap tune.

Other than that, I get the most out of the Sadowsky preamp with very subtle tweaks so it ends up sounding like a great passive bass that has a bit more oomph to it. Like seasoning a filet mignon, a little goes a long way.

I've also discovered that the Sadowsky soapbars are probably my absolute favorite pickup ever.
Click to expand...
+1 Roger’s preamp is sauce for classic Fender tones. When you learn how to use it, you can run the gamut from P Bass whomp/thump to Jaco staccato to 70’s slap bite. It’s all there. Perfect preamp for playing cover gigs, if you are trying to be semi faithful to the original feels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G-MonRV5, puff father, Spidey2112 and 1 other person
#44,519
phillipkregg said:
I've also discovered that the Sadowsky soapbars are probably my absolute favorite pickup ever.
Click to expand...

I have the single coils and really like them. I tried the PJ in the store, and while it was great it wasn't exactly what I had in my head as P sound either. The interesting thing is I thought I was shopping for a PJ until I played the Sadowsky JJ configuration. The preamp is magic and does everything I need. Turns out I don't need a P pickup to get "that" sound I was looking for. I haven't tried the soapbars though. Now I wonder what I am missing out on. Guess I'll have to hit youtube looking for sound clips now.
 
#44,520
Firewraith said:
I have the single coils and really like them. I tried the PJ in the store, and while it was great it wasn't exactly what I had in my head as P sound either. The interesting thing is I thought I was shopping for a PJ until I played the Sadowsky JJ configuration. The preamp is magic and does everything I need. Turns out I don't need a P pickup to get "that" sound I was looking for. I haven't tried the soapbars though. Now I wonder what I am missing out on. Guess I'll have to hit youtube looking for sound clips now.
Click to expand...

I love the singles too, but I've played several Sadowsky Modern 5s and felt more drawn to that tone.

A couple weeks ago I found a good deal on a Valenti Modern (same body style as Sadowsky Modern) with Sadowsky soapbars and preamp so I took a chance on it and it's a great bass.

It has such a unique tone, a little more MTDish or even maybe reminiscent of a Ken Smith. But believe it or not, I can actually get a very good Pbass-like tone out of the neck pickup.

Sadowsky offers those soapbars in more of a standard 60s jazz position also. Like on this Will Lee:

DSC_0697-3000x860.jpg


Haven't heard them in that configuration yet, but I'm going to start researching them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BluesyCat, kittywithabanjo and Firewraith

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back