Club Sadowsky!!!

[ElMon]

I know this is all about 'the sound in our head', but I did some serious A/B/C tests with ...

1) My main player, heavy ash/brazilian RW PJ 5 with Chrome Flats
2) backup Sadowsky Metro UV5
3) MTD 535 Makore Body/Cocobolo top/african blackwood FB/std BARTS

Both my Sadowsky basses, set completely flat, sounded measurably thicker and meatier than did the MTD, even at extreme EQ settings (bass knob maxxed, mid boosted at 250hz and/or cut at 1k to give a thicker sound AND on the neck pickup at times) all up and down the fretboard.

I got that MTD in a trade for an Alleva Coppolo, and while it plays amazingly-well, and has a very unique and 'stringy' sound, I reiterate that I have been spoiled/ruined.

Think the answer to the 'have a more modern-sounding bass in your stable' needs to be a new build.

Something I've always pined for:

1) Unchambered Ash Body ... Maple and/or Braz RW Fretboard ... P-Shape ... two 'big single' pickups in 70's JBass position

or

2) Unchambered Ash Body ... Maple and/or Braz RW Fretboard ... P-Shape ... one musicman-style pickup.

 

[Vic]

With my new-ish basses, I cover the buckle with my shirt...

Bottom line: I love the freedom of playing a bass with no worry about buckle rash.

I have two newer Sadowskys with insignificant rash: I'm still stressing about them... which is probably why Blackie still gets the majority of playing time.

I get the freedom part, but clearly, covering with the shirt really doesn't fully solve the problem. I wear my bass kinda' high, so I don't have the issue, but even through a shirt a buckle can create a lot of damage. Just IMHO.

 

[Vic]

I don’t know @Vic, some folks pay a lot of extra $$ to purchase instruments that are beat up with that kind of natural wear. Just sayin...

jeez, don't even get me started on relicking. ugh.

 

[Fuzzbass]

I don’t know @Vic, some folks pay a lot of extra $$ to purchase instruments that are beat up with that kind of natural wear. Just sayin...

I really wanted to get a relic Sadowsky when offered... I think the line was called Vintiquity? My budget couldn't handle it at the time.

One reason is that I love the mojo on vintage Fenders, including a very-well-worn 1964 Precision I had bought used back in 1982 or so. Love the broken in feel, especially on the neck. Another reason (as previously noted) is no more worry about road rash.

And I don't give a whit about "real" or "fake" mojo. I've seen godawful real mojo, sexy fake mojo. And vice versa, of course. Point is, ya never know.

 

[Vic]

One reason is that I love the mojo on vintage Fenders... Love the broken in feel, especially on the neck...

...Another reason (as previously noted) is no more worry about road rash...

...And I don't give a whit about "real" or "fake" mojo. I've seen godawful real mojo, sexy fake mojo. And vice versa, of course. Point is, ya never know.

YMMV but IMHO "mojo" has to be earned.

That said, I totally get the worn-in warm feel of a played bass, but as you point out, the first thing that came to your mind (and the only place it really matters IMHO) is the neck. And it's EASY to get that nice worn-in feel without trashing the finish on the hardware and body. Just go to the gunstock oil finish. Done.

I'd also argue that "freedom" of not worrying about nicking an already nicked bass... well... just "relick" it yourself over time. Either way, you can choose not to worry about it if you know it's going down that road.

again, just IMHO(!!!), but i don't believe relicking holds any value whatsoever, and I certainly wouldn't pay extra to have somebody trash an otherwise perfectly good and beautiful instrument.

 

[Joeykun]

Wearing your bass above your belt buckle is a violation of the Viking Code of Law.

 

[Fuzzbass]

YMMV but IMHO "mojo" has to be earned.

Well... okay then. I fail to see why that matters at all.

True story: my guitarist brother used to feel the same way about relicing that you do. Then he played one. Now, his favorite blues guitar is a Fender Relic Nocaster that he ordered from the Fender Custom Shop. It was expensive, but a helluva lot cheaper than the real deal.

Speaking of expense: of course you have to pay more for relicing. Takes time and effort on the part of the builder. Also, they can do it in a couple of weeks (?)... i.e. you don't have to wait years, as I did with my black Sadowsky. And on that note: I wish the body on mind was more relic'd... arm wear, for example... yes, it's also a comfort factor, just like the neck. But of course the Sadowsky body is poly, not nitro, so that might not ever happen.

Goes without saying that not everyone likes the relic thing... different strokes. Never understood the fuss, though. Same as P vs J or whatever: if you don't want one, don't get one (or even "roll your own" ).

 

[Vic]

Wearing your bass above your belt buckle is a violation of the Viking Code of Law.

lol! true. i'm not a badass low slinger. i accept that about myself.

 

[cxcxcx]

Totally random:

Does anyone on hear switch in between a Sadowsky and a Lakland 55-94. Don't have much experience with Laklands, but have been hearing some juicy, inherently thick tone on some clips that reminds me of this nice gentleman in NYC named Roger, who builds a few basses each year.

I have, but the Sadowsky won out in the end. Lakland is a little too "polite" sounding in the mix for me.Since the MM pickup on the 55-94 isn't in the place as a MMSR5, you don't get the point on the note that this pickup setup and placement normally deliver. The 55-94 seems to record better compared to how it performs live, but yor average Sadowsky eats everything for lunch,

Just as an aside, I have played a 55-94 with the preamp bypassed through a Sadowsky outboard pre and I really liked it. Never did try it on deck live with a band, though.

 

[Vic]

i said mojo has to be earned

Well... okay then. I fail to see why that matters at all.

just getting terminology straight. to me, mojo comes (only) from many years of play, because if you're only talking about the feel of an old instrument, i'd still argue that's mostly just the feel of the neck, which can be done without destroying hardware or the body finish. fyi, i did this on my '04 nyc and it feels a lot like one of my old fenders, and many other vintage instruments i've played (many).

maybe to be more specific... i'm not into relicking that is done specifically to make an instrument appear old and beat up. i think it makes perfect sense to do things that actually matter for feel... like exposing the wood on the back of the neck, exposing the wood on certain body contours, etc., but the bashing and chipping that's strictly aesthetic, and the stressing of the hardware, well... not my thing at all...

Goes without saying that not everyone likes the relic thing... different strokes. Never understood the fuss, though. Same as P vs J or whatever: if you don't want one, don't get one (or even "roll your own" ).

well, at least in my case, i'm not fussing, and i'm not upset and don't judge people for being into it (honestly!). just saying i'm not because it makes no sense to me.

vive la difference y'all.

 

[Fuzzbass]

maybe to be more specific... i'm not into relicking that is done specifically to make an instrument appear old and beat up. i think it makes perfect sense to do things that actually matter for feel... like exposing the wood on the back of the neck, exposing the wood on certain body contours, etc., but the bashing and chipping that's strictly aesthetic, and the stressing of the hardware, well... not my thing at all...

My brother owns a pair of pre-CBS Stratocasters but loves the feel and look of his CS Relic so that he calls it mojo. I've seen crappy looking wear (real and artificial), but I've also seen sexy wear... such as Fender CS, Sadowsky Vintiquity.

We agree that it's just personal preference, but for the record I happen to I like both. Most of my basses are minty fresh or have very little wear, but I also have a couple of road warriors. Same's true for clothing: I own a few pre-broken-in items. Whether basses or clothes, it's nice not to have to wait 10 years or whatever for real mojo to kick in. Artificial mojo can be every bit as good.

I've never actually owned an artificially mojo'd bass. Just sayin', I would have bought one of those Vintiquities if I'd had the money.

 

[Vic]

...We agree that it's just personal preference, but for the record I happen to I like both...
...Just sayin', I would have bought one of those Vintiquities if I'd had the money.

i hear ya bro.

that said, i won't lie, while it's not the prettiest thing i own, my older nyc that's got wear and had the neck finish stripped is amazing on every level, and it feels like "home". i also kinda' like that it doesn't attract attention in some circumstances, and i don't worry as much about keeping it clean, etc.. i call it my sleeper... just like the (apparent) jalopy you don't care about shopping cart dings at wally world, but... under the hood is a whole different story. LOL!!

 

[Joelc73]

I love beat up Fender style instruments - like Sadowsky’s. They look great to me. I’m not a fan of beat up Les Paul’s for some reason or more modern instruments.

 

[bucephylus]

Just a couple of comments on the discussion between @Vic and @Fuzzbass:

In the case of instruments sustaining use related relicing over years of playing, there are multiple things going on. The finish gets beaten up; and the instrument undergoes extensive interaction with the environment. In particular, the wood’s structure continues changing internally; which has significant consequences on the resonant qualities of the instrument.

You can actually have old instruments refinished. For example, Pat Wilkins could take care of Ken’s Blackie, putting it back to what it was when it left Roger’s shop; except that it would feel and sound just like it does now. Except maybe the neck feel; that’s a different matter. I also suspect Ken would never contemplate that in a million years. For good reasons. That instrument tells a story as it is.

Unfortunately, refinishing instruments has a certain stigma, partly because of collector valuation, and partly because the characteristics of the instrument might seem to be at risk. They aren’t. Finishes these days are so thin that they have negligible effect on the instrument performance.

I had a 76 Alembic Series I that went back to Alembic some years back for truss rod repair. The required work resulted in a complete refinish; and when the instrument came back it looked new, but sounded exactly the same as when it left my house.

Factory Relicing depends on the processes used, at least some of which apparently can shortcut the longer term environmental effects on the wood. Fender, in particular, seems to have this down to an engineering spec. I too dislike the purposely disfigured instruments offered for sale as faux relic jobs in terms of the cosmetics. I mean, why mess up a perfectly decent new instrument? But, the Custom Shop relic jobs really do produce improved resonant response. So, there is more than meets the eye going on. My only question on that one is if they have, for example, heat treatments to improve the instruments, why don’t they do that before they finish them?

Anyhow, my NYC has a roasted maple neck and a roasted alder body. It is sweet.

Instrument appearance is a personal pref. That’s a different strokes thing. Meanwhile, Roger generally takes care of us, regardless.

 

[Holdsg]

I swear the F-er JMJ Mustangs are relic'd by someone dragging them behind a pickup truck in the parking lot in Ensenada

 

[pickles]

@ElMon a 55-94 is on the list of basses that Work, for me. MTD 535s are not. Roscoes and Foderas are sort of borderline. Other basses that Work: Fender, MusicMan, G&L, Wal, and in certain circumstances Warwick, Zon, and Modulus.

But Sadowskys still almost always get the nod from me.

 

[Fuzzbass]

Unfortunately, refinishing instruments has a certain stigma, partly because of collector valuation, and partly because the characteristics of the instrument might seem to be at risk. They aren’t. Finishes these days are so thin that they have negligible effect on the instrument performance.

I had a 76 Alembic Series I that went back to Alembic some years back for truss rod repair. The required work resulted in a complete refinish; and when the instrument came back it looked new, but sounded exactly the same as when it left my house.

Yes, refinishing can lower the value of a collectible instrument. Often true for vintage Gibsons and Fenders (etc) -- but that's less about tone, and primarily because collectors/investors pay top dollar for instruments that are as close as possible to original.

For the record, I didn't say anything about wear and tear (real or artificial) affecting tone. I mentioned look and feel, etc, but tone isn't a consideration for me. I've heard the TimbreTech argument that vibration from playing an instrument frequently over many years changes the structure of the wood and improves tone. I've also heard from Paul Reed Smith and other luths who insist that age/vibration is irrelevant; vintage instruments sounded every bit as good back in the day as they do now. Bottom line for me: my black Sadowsky sounded great 15 years ago, and still sounds great today.

Could it sound better now, or just different? Doesn't matter to me... and it's a moot point: there is absolutely no way to objectively and scientifically measure that difference. Even if I thought it sounded better, there could be many reasons other than the instrument itself: newer/different strings, a change in my hearing, a change in my tonal taste, or maybe I've become a better bassist (better technique).

Just my opinion... but that's all any of us has. No science to back anyone up.

 

[bucephylus]

...Just my opinion... but that's all any of us has. No science to back anyone up.

That’s a rather sad point. In fact, the structure and properties of wood could pretty readily be examined. We know how to do it. and, I’m not sure that those studies don’t exist. Would take some substantial time with the lit search.

Wood has a complex composite structure. And, various heat treatments do change the behavior; which isn’t too surprising, given the structure.

My empirical point of reference is the toothpick maple neck on my 62 Jazz, which is essentially immune to humidity swings. No, that’s not exactly a controlled experiment. But, it’s also not magic.

To your point, there is an apparent absence of solid scientific study of the structure - property relations in wood. Wood being complex, such studies would likely be somewhat expensive. I mean, someone has to pay for analytical instrumentation and time. And, obviously, guitar companies are not about to invest in such studies out of the goodness of their hearts.

Still, we do know that the structure and properties of materials are directly related. And, we know that older wooden instruments have strong appeal to players. I’d love to perform studies to prove or disprove such connections. But, as they say, no bucks, no Buck Rogers.

 

[Joeykun]

 

[ElMon]

I have, but the Sadowsky won out in the end. Lakland is a little too "polite" sounding in the mix for me.Since the MM pickup on the 55-94 isn't in the place as a MMSR5, you don't get the point on the note that this pickup setup and placement normally deliver. The 55-94 seems to record better compared to how it performs live, but yor average Sadowsky eats everything for lunch,

Just as an aside, I have played a 55-94 with the preamp bypassed through a Sadowsky outboard pre and I really liked it. Never did try it on deck live with a band, though.

@ElMon a 55-94 is on the list of basses that Work, for me. MTD 535s are not. Roscoes and Foderas are sort of borderline. Other basses that Work: Fender, MusicMan, G&L, Wal, and in certain circumstances Warwick, Zon, and Modulus.

But Sadowskys still almost always get the nod from me.

Been playing some gigs with this guy:

Jimmy Paxson - Wikipedia

He has such a huge sound on-stage, in a loud mix with a screaming-loud guitar player and a keyboard player rocking B3 sounds, and I can not imagine another bass in my arsenal. VTC on, P Pickup dimed ... pure roots blues bliss.

The hi-fi, polite sound of that MTD would be absolutely buried on this gig. Every bit of 'you need to learn to master the EQ' hyperbole would just fall flat (pun intended).

Roger achieved his goal in this regard: give working stiffs a fighting chance on a loud gig. Only consideration I ever have is on that blend knob and with the VTC.