• 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!!!

#14,881
Glad to see Sklar back with Taylor... Taylor hasn't had a good record in 20 years or since Sklar was gone.. Guess they kissed and made up.
There used to be a good interview of Sklar with Mike Visceglia on his site.. dont know it its still there.
I have it in MP3 somewhere on my machine though.. if anyone wants it PM me your email and i will send you a link
 
#14,896
KJung said:
I think I know who is getting that beauty:bassist:... mid 8 pounds, ash maple, single coils, 60 position... yeah buddy!
Click to expand...

So would you guys agree that the Ash/Maple, Single Coils in 60's Spacing is the recipe for THE Sadowsky sound?

Fif so, why not 70's spacing to keep with the more traditional Fender theme. Does it change the tone that drastically?
 
#14,897
thisSNsucks said:
So would you guys agree that the Ash/Maple, Single Coils in 60's Spacing is the recipe for THE Sadowsky sound?

Fif so, why not 70's spacing to keep with the more traditional Fender theme. Does it change the tone that drastically?
Click to expand...

IMO, the 70's spacing (the only 70's spaced Sadowsky I've ever played was a few UV Metro's, only one with singles) is cool, but it is more of a tweak of the Sadowsky tone to me versus moving the Sadowsky UV into sounding like a 1977 Fender or whatever.

I find I get plenty of grind and sizzle out of my ash/maple 60's spacing (i.e., the 'typical Sadowsky ash/maple vintage/standard spec) with the singles, but get a bit more burp and meat when digging in versus the UV's with the 70's spacing.

Relatively subtle, but if you are one (like me) who likes to dig in relatively close to the bridge and favor the bridge pickup a slight amount sometimes, that spec is just magic. IMO.
 
#14,898
thisSNsucks said:
So would you guys agree that the Ash/Maple, Single Coils in 60's Spacing is the recipe for THE Sadowsky sound?
Click to expand...
IMHO, yes... at least one of "the sound(s)".

If so, why not 70's spacing to keep with the more traditional Fender theme. Does it change the tone that drastically?
Click to expand...
IMHO, yes. Considering proportional distance to that fulcrum end of the string, 1/2" or so is pretty significant with respect to amount of string movement.

IMHO/IME (and generally speaking... not specifically wrt a Sadowsky) the 60's spacing is best for a wider range of applications, unless you're specifically going for a faithful 70's tone. I'm betting that's why Fender went back to it and why Roger uses it as his standard config. That added phattness from the bridge pickup really adds a lot of mid punch to the tone. You lose a little bit of edge and aggression tho, so that's the trade-off.
 
#14,899
Vic said:
IMHO, yes... at least one of "the sound(s)".

IMHO, yes. Considering proportional distance to that fulcrum end of the string, 1/2" or so is pretty significant with respect to amount of string movement.

IMHO/IME (and generally speaking... not specifically wrt a Sadowsky) the 60's spacing is best for a wider range of applications, unless you're specifically going for a faithful 70's tone. I'm betting that's why Fender went back to it and why Roger uses it as his standard config. That added phattness from the bridge pickup really adds a lot of mid punch to the tone.
Click to expand...

+1 I guess building on my previous post and your comments above, if you really want a quite legit 70's J tone, I would not be looking at Sadowsky basses (even the UV Metro's sound more like Sadowsky basses than Fenders from the 70's). And, since you aren't going to get that pure Fender 70's thing out of a Sadowsky anyway (IMO and IME), might as well have the advantage of the fatter, wider range of voicings with the 60's pickup position, combined (if you like it bright and grindy in the 'spirit' of a 70's Fender) with that ash/maple spec.

IMO... all this stuff sounds great in its own way.
 
#14,900
KJung said:
IMO... all this stuff sounds great in its own way.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know your main thing right now is a pretty faithful 70's spec bass, but I'm currently more charmed by the 60's spaced Sadowsky as well as the pure 60's spec bass I currently have. I used to be the total opposite tho, so I totally know where you're coming from.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back