• 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!!!

#16,543
Phantasm said:
#M4242 is here, and it's already in action!

DSC_0109.jpg
Click to expand...

That candy colour looks REAL special! Congratulations.
Is that by any chance a "Reference Laboratory" cable you're using?(plug looks similar). Can't seem to locate a dealer to audition one. Thanks.
B.
 
#16,544
P. Bass said:
That candy colour looks REAL special! Congratulations.
Is that by any chance a "Reference Laboratory" cable you're using?(plug looks similar). Can't seem to locate a dealer to audition one. Thanks.
B.
Click to expand...

It's a Bayou Audio cable, so it's canare. Butch lives nearby so I went and spent a little time with him and had him make me some. The whole band has them now!
 
#16,548
I just compared my brand new UV 5 string (ash/morado) to my older MV5 #M416 (ash/maple).
Both have the same Sadowsky single coils, new strings (Sadowsky Blue Steels) and I made sure, the distance between the PUs and the strings was the same on both basses.

Experience would lead me to experience a more lively, crisper sound from the MV (being an ash/maple bass).
But the opposite is true: the UV is a bit louder and snappier in all PU positions....

Could this be due to the UV's body being bigger?
 
#16,549
I'd like some feedback from some of you experienced with both Sadowskys and Fenders. I just returned from a sound check where the stage was hollow and incredibly boomy. I actually know this particular room and I brought my Sadowsky (JJ) thinking that it would be the best of my basses for the sound of that room (and for the band I'll be playing with). I'd been using my Fender Jazz '62 reissue during rehearsals but had also previously used my Sadowsky on a live gig with these guys. Anyway, the stage sound during sound check was awful and the band leader kept asking me to EQ out some of the lower frequencies and boost some of the upper mids. I'd already dropped a significant amount of low end out of my amp and the bass was starting to sound pretty wiry. At this point the band leader/guitarist tells me that I should have brought the Fender and left my "fancy" active bass at home. I then switched to passive mode and the bass on stage was still boomy. Finally, I put my cabinet on the floor to the side of the sage and the problem was fixed - I was able to pump the bass frequencies and get a sound that I (and everyone else) liked. Now here's what I was thinking when the band leader made his suggestion: my Sadowsky has a much more controllable low end than my Fender. If the Sadowsky wasn't sitting well "in the mix" then nothing - certainly not my Fender - was going to. To me, the Sadowsky has a certain compression in the low end that the Fender doesn't and I don't expect things to get as uncontrollably boomy with the Sadowsky as I do with the Fender. Is my thinking off here? I get sick of what I see as "Fender-centric" notions that seem to be based more on ignorant perceptions than anything else but I wanted some other folks' opinions on the Sadowsky versus Fender question in this particular context.
 
#16,550
Clearly, none of your bandmates realized it's just the stage and the room causing the boom... it's not your bass... it's the amplifier placement.

bass12 said:
I'd like some feedback from some of you experienced with both Sadowskys and Fenders. I just returned from a sound check where the stage was hollow and incredibly boomy. I actually know this particular room and I brought my Sadowsky (JJ) thinking that it would be the best of my basses for the sound of that room (and for the band I'll be playing with). I'd been using my Fender Jazz '62 reissue during rehearsals but had also previously used my Sadowsky on a live gig with these guys. Anyway, the stage sound during sound check was awful and the band leader kept asking me to EQ out some of the lower frequencies and boost some of the upper mids. I'd already dropped a significant amount of low end out of my amp and the bass was starting to sound pretty wiry. At this point the band leader/guitarist tells me that I should have brought the Fender and left my "fancy" active bass at home. I then switched to passive mode and the bass on stage was still boomy. Finally, I put my cabinet on the floor to the side of the sage and the problem was fixed - I was able to pump the bass frequencies and get a sound that I (and everyone else) liked. Now here's what I was thinking when the band leader made his suggestion: my Sadowsky has a much more controllable low end than my Fender. If the Sadowsky wasn't sitting well "in the mix" then nothing - certainly not my Fender - was going to. To me, the Sadowsky has a certain compression in the low end that the Fender doesn't and I don't expect things to get as uncontrollably boomy with the Sadowsky as I do with the Fender. Is my thinking off here? I get sick of what I see as "Fender-centric" notions that seem to be based more on ignorant perceptions than anything else but I wanted some other folks' opinions on the Sadowsky versus Fender question in this particular context.
Click to expand...
 
#16,551
gillento said:
I just compared my brand new UV 5 string (ash/morado) to my older MV5 #M416 (ash/maple).
Both have the same Sadowsky single coils, new strings (Sadowsky Blue Steels) and I made sure, the distance between the PUs and the strings was the same on both basses.

Experience would lead me to experience a more lively, crisper sound from the MV (being an ash/maple bass).
But the opposite is true: the UV is a bit louder and snappier in all PU positions....

Could this be due to the UV's body being bigger?
Click to expand...

It is my experience/opinion that tone variance from fingerboard woods is pretty modest compared to the many other factors. Your experience could be simply from a different batch of pickups, the density variance in the body or anything else including the fingerboard. Could it be the fb? Yes. Is it the obvious reason? IMO, no. Sometimes you have to play the "no two basses are the same" card.
 
#16,554
DrSmaggs said:
Clearly, none of your bandmates realized it's just the stage and the room causing the boom... it's not your bass... it's the amplifier placement.
Click to expand...
+1

bass12,
A room like that is no place to make tonal judgments on what any given bass can or can't do, and boom problems like that are pretty much never the rig itself or the bass, but rig placement and isolation from the stage (which should always be achieved in these cases if at all possible). VERY common issue. I'm surprised those other folks actually thought it was the bass.
 
#16,555
bass12 said:
I'd like some feedback from some of you experienced with both Sadowskys and Fenders. I just returned from a sound check where the stage was hollow and incredibly boomy. I actually know this particular room and I brought my Sadowsky (JJ) thinking that it would be the best of my basses for the sound of that room (and for the band I'll be playing with). I'd been using my Fender Jazz '62 reissue during rehearsals but had also previously used my Sadowsky on a live gig with these guys. Anyway, the stage sound during sound check was awful and the band leader kept asking me to EQ out some of the lower frequencies and boost some of the upper mids. I'd already dropped a significant amount of low end out of my amp and the bass was starting to sound pretty wiry. At this point the band leader/guitarist tells me that I should have brought the Fender and left my "fancy" active bass at home. I then switched to passive mode and the bass on stage was still boomy. Finally, I put my cabinet on the floor to the side of the sage and the problem was fixed - I was able to pump the bass frequencies and get a sound that I (and everyone else) liked. Now here's what I was thinking when the band leader made his suggestion: my Sadowsky has a much more controllable low end than my Fender. If the Sadowsky wasn't sitting well "in the mix" then nothing - certainly not my Fender - was going to. To me, the Sadowsky has a certain compression in the low end that the Fender doesn't and I don't expect things to get as uncontrollably boomy with the Sadowsky as I do with the Fender. Is my thinking off here? I get sick of what I see as "Fender-centric" notions that seem to be based more on ignorant perceptions than anything else but I wanted some other folks' opinions on the Sadowsky versus Fender question in this particular context.
Click to expand...

I would be amazed if you had better results with the Fender. Perhaps may favorite attribute of Sadowsky, among many, is how focused the low end can be. If a Sadowsky gets boomy/muddy it AIN'T the bass!!!
 
#16,556
bass12 said:
At this point the band leader/guitarist tells me that I should have brought the Fender and left my "fancy" active bass at home.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because you're not going to have to use any sort of active EQ to fix that low end problem.

Spend the $70 on a Boss Bass EQ for times that you have to deal with this guy. A few ticks down at 120hz usually works for me and silences the people who were beat down by low frequencies as teenagers.
 
#16,557
DrSmaggs said:
Clearly, none of your bandmates realized it's just the stage and the room causing the boom... it's not your bass... it's the amplifier placement.
Click to expand...

+1 And the mechanical coupling with the wooden stage was the main culprit. This is a situation where those Auralex GRAMMA pads can often help a lot.
 
#16,558
Phantasm said:
Yeah, because you're not going to have to use any sort of active EQ to fix that low end problem.

Spend the $70 on a Boss Bass EQ for times that you have to deal with this guy. A few ticks down at 120hz usually works for me and silences the people who were beat down by low frequencies as teenagers.
Click to expand...
I still think the proper solution was the one taken... move the rig. The boom was not coming from the bass or the amp, it was an amp placement problem in the room. You suck the lows out of the actual signal, then you also thin out the sound going to the board, which is also bad... assuming there was a PA. If there wasn't a PA, then this might be helpful, but I still feel the best solution was taken, which eliminated the proximity resonance issue so a more normal amp voicing could be used.

IMHO
 
#16,559
tombowlus said:
+1 And the mechanical coupling with the wooden stage was the main culprit. This is a situation where those Auralex GRAMMA pads can often help a lot.
Click to expand...
Actually, it can be both the stage and a nearby wall. I JUST had this problem a couple weeks ago, and I was using the gramma. I had to move my amp about 24" from the wall and angle it a bit and the problem was gone.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back