• 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!!!

#17,761
BluesyCat said:
I am torn between these for the future reverse PJ 5er:
Quilt Maple on Ash/Braz neck,
Quilt Maple on Alder/Braz neck
Alder/Braz neck

This bass will be specific to the blues stuff.

:help: Steer me in the right direction guys and gals....
Click to expand...
Well, as others have said, if you want a reverse, you're looking at an NYC as your only option from your list. I also agree it's a lot more traditional for a vintage tone to use alder/braz, and really, no top.

However, you're breaking from tradition in a couple important ways... a PJ is more than a P, and not the same as a J... it's blended tone is a lot more modern sounding than anything you'd typically hear on those older recordings. Also, if you go reverse P, then it won't even truly sound like a P, either. Not a night/day diff, but it is noticeable.

So it seems like you're not necessarily that concerned with being a purist tonally, but rather, just finding something that sounds good to you, so I would suggest you keep yer options open.

Here's what happened to me...

I had a beautiful NYC alder/braz PJ5 (tho not reverse) that I specifically got for more traditional/classic stuff, and figured it'd be my main bass in the blues band. It was a fantastic bass, but just didn't "have it" for me. So I sold it and evaluated a straight up ash/maple NYC PJ5. Bam. My sound was there. I decided I wanted a different finish, however, so I was about to place an order when my Metro popped up, and it happened to be in my weight class. The rest of course is history.

So since you've got time while you save your money, I suggest you go back to NAMM in January and try some things out and see what speaks to you most. Maybe see about bringing a Cafe Walter and an MP3 player with some classic tunes to play along with.
 
#17,762
I hear ya Vic. What I would like to obtain is not achievable with what I have now. I was under the impression that the reverse pj is going to stand out with a bigger, solid, tight low end. Doesn't have to be that classic tone, just needs to stand out and be distinctive in the recording and not get lost in my guitarists playing. Big fat tight B is what I need/desire.

I shall wait and save the cash I suppose unless a good experienced one pops up.
 
#17,763
BluesyCat said:
I hear ya Vic. What I would like to obtain is not achievable with what I have now. I was under the impression that the reverse pj is going to stand out with a bigger, solid, tight low end. Doesn't have to be that classic tone, just needs to stand out and be distinctive in the recording and not get lost in my guitarists playing. Big fat tight B is what I need/desire.

I shall wait and save the cash I suppose unless a good experienced one pops up.
Click to expand...
Right, so actually, either a normal or a reverse PJ will get you the kinds of diffs you're looking for compared to your existing J, and IMHO, that'll also be true to a varying degree pretty much regardless of which wood combo you select.

So you're looking at the right thing... just need to see which woods work best for ya.
 
#17,764
Just wanted to chim in that, IME (played 2 reverse PJ NYC PJ5's, owned/gigged an ash/maple PJ5 Metro and two NYC PJ5's in standard config, including the one I own/gig now) the reverse P option does NOT equal a 'tighter' B string. IMO at least. My PJ5 has an incredible B string with excellent pitch focus, especially with both pickups blended. The thing I DID notice right away with the reverse PJ5 config is that to me the G string sounded a little fuller-sounding. Again, a VERY small difference. And the reverse P was every bit as amazing sounding as the standard configuration, just less like a pbass on that front pickup.
 
#17,765
ElMon said:
Just wanted to chim in that, IME (played 2 reverse PJ NYC PJ5's, owned/gigged an ash/maple PJ5 Metro and two NYC PJ5's in standard config, including the one I own/gig now) the reverse P option does NOT equal a 'tighter' B string. IMO at least. My PJ5 has an incredible B string with excellent pitch focus, especially with both pickups blended. The thing I DID notice right away with the reverse PJ5 config is that to me the G string sounded a little fuller-sounding. Again, a VERY small difference. And the reverse P was every bit as amazing sounding as the standard configuration, just less like a pbass on that front pickup.
Click to expand...
Just to make sure at least my position is clear, I (also) would never suggest you can't have a B string with excellent pitch and focus without going reverse on a P. My Metro of course is straight up and the B string is absolutely great on it. FWIW.

However, I do find it interesting that you didn't notice a reduction in the big roundness of the low end when moving that pickup a good amount closer to the bridge. I guess I'd just ask, since you don't really say here, what did you notice about the lower strings that changed? Anything?

I agree, however, it's not gonna' be a huge night/day thing between them.

I think we all agree on the effects on the higher strings.
 
#17,766
ElMon said:
Just wanted to chim in that, IME (played 2 reverse PJ NYC PJ5's, owned/gigged an ash/maple PJ5 Metro and two NYC PJ5's in standard config, including the one I own/gig now) the reverse P option does NOT equal a 'tighter' B string. IMO at least. My PJ5 has an incredible B string with excellent pitch focus, especially with both pickups blended. The thing I DID notice right away with the reverse PJ5 config is that to me the G string sounded a little fuller-sounding. Again, a VERY small difference. And the reverse P was every bit as amazing sounding as the standard configuration, just less like a pbass on that front pickup.
Click to expand...

I would have to politely take exception to this post. Having owned a Sadowsky with the universal routing and done experiments on the PU placement, I contend that the reversing of the P pickup absolutely does significantly alter the tone and response of the B string.

Of course we all have different ears, but I had about as close a control environment as you can get. Same bass, same strings, same amp, same cabs, same settings, same player.

In the standard config, the B (and E as well but to a lesser degree) produced a puffier, fuller, more rounded note. The attack less crisp with almost a touch of swell to it. The overall "bass" sensation was actually a bit stronger. With the PUs reversed, the B notes were "quicker" and noticeably more articulate. The overall bass sensation was less, but the notes more pronounced and clear.

The upper strings experience the opposite but to a lesser degree. They are a bit more rounded and less shrill with a bit better low end character.

I found the tone and the tone balance better in the reversed position on that bass.

I would not characterize the differences as overwhelming, but I would argue that they are far more than slight. You are, after all, changing the position of the PUs but about an inch.

Either, the bass was still very much a Sadowsky. And oddly enough, in passive mode with the P pickup soloed was VERY P-bass like in nature despite the reversed configuration. Although, typically I mostly ignore the B string in passive mode. If I wanted the old-school P bass four-banger vibe, it got it.
 
#17,767
Vic said:
Just to make sure at least my position is clear, I (also) would never suggest you can't have a B string with excellent pitch and focus without going reverse on a P. My Metro of course is straight up and the B string is absolutely great on it. FWIW.

However, I do find it interesting that you didn't notice a reduction in the big roundness of the low end when moving that pickup a good amount closer to the bridge. I guess I'd just ask, since you don't really say here, what did you notice about the lower strings that changed? Anything?

I agree, however, it's not gonna' be a huge night/day thing between them.

I think we all agree on the effects on the higher strings.
Click to expand...

Chasarms said:
I would have to politely take exception to this post. Having owned a Sadowsky with the universal routing and done experiments on the PU placement, I contend that the reversing of the P pickup absolutely does significantly alter the tone and response of the B string.

Of course we all have different ears, but I had about as close a control environment as you can get. Same bass, same strings, same amp, same cabs, same settings, same player.

In the standard config, the B (and E as well but to a lesser degree) produced a puffier, fuller, more rounded note. The attack less crisp with almost a touch of swell to it. The overall "bass" sensation was actually a bit stronger. With the PUs reversed, the B notes were "quicker" and noticeably more articulate. The overall bass sensation was less, but the notes more pronounced and clear.

The upper strings experience the opposite but to a lesser degree. They are a bit more rounded and less shrill with a bit better low end character.

I found the tone and the tone balance better in the reversed position on that bass.

I would not characterize the differences as overwhelming, but I would argue that they are far more than slight. You are, after all, changing the position of the PUs but about an inch.

Either, the bass was still very much a Sadowsky. And oddly enough, in passive mode with the P pickup soloed was VERY P-bass like in nature despite the reversed configuration. Although, typically I mostly ignore the B string in passive mode. If I wanted the old-school P bass four-banger vibe, it got it.
Click to expand...

Few things....

My controls were the same, same rig, same player, same strings, etc....

I DID notice a difference in the B string, I just wouldn't agree with the assessment that the reverse mode had a 'tighter' B string. Of course, to ME the definition of 'tighter' would mean a clearer pitch on the last 4 frets of the Bstring. Again, to me there was NO difference in this regard. Equally awesome B strings on both.

Now, if you simply mean that the reverse P pickup had less lowend bloom and spread to the sound, then I DEFINITELY agree with this assessment. If that translates to a 'tighter' sound to YOU, then we are in agreement. I just happen to prefer the fuller sound on the B and E string. I should also note that this difference was more noticeable when comparing both configurations with the neck pickup only. When you factor in the bridge pickup, to me the B/E string was closer in sound and I notice more of a difference in the D/G string response.

The only experience I DON"T have with the reverse config is gigging it and hearing if there are, if any, differences in how they sit in a mix. As it is, and after having 3 JJ-model Sadowskys and 2 PJ5s on stage with my main band, the standard config PJ5 in alder/rw sits in the mix just PERFECTLY like all Sadowsky basses do IME, but with more of a lowmid kick than the JJ models have. Incredibly tight and defined B string, and completely even-sounding everywhere on the neck.
 
#17,768
Lots of talk about reverse P's vs standard. I would never choose NOT to buy a PJ5 because it doesn't come in a reverse P option.

I've owned two of each now (which is probably more than most guys here...) and actually prefer the standard P. The B string is plenty full with the standard P set-up - it sounds very authentic and meaty. Plus it feels slightly more natural for my thumb placement.

They're both great instruments - but if I were ordering new and given the choice, I'd choose the standard P on a PJ5.
 
#17,769
Joelc73 said:
Lots of talk about reverse P's vs standard. I would never choose NOT to buy a PJ5 because it doesn't come in a reverse P option.

I've owned two of each now (which is probably more than most guys here...) and actually prefer the standard P. The B string is plenty full with the standard P set-up - it sounds very authentic and meaty. Plus it feels slightly more natural for my thumb placement.

They're both great instruments - but if I were ordering new and given the choice, I'd choose the standard P on a PJ5.
Click to expand...

Same here, though if the difference in sound was THAT noticealbe to someone, they could always go the universal route and have the best of both worlds!!! I imagine having an alder/rw in standard config and an ash/maple in reverse option would cover a LOT of sonic ground. Not going to even consider it though lest my Sadowsky-GAS flares up again. Bad enough that I know that Roger and Co are making a 'Musicman-on-Steroids'. Might have to just sell my computer, disable my talkbass account, and content myself with what I have!!!
 
#17,770
ElMon said:
. . . Of course, to ME the definition of 'tighter' would mean a clearer pitch on the last 4 frets of the Bstring. . . .
Click to expand...

My experience was that the the reversed position on the PJ I had was, along with other things, almost EXACTLY this. The bass produced a "clearer pitch" in the reversed position.

But, as always, experiences and about 10,000 other control factors always come into play. Where we do agree, is that the PJ5 is a great bass either way.
 
#17,771
ElMon said:
I imagine having an alder/rw in standard config and an ash/maple in reverse option would cover a LOT of sonic ground.
Click to expand...

+1, although lately, I am thinking that maybe just a straight-up alder/rw Sadowsky P-5, along with my ash/ebony (currently reverse) P/J-5 might be the way to go. :bassist: :bassist: :bassist: :cool:

I'll just add that I really like what the reverse P does with the ebony board on the D and G strings. :cool:
 
#17,773
Joelc73 said:
Lots of talk about reverse P's vs standard. I would never choose NOT to buy a PJ5 because it doesn't come in a reverse P option.

I've owned two of each now (which is probably more than most guys here...) and actually prefer the standard P. The B string is plenty full with the standard P set-up - it sounds very authentic and meaty. Plus it feels slightly more natural for my thumb placement.

They're both great instruments - but if I were ordering new and given the choice, I'd choose the standard P on a PJ5.
Click to expand...
I have yet to spend any real quality time with a reverse P, so take that into consideration when I say I think I'd generally feel the same way. Yeah, I know, easy to say when that's what I have, but I just so dig everything about the way that bass sounds, and I really don't feel the need to fatten up the D and G strings. That might be because I don't slap much, but FWIW, I guess.

I think we all agree tho, the reverse P is not categorically "better", so it's not at all like that's the new thing we all need to be doing now, so for those folks reading these posts and seeing the ones from folks who do have enthusiastic reverse prefs, keep that in mind.
 
#17,776
Vic said:
I have yet to spend any real quality time with a reverse P, so take that into consideration when I say I think I'd generally feel the same way. Yeah, I know, easy to say when that's what I have, but I just so dig everything about the way that bass sounds, and I really don't feel the need to fatten up the D and G strings. That might be because I don't slap much, but FWIW, I guess.

I think we all agree tho, the reverse P is not categorically "better", so it's not at all like that's the new thing we all need to be doing now, so for those folks reading these posts and seeing the ones from folks who do have enthusiastic reverse prefs, keep that in mind.
Click to expand...

bikeplate said:
HI

I think this whole subject is just splitting hairs. My Metro PJ5 kills! Ive never gigged a reverse version but both my pjs(4 and 5) sound huge! Highly recommended

Rob
Click to expand...

+1. I guess if you had picked up a standard PJ5 and found that the B string had too much bloom, OR thought that the pitch clarity left something to be desired (again I couldn't disagree with this more), the reverse option might just be right up your alley. IME, the PJ5's B string has as much clarity as any of the Modulus/MTD/Smith's that I"ve owned prior. And to ME the slap tone of both pickups blended is a killer, more modern sound.

I COMPLETELY understand however that what seems like a small nuance can make a HUGE difference to the player if not the audience, and that matters just as much. Like how all the other hi-end basses I"ve owned were all amazing instruments that I was able to get 'my sound' on and yet were unable to get that 'Sadowsky Sound'. A small yet NAGGING problem that I, for the last time I PROMISE, have remedied!!!
 
#17,777
@reverse/normal P...

One other thing is, my opinion would probably change depending on woods. For example, with my ash/maple combo, I just get a great sound for my prefs, style, and gear. However, if it were an alder/rosewood (actual rosewood, not morado), I could see myself slightly preferring reverse. IMHO, you get a lot more of a bigger warm low end with alder/rosewood and I could see the reverse P working slightly better for ME in that case.
 
#17,780
HI

Dont wanna speak for RS, but I still believe U can order an NYC with a solid body. Not sure if its an upcharge or not. If you follow the instock page on the site, occasionally one is available with a solid body. Frankly, Im thinking about a solid ash body on my WL5 order that im throwing around in my head. I think Kjungs NYC is solid, the orange one. Ive had quite a few solid NYC's and all metros are solid bodies

Rob
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back