• 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.

Dr DIMENTO'S ONGOING "J" STYLE PUP EXPERIMENT

#41
Yep, I've ran across a number of people that liked them. Different strings, bass, rigging, ears, whatever. As demonstrated by the Marcus Millers, even the same model of pups can sound different through the same rigging to the same person. I'd have to go back to see which bass I stuck them in but one bass in particular it seems no pup excells in but it's taken time to come to that realization. But even in that bass the general characteristics of a pup don't change, they're just mixed different.

At best, any review is just a piece of a puzzle. But my findings weren't far removed the bassplayer shootout reveiw.
 
#43
Peter Weil said:
Any idea when you're going to review the Bill Lawrence J45's?

Pete
Click to expand...

I don't have a set of Lawrence J45's. Dharmabass just brought those up when I ran the Ken Smith J45's cause they're both 9 pole pups and so probably the same bobbins if nothing else. Seems the Lawrence are singles though and the Smiths are definitely humbuckers. Neither of these pups show up very often. So my guess is, it could be a long time coming.
 
#44
FENDER MIJ's (from '95 Japanese '62 re-issue fretless)

Two wire (plastic coated) singles with tapered bi-poles and elevated A & D poles.

Loaded into an acoustically midrange bass. Output about 15% better than average. Typical single coil hum. Average sensitivity to attack and less finger transfer than usual - none of consequence.

Mid heavy with barely sufficient low end for most tones played to tunes. Even struck me as lacking in low mids and I'm not a low end heavy guy. The top end wasn't really an issue and just seemed an extension of the midrange. I upped the treble on a couple occassions to increase bite and cut it a bit for Reggae but basically left it untouched. Bottom end could be beefed up some but that cut into the mid tone too much and getting the mids where I preferred would knock out the low end way to much. A compromise resulted in tone used for many tunes that was very similar to the Fender Marcus Miller's I'm accustomed to but a shade or two darker. Actually a bit appealing. To give some idea ettings for that tone were Vol channel II (bridge pup) 2 1/2, B cut 4 1/8 (-5 = full cut), M cut 2 1/2, T cut 4; Vol I (neck pup) 3/4, B cut 4 1/2, T cut 4.

Tone noticeably J, warm, and Fenderish. No variations in sound noted but the tone the pups put out was fairly adjustable to various music styles. Apparent rawness with a bit of bulge on the E string but actually a tad more on the A. Some growl but nothing to write home about. Aside from the low end, the other aspect that stood out was the clarity. Fairly clear, focused, and defined tone that was reminescent of the Ken Smith stacked HB's. Compared to the MM's which are more fuzzy, warmer, good low end, and definetly more raw.

Volume, sensitivity, clarity and cut fairly even across the board as a rule but I did notice the E lacking volume in open spaces at times and A & D strings a tad stronger at times. The A & D didn't pose a problem but the E did. Another thing I noticed was a lack of sustain on the E string on a couple of occassions.

I'd estimate the pups played quite passably to 50%, passably to another 20%, with the reminder being very marginal with the mid heaviness and lack of low end a concern. Almost got a useable Reggae tone but just not enough bass to suit my taste.

I'd also loaded these in another mid range bass intially but there was too much midrange and it easily got boomie. I also couldn't use the combine channel (mixes both channels) on the amp cause it got too boomie and virtually removed the low end. I also adjusted the pups on the E side a bit with no change. Not the best way to go about it with elevated center poles but I wasn't about to jack with string height.
 
#45
FENDER MIA's (from 2001 MIA jazz)

Passive 2 wire (plastic coated) singles with windings wrapped in blue tape

Loaded into an acoustically midrange bass. Output about average or maybe a bit less. Typical single coil hum. Sensitivity average or less. Finger transfer not an issue.

Sounded like Fenders with a moderately dark low mid/low end tone - but not fat bottomed. Very likeable and similar to the Marcus Miller's -just darker, less flexibility, and less edge. But lacking somewhere in mids for some tunes, mid to upper mid I'd guess. If I got the mids about where I wanted the bottom end thinned too much and visa versa. Also had some problems with it getting boomie at times. Useable top end that didn't get in the way. Could go from a fairly defined tone to shades of gray with a noticeable amount of rawness but not much beyond that. So could get some variation in tone that worked but not a different sound per se'. Definetly easier pups to darken up for a tone (as for Reggae) than brighten up. Some bulge on E and A strings depending on setting and it seemed a bit less than average amount of growl for a Fender J pup.

Volume, sensitivity, clarity and cut fairly even across the board for tones that worked. Also noticed marginal sustain on the E string (but not to the degree of the MIJ's) as well some brevity of tone in general on some tunes where a clearer tone was used.

I'd estimate the pups played quite passably to 70%, passably to another 15%, and not all to about 15%. Oddly, the pups seemed particularly lacking to Skynyrd tunes.

I also loaded these into an acoustically bright bass and they were just too boomie or too thin.
 
#46
SD ANTIQUITY II's (acoustically bright bass)

Passive 2 wire singles

Loaded into an acoustically bright bass (read about the heavy low-end so seemed appropriate). Output about average, maybe a little less if anything (with amp channels reversed it was average or better). Typical hum killed by touching strings. Sensitivity noticeably below average. No finger/pic transfer issues.

Soft, distinctly dark, mid range, J tone. Luke warm with a fuzz to the tone that is particularly common with this bass. Bass marginal on some tunes but adequate by and large. More of an upper mid range than a top end. Not clear, punchy pups but pups that struck me as soft Jazz. Punch could be had but required some serious digging in.

No variations in sound and not much variety in tone. [after the fact insert: by splitting amp channels and cutting the tweeter off, a P-like tone with focus (clarity), buzz, some punch, and some rawness was obtained]. Midrange and treble adjustments didn't make much difference. Bass easily became boomie or too much air with the bridge pup running through the 3 band channel and neck through the 2 band so swapped them and it was fine. E side of the pups had been dropped some due to distortion with amp settings as they previously were. Some growl but on the low side. Distinctly passive pups but no rawness to them per se'. Not a vintage tone.

Regardless, the tone the pups put out was appealing and worked at least passably or better to all tunes. They didn't strike me as excelling with any particular style. I would probably be more impressed with the pups if I hadn't already ran across something similar. Definetly some of the more likeable pups I've ran.

Volume, sensitivity, clarity, and cut even across the board. VERY controlled set of pups. They didn't sound like typical Barts but they acted very much like them. No solo tones noted.

Definetly some variation from some of the reviews I've read on these pups - whether it's the bass, rigging, my left ear (on the fritz as of late), or what - don't know. Will try them with another bass and rigging but would be suprised at any significant change.

Addendum: hearings pretty much back to normal and I do notice more bass (low frequency hearing is first to go) but I'll have to stick them in another bass to really tell how relative it is.
 
#47
luknfur said:
I don't have a set of Lawrence J45's. Dharmabass just brought those up when I ran the Ken Smith J45's cause they're both 9 pole pups and so probably the same bobbins if nothing else. Seems the Lawrence are singles though and the Smiths are definitely humbuckers.
Click to expand...

The Bill Lawrence J-45s are humbuckers. I should know, I've got a horde of them.
 
#49
SD ANTIQUITY II's (acoustically midrange bass)

Amps channels reversed (Neck pup > 3 band channel/bridge > 2 band)

Anytime I get something considerably different from a pup than what I hear from reliable sources, I start looking for a reason.

A bit much to throw into one review so I split them up. And although the general characterisitics of the pups were consistent (relative to the application that is) and both situations worked well to tunes, there were different sounds between the two setups - enough to have been different pups. And even though it may not sound like it, I think this is close enough to what I've heard about these pups from others to have put it to rest in my mind.

I constantly found myself comparing these to the Marcus Millers so that's how I wrote it up - so reading the first MM review may help to make some sense if it doesn't on it's own.

Put the pups in an acoustically midrange bass (same one I play the Fender Marcus Millers in) with same amp and the pups struck me as an SD version of the Marcus Millers. Some tones are so close to the MM's for the same tune, I doubt I could tell the difference. In fact, these SD's may actually sound closer to the first set of MM's than do the second set of MM's I have.

I haven't played the SD's nearly as much but they don't seem to have the flexibility or degree of color the MM's have (1st set). Fewer tonal variations with tone adjustments not making that much difference. Tone variations were primarily a result of amp switching by turning the tweeter off/on and/or combining or seperating the amp channels. Many more tunes I just couldn't quite dial in the tone with the SD's.

There was some crunch, growl, bulge, and rawness to the SD's but to a lessor degree than the MMs. The SD's also didn't seem to have the harmonics/overtones present in the MM's - on roughly 20% of the tunes sounding thin (too focused/transparent) with the tweeter off and amp channels seperate but not clear enough with the tweeter on or amp channels combined. Bass was plenty adequate with the SD's but seemed to me to be maybe equal but probably less than the MMs (seemed low end in the SD's covered a broader frequency range but didn't go as low). The SD's did seem to have a bit more output and less sustain. Sustain is normally associated with the bass itself but I've noticed differences with different pups with all else equal. May be due to different amp setting's but I go by the tone that works for the tune.

This may not sound very complimentary or like much of an improvement over the intial run but these are really pretty decent pups. If fact that P tone from the first run has convinced me to hang onto these pups for the time being for that tone alone. Beats any tone I've gotten from any P pups I've had so far and is one aspect of these pups that has an edge on a similar tone in the MM's.

Also, if it wasn't apparent by reading this stuff, the same set of pups can sound considerably different (while retaining their general characteristics) depending on the bass they're in, how they're ran, what they're ran through, and what they're played to/accompanying.
 
#50
LINDY FRALIN J's (2% underwound/plain enamel wire)

2 wire passive singles

SYNOPSIS:

These were very similar to SD Antiquity II's but with a deeper, punchier, more focused bottom. Output better than average. Sensivity to attack average. Finger/pic transfer not a problem in general. Typical hum killed by touching strings. Not a broad range of useable tones available. Basically a moderately dark low mid (fat bulging E & A strings, punch) or mid midrange (ample growl, crunch, some crispness without being too bright) J tone for most of the tunes. They did have good balanced P tone. Volume, sensitivity, tone, clarity, and cut were fairly even across the board on some useable settings while on others the D & G strings were noticeably less pronounced. They worked well with a flat pick. The main issue is useable tones only worked to about half the tunes.


WHOLE ENCHILADA

Info provided by previous owner: Custom set to my specs wound with same type of wire (deep purple color plain enamel) used from the mid-late 60's Fender Jazz Bass pickups. 2% underwind is enough to affect tone but not output. These pickups,to my ear,sound a lot like an early 70's Jazz Bass tone but with a"smidge"more bass and treble.

Loaded into an acoustically midrange bass. Output better than average. Sensivity to attack about average overall, sometimes more sometimes less depending on setting. Finger/pic transfer was a problem on some tunes but not in general. When it was an issue, it had more to do with the mix in the tune rather than it being a slow or open tune as is typical. Typical hum killed by touching strings.

I've only had a single other Fralin (not a set) but the characteristics of this pup were similar to it. Something in between a Fender and Duncan. More air than I'd like on a number of tunes - difficult to get the clarity or overtones desired. Not a broad range of useable tones available. Basically a moderately dark low mid or growly mid midrange J tone for most the tunes. They did have good balanced P tone that I found more to my liking than from the Antiquity II's. Within the range of useable tones the pups were responsive to amp/technique/position adjustments. On the darker J setting I frequently experienced a softness that I couldn't decide if I liked or not and along with it came what struck me as a prematurely rounded top end - I'd have liked more bite and/or perhaps a more extended top end.

That said there were some useable quality tones: fat bulging E & A strings, punch (darker setting), ample growl, crunch, some crispness without being too bright (midrange setting). This is more of what I expected from the SD Antiquity II's and they are very similar but with a deeper, punchier, more focused bottom. The main issue is useable tones only worked to about half the tunes - although I could see how someone else may find a much higher percentage acceptable. I could get the E & A string tone or the D & G string but not both. The output and tone was sufficient to use the bridge alone. The neck was too boomie and lacked definition. Tonewise, the neck pup sounded like the bridge moved up to the neck to me.

The pups did have some rawness to them but they could also sound quite refined and at times struck me as "too perfect," for lack of better phrasing. Sustain was not an issue and they worked well with a flat pick.

Volume, sensitivity, tone, clarity, and cut were fairly even across the board on some useable settings while on others the D & G strings were noticeably less pronounced (too much air thing). I went to considerable length to attempt to resolve air issue but nothing worked. Even dropped the pups lower than I normally would cause someone (was thinking it was Fralin) said they believed the lower the pups the better the sound - which I haven't found to be the case once they're clear of distortion.

Basically, I liked these pups better than the Antiquities but they didn't play well to nearly as many tunes as the Duncans did. I'll try them in a different bass and check for change.
 
#51
KEN SMITH HB J's (80's/90's model EMG type housing)

passive 4 wire HB's w/ground (stacked, side-side, split?)
both pups are longs

Loaded into an acoustically midrange bass. Output about average. No hum. Above average sensitivity to attack. No finger transfer of consequence. Sustain average or better.

Fairly typical full HB J tone. Big bottom but fairly even frequency distribution overall. Useable top end that was not too bright or harsh as adjusted but could be so. These pups have what I can only imagine as slap burns so someone either played or practiced with these extensively to slap. Noticeable tubular tone. A bit airy with tendency to get boomie. Could cut definition on the low end by boosting low frequency or cutting higher frequencies for something along the lines of Reggae. Could get the big bottom yet have mid and top end cut. And could tighten up the low end by cutting low frequencies and boosting mids and top to clear up the bottom. Some fairly extreme variations in controls settings yet they were intuitive and not hard to figure out to roughly 66% of the tunes with the remainder never quite getting the definition I'd have liked. Regardless they responded much better to variations in controls than what I recall from the late model KS J45's. Responded fairly well to variations in technique and hand position.

The pups were sometimes fairly smooth and noticeably refined; sometimes on the boomie side, lacking definition, with too much air; sometimes fat and punchy. Pretty consistent about having a big sound. Even when they were thinned down there was a richness about the tone. Some rawness along the lines of a bit of crunch, little growl, some bulge, with the most pronounced characteristic being some serious rounded punch that could be varied to the degree desired through attack and sufficient to require either good technique or a compressor to keep it under control.

Volume, sensitivity, tone, clarity, and cut even across the board for a given setting. Pups played acceptably or better to about 70% of the tunes with the remainder being marginal due to lack of definition on some tunes. They didn't trash any songs by any means. This is first run on these pups so could be a matter of settings on the tunes lacking but I gave them a good shot. Seem to work well with what little I used a flatpick. No solo tones noted.

In all, these are a reasonably versatile set of pups with sufficient output and decent tone depending on what you're looking for.

FLUFF:

These pups had to have been made by EMG. If not for the Ken Smith on the face, you couldn't tell these from an L-J5 aside from the wiring scheme. Tone is similar to an active EMG J set but in a passive stacked HB form and exhibit associated characteristics of as much - boomie lack of definition at times. For any player who likes active EMG J's but would like an active passive set up with series/parallel that is quiet, these may fit the bill. Plus you could split the coils if desired. It's been a while since I've played the EMG J set but I'll observe for a comparison next time I do. .

I'm guessing the late model J45's were designed to go with a Ken Smith preamp which I assume would provide a better handle in terms of control than I was able to obtain with them. It's my understanding the J45's were factory wired in series because parallel output was viewed as insufficient. These pups were wired in the typical HB manner permitting common wiring options so I'm guessing they were either not intended to be used with a preamp or were designed with thoughts of either/or. Output on these seem at least equal to or better than typical J singles. The tubular fat tone of these pups on some settings was similar to that of the KS J45's in my recollection .
 
#52
DUNCAN CLASSIC STACK J's (STK-J1n - short and STKJ1-b - long)

passive 4 wire/ground HB exposed bi-poles

Loaded into an acoustically midrange bass. Output about average. Sensitivity to attack above average, somtimes more sometimes less depending on settings. Average sustain. No hum. No finger/pic transfer of consequence.

Very much a vintage Fender single coil J tone - by far the best I've heard from a pair of HB's (and 90% of the J singles). No small feat due to inherent variation in design. At some settings I doubt I could tell the difference solo from my Marcus Millers and definetly not played to most tunes at a given setting. Perhaps not the replacement for a purist but very passable and no issue with hum and having to keep volumes maxed. They lack the degree of transparency and flexibility but pretty decent. Adequate bottom, fairly flexible midrange, top end that's easily controlled.

Fairly responsive to controls, technique, and hand postioning. Didn't require a lot of adjustment with changes in style and subtle changes in controls were apparent in bass, mid, and treble ranges.

Volume, sensitivity, tone, clarity, and cut fairly even across the board with minor variations of minimal consequence. Biggest issue for me was not getting the bite I'd like on the top without losing the tone on the bottom end. Basically just a single coil J sound out of these pups with variations thereof. Not much apparent rawness to the pups but they did have a pronounced punch and bulge on the bottom end with clarity to the point of some grind. Clarity about average for settings overall but the pups tended to have a punch that cut through at most fequencies. Some mild crunch and growl at the settings I ran.

Worked to all tunes acceptably and better than most pups to roughly 80% of the tunes. No solo tones noted. Worked well with flat pick what little I used it. Bridge pup worked fine alone. Neck pup tended to be boomie, thin, and soft in tone but would probably work to tunes requiring a soft, dark, background tone.

First run on these pups and I was pleasantly suprised from first fire. Not sure how my impression may change in the future but great start.
 
#53
Duncan Active Jazz (JB-3aSB - Steve Bailey Fretless)

3 wire Active Jazz 4/5 string (singles I assume)

Loaded into an acoustically midrange FRETTED bass. Output about average (when ran through the PASSIVE input on the amp). Dead quiet except with significant treble boost. Sensitivity deceptively above average. No finger/pic transfer of consequence - although apparent with a pic and on some settings fingerstyle. Seemed to work well with a flat pick what little I used it. Sustain on the low side of average.

No much rawness, typical actives in that sense. Some punch, bit of crunch and bulge, not much growl.

Dark toned low end pups with decent midrange and soft top. A pleasant useable dark - not pitch black like Bart M34C's. Soft tones in general. Refined smooth tone but no better than average in clarity. Ran bass cut two steps to keep them from being boomie. Nice low mid - mid mid J tone. The soft top is nice for the many tunes I often have to climb up the neck or alter finger angle to keep the G or G and D strings from being too bright.

The pups could also be brightened up considerably to a mid mid - upper midrange parallel-like J tone by using the treble boost switching on the amp. Some noise as a result. I read a review on these used with the Bailey preamp and the guy mentioned they exhibited some noise with treble boost. Normally such switching pretty much trashes the low end but with these pups it effectively thinned the bottom out - very useful for some tunes.

Since the pups are soft in nature and were fairly dark as played to many tunes, it took a while to realize how sensitive to attack the pups actually were. Sensitivity could be decieving cause the pups didn't seem that responsive but a thud type punch invariably resulted from an inadvertant heavy attack. Also noticed a slight decrease in low end volume in a few tunes with bass tone cut (primarily E string), which it always was except for Reggae.

Pups require a lot of adjustment, not quite from tune to tune but it felt that way sometimes. Mostly trying to get a tone with the definition I wanted on the low end. One tune may work fine than the next by the same artist in the same style would have too much air. The boomieness bordered on appealing at times but was not preferable to a clearer version of the same tone to me. But the tones were there to be had.

At a given setting volume, sensitivity, tone, clarity, and cut remained fairly even across the board except as mentioned elsewhere. Technique resulted in useful variations in tone but hand position made suprisingly little difference. Some flexibility in varying string balance but nothing to scream about - top pretty much remained constant while the bottom could be muddied up, fairly well defined, or thinned down.

Worked to all tunes acceptably or better. Pups could pull off good J and P tones. Some pretty pleasant tones in general with potential solo sounds in the mix. Probably would have been fun to play if it weren't for all the jacking with controls.

FLUFF:

A firsrt run on these and I anticipate some update in future sessions cause I was learning these pups as I went along.

Obviously designed for fretless but I don't have a fretless. Long story but I did tinker with a fretless briefly some time back. Aside from being a pain to setup, what I recall is I had no pups that worked well for it - although it was acoustically a very bright bass which complicates finding a pup for it whether it's fretless or not.

These pups were run with just a battery, no preamp. I have the Duncan Bailey preamp that was designed for these pups but I don't use preamps anymore. I'm curious what it would sound like with these pups and if it's much different than the other preamps I've had but I'd have to make some changes to either drop it in one of my basses or to wire it as an outboard and I'm not up for it since it's intact and ready to go as it is. Ain't broke and I ain't fixing it!

Update:

Played these pups quite a bit since the above and they've been the pups I prefer most lately. Stuck them in another bass (also midrange but different) where they also work well and put the Millers back where they belong. In general, I'm inclined to believe actives sound more similar from bass to bass than passives. With more play I've gotten to where I know the settings and controls aren't all over the place. They also have a noticeable passive-like rawness, cut well, and fairly punchy. I'm guessing anybody that like's a P bass thinking of J's would like these pups. Also the guy that bought the Bailey preamp installed it (also in a fretted) and is very pleased with it.
 
#55
A REMINDER ABOUT THE NATURE OF PICKUPS

This is a recent email from and my response to a player that bought a set of pups and it seems an appropriate post to make a point that many players don't seem to grasp about the nature of pickups.
'''''''''''''''''''''''

Ron, These p/ups are great, my bass sounds like an absolutely new beast! Someone at the blues jam on Monday said it was like a poorman's Sadowsky.... This coming from a Sadowsky/Lakland owner!

Thx again,


---------
Yeh,

it's interesting. Pups retain there general characteristics all else aside. But there are so many variables involved otherwise that under one set of conditions a set of pups will excel while in another they seem pretty ordinary.

I had two sets of those and the set I kept I found noticeably more to my liking in one particular bass. Even in the same bass, I could tell both sets were the same pups but they definetly didn't sound exactly the same. I ran reviews on both of them and ran the ad on Talkbass for the set you bought. I had numerous emails asking which set was being sold. And there basically was no interest in the set you bought, so I assume they wanted the set I preferred. Most players just don't understand how significantly variables factor into a given tone. In all probability, the pups I prefer may not have worked as well for your setup. Afterall, they're decent but nothing to scream about in my other basses.
------------------

In summary, every link in the chain of tone plays it's part and pickups are a critical component. To a considerable degree, whether any given pup is the missing link to killer tone depends on the rest of the chain.
 
#56
Luknfur,
Good stuff! Have you come across a set of Jason Lollar single coils? Keep your eye out for a set, they are really nice p/ups. I have some in my Marcus Miller (no onboard preamp) and I love them. Also have a set in a fretless that I like, very warm, clear, and punchy.
Nice thread man, keep it up!
 
#57
Luknfur, you are a true public servant. Let me tell you about a couple of recent experiences I've had. I bought an American Series Jazz (alder/maple) some time ago, I'm not good with dates :rolleyes: , but anyway more than a year ago, and it was a leftover pre-S1 model. I couldn't get a tone I liked out of it with the stock pups, Duncan Vintage pups, or Aeros. Got rid of it and went back to a P bass. Late last year, I was bass shopping again, and after trying numerous basses (mostly Fenders, but some others), I bought a 2004 Jazz, also alder/maple. I bought it because it was the best-sounding bass I had played during all my shopping. While the first Jazz was lackluster and just blah-sounding, this one is punchy, thumpy, clear, and has a good-sounding E string. So far, I haven't really found a use for the S-1 thingy, but this bass gives me just about everything I wanted from a P, and other stuff besides. One thing it doesn't do very well is Jaco-tone, which is something I don't need all that often. It can, however, do an almost-Stingray sound. So, really, this just reinforces your point about how important the bass itself is. The combination of these particular pieces of wood and these pickups just works. Everyone who hears this bass says it sounds good.

Also, I still have those Laces in my Essex, and that bass sounds great as well. It was pretty blah with the Duncans, but it sounds lively and present with the Laces. Right now, I have GHS Precision Flatwounds on it, and it thumps like a P.
 
#58
SPC, no Lollars. Pretty rare birds on the used market and that's all I buy. LPs show a lot more frequently than Lollars. If I ever land some, there will be a review for sure.

Flatwound, concur. No telling how many guys have sold basses when they just needed to change pups, strings, or chuck a preamp; how many have changed pups without considering the acoustic properties of their bass and how it would effect the desired results (Bright, harsh pups probably won't be bright and harsh for long stuck in an acoustically dark bass); or how many have replaced the neck on a bass only to be shocked at how it sounds nothing like the old bass.

It's a jungle out there
 
#59
I saw a post in this thread about Status pickups. I would be interested in your take on them. My Trace Elliot T-Bass is the hottest output I have ever heard, and a tone that has caused at least a dozen people to try to buy my bass from me on the spot. I was never sure if it was the pickups or the preamp (although I have never engaged the tone controls while playing - the switch on there is a tone control by-pass. It basically leaves the bass and treble at detent if you don't engage it.)

Would love to hear your thoughts, and great thread by the way!
 
#60
crhoton said:
I saw a post in this thread about Status pickups. I would be interested in your take on them. My Trace Elliot T-Bass is the hottest output I have ever heard, and a tone that has caused at least a dozen people to try to buy my bass from me on the spot. I was never sure if it was the pickups or the preamp (although I have never engaged the tone controls while playing - the switch on there is a tone control by-pass. It basically leaves the bass and treble at detent if you don't engage it.)

Would love to hear your thoughts, and great thread by the way!
Click to expand...

The only Status pups I've had were older soap bars and they're reviewed under Dimento's Soap Experiment. Like all manufacturers, the pups used can vary a lot. I've gotten the impression their later pups are more desireable but haven't had the later ones myself - as of yet.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back