• 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.

Double Bass Ehrlund Acoustic Pickup

JYD

JYD

Sep 9, 2001
430
54
USA
www.gotlcdiet.com
#1
Has anyone tried out the Ehrlund Acoustic Pickup?
I used the original Fishman BP for years. Then more recently went to the Revolution solo.
I'm considering trying out the Fishman Full Circle.
My thoughts are if I get the Fishman full circle I'll need either a new bridge or my current adjustable bridge modified. Figure cost will be in the $400 range.
The Ehrlund Acoustic Pickup is listed at like $600 without knowing anything about it,, I have to consider if it's a microphone type system the louder gigs/drums might be an issue.
Also is the cost worth it considering piezo system don't have the same limitations.

Appreciate any feedback
 
#4
Eric Hochberg said:
Why will you need your current bridge modified for the Full Circle? If you have aluminum
adjusters a direct swap will work.
Click to expand...
I thought I recalled reading that adding the full circle might require some changes/modification to the existing bridge even if it already has adjusters. Might have been a one off or horror story but I seem to remember reading that the adjuster holes might need to be modified to ensure your getting the right mating of the full circle.
If not that's even better. The I can add the FC myself.
I'm about try some new stuff. I'll likely keep the Revolution solo pickup. I have been wanting to experiment with two pickups but was hoping to mix a piezo and mic type system.
Like a lot of guys say (or at least I'm saying) I need something reliable. The idea of a Mic system sounds great but if it's not reliable or causes a bunch of head aches based on venue and personnel/etc., then its not worth it no matter how high or low the cost.
 
#5
JYD said:
I thought I recalled reading that adding the full circle might require some changes/modification to the existing bridge even if it already has adjusters.
Click to expand...

The FC comes in two thread/post sizes so you need to confirm which your current adjusters are. Check the website for details.
Wood and composite adjusters have bigger posts than aluminum requiring filling in and redrilling.
 
#7
Eric Hochberg said:
The FC comes in two thread/post sizes so you need to confirm which your current adjusters are. Check the website for details.
Wood and composite adjusters have bigger posts than aluminum requiring filling in and redrilling.
Click to expand...
I have the aluminum adjusters on my bridge so maybe I'm good. I think I'm going to order the FC. Worst thing I have to do is get a new bridge carved. Bridge/FC pick is still cheaper than Ehrlund Acoustic Pickup with the pre amp.
 
#9
robgrow said:
While some players like the Ehrlund pickup very much, it just doesn't seem to work on a lot of basses. The Full Circle and Ehrlund are very different sounding pickups, but the chances of the FC working on your bass seems to be much higher.
Click to expand...
Yep seems the way Fishman makes the FC its designed to give a good response and be compatible with just about any bass with a bridge. I seem to read a lot about needed modifications and style incompatibility of non piezo sound stuff.
My biggest concern is a MIC style pickup won't work well in scenarios with louder drummers and may need mods.
I don't need to add headaches but do want to experiment with different equipment. But putting $400 - $600 for an experiment that might only sound good in the practice room is not something I'm feeling like doing.
 
#10
robgrow said:
While some players like the Ehrlund pickup very much, it just doesn't seem to work on a lot of basses. The Full Circle and Ehrlund are very different sounding pickups, but the chances of the FC working on your bass seems to be much higher.
Click to expand...
...just doesn't seem to work on a lot of basses?! I'm not sure what you mean by that. I'm assuming you mean that there are many basses on which it doesn't seem to work and not that one cannot find many on which it does. :)

Sure, there are many basses on which players report not being able to achieve a good sound. There sure are many more on which it works and works well!

Rob-- you posted this a couple of years back:
robgrow said:
Because the Ehrlund simply doesn't work on every bass. Two of my friends and I tried the EAP on ours basses and could not get useable sounds. That was enough for me.
Click to expand...

Have you since had a chance to gain some first-hand experience with it?

Granted, the Ehrlund does require more investment of time than usual to find the right spot for your bass but, oh man, once you do, it's quite the device. IMO, the majority of negative reports stem from players either 1) not knowing what adjustments to make in terms of position; 2) not having the patience to do it; 3) #1 and #2.

Still, from the reports, there are just some basses for which experienced, knowledgeable, and patient players simply have not had success. I think they represent the minority of negative reports.

Gollihur still offers a seven-day audition period so one has much to gain and potentially little to lose by trying it. Then again, as pointed out, we have long and detailed threads devoted to the Ehrlund and there seems little good reason for this thread to have even been started. :)
 
Last edited:
#11
Well I love new technology and new pickups and I try them when I can and I gave the EAP plenty of #1 and #2 and a bunch of #3 too and it didnt work for me for several reasons. One of them is that contact pickups pick up contact sounds and the sound off the face of the bass has a lot of different things happening many of which are difficult to mitigate from that angle: A bridge pickup (which is also contact) is picking up the vibrations of the strings and bridge primarily, secondarily and just about any other airily, and the sound it gets you is direct and somewhat less acoustic but also it filters out a lot of extraneous sounds. The EAP and the DYN B and the Vektor pick up what is happening on the FACE of the bass, which is just as weird a slice of the sound as a bridge pickup only you get a bunch of contact noise and placement is super finicky. In practice (that is on real gigs with real drummers) I found that it sounded acousticy but lacking definition (BALLS) like a bridge pickup (which excludes a lot of the tricky acousticy sounds in favor of SIGNAL) I prefer to have a PU with balls AND a mic, which picks up the sounds IN FRONT OF AND EMINATING FROM the bass (much different then the sound of the table itself) I usually keep pickups when I buy them so I can see if I am as full of @#$% years later as I am today or as in the case of the MAS 46 speaker when something comes along which changes the game such that a revisit might be fruitful. But I sold the EAP, dunno why exactly, just knew I wouldn't want to go back to it. I know a lot of guys here who swear by it, but I don't know a single guy in my sphere of gigging bassists who use it. Just my opinion on my bass with my hands and my small ears.
 
#12
robgrow said:
Because the Ehrlund simply doesn't work on every bass. Two of my friends and I tried the EAP on ours basses and could not get useable sounds. That was enough for me.
Click to expand...
flatback said:
Well I love new technology and new pickups and I try them when I can and I gave the EAP plenty of #1 and #2 and a bunch of #3 too and it didnt work for me for several reasons. One of them is that contact pickups pick up contact sounds and the sound off the face of the bass has a lot of different things happening many of which are difficult to mitigate from that angle: A bridge pickup (which is also contact) is picking up the vibrations of the strings and bridge primarily, secondarily and just about any other airily, and the sound it gets you is direct and somewhat less acoustic but also it filters out a lot of extraneous sounds. The EAP and the DYN B and the Vektor pick up what is happening on the FACE of the bass, which is just as weird a slice of the sound as a bridge pickup only you get a bunch of contact noise and placement is super finicky. In practice (that is on real gigs with real drummers) I found that it sounded acousticy but lacking definition (BALLS) like a bridge pickup (which excludes a lot of the tricky acousticy sounds in favor of SIGNAL) I prefer to have a PU with balls AND a mic, which picks up the sounds IN FRONT OF AND EMINATING FROM the bass (much different then the sound of the table itself) I usually keep pickups when I buy them so I can see if I am as full of @#$% years later as I am today or as in the case of the MAS 46 speaker when something comes along which changes the game such that a revisit might be fruitful. But I sold the EAP, dunno why exactly, just knew I wouldn't want to go back to it. I know a lot of guys here who swear by it, but I don't know a single guy in my sphere of gigging bassists who use it. Just my opinion on my bass with my hands and my small ears.
Click to expand...

That doesn't seem to square with the physics involved. A pickup placed at the bridge does not and never will come close to transmitting the attack/decay transient that is similar to what is transmitted acoustically. I posted at length in the Ehrlund thread(s) about the attack/decay profile and its importance in terms of how we identify and characterize the sound of any instrument. So, the vibrations of the table are not "just as weird" as those at the bridge. Rather, I believe they can be (and typically are) closer to what is radiated acoustically-- that is, what emanates from the front of the bass. That's not always the case and therein lies the rub. The greater the extent to which you transduce what's at the strings, the less the extent you transduce what the instrument is doing. Sure, the response of the instrument affects the strings but that influence pales in comparison to the way the response of the strings affect the instrument. It's a classic impedance mis-match and we rely on it.

As for balls, well, IME, in that department, the Ehrlund, when placed properly, trounces any bridge-mounted pickup I've ever used or heard. I don't dispute your experience at all. Yes, there are just some basses for which players can't seem to get it to work well. It may also have to do with their preferences for amplified sound.

It's not surprising that you don't know many other players in your sphere who use the Ehrlund. Neither do I! Many people don't know about it, it's expensive, and it requires a fair degree of fiddling and expertise. It's hardly plug-n-play as are many other pickups. Those characteristics right there turn off many players right at the get-go. That's quite understandable.

By the way, on a variety of real gigs, I've never experienced substantial "contact noise" from the Ehrlund.

YMMV
 
Last edited:
#13
drurb,

Are you aware of any "name" players who use, endorse, or have used the Ehrlund? I'm in LA, where you can't swing a dead cat around without hitting a bassist, and I'm not aware of any current use or history of the Erhlund here.
If it wasn't for TB, I would not know of this pickup.
Thanks for your time and expertise.
don kasper
 
#15
Don Kasper said:
drurb,

Are you aware of any "name" players who use, endorse, or have used the Ehrlund? I'm in LA, where you can't swing a dead cat around without hitting a bassist, and I'm not aware of any current use or history of the Erhlund here.
If it wasn't for TB, I would not know of this pickup.
Thanks for your time and expertise.
don kasper
Click to expand...
Nope, but that's hardly relevant to the quality of the device or what it does. As I said, the Ehrlund is definitely more difficult to deal with and it's sure not as accessible as the more mainstream pickups. I can very well understand why a gigging pro who is satisfied with his/her sound wouldn't go out and buy an expensive contact mic that requires careful fitting-- even if he/she knew of its existence. By the way, have you ever used the EAP? Unlike others, I'm not suggesting that an informed opinion requires having first-hand experience. Rather, I'm curious to know if you've ever had the chance to fiddle (pun intended :)) with one.
 
Last edited:
#16
No. I have not used the EAP.
Thanks for answering my question.
I considered the Schertler DYN-B, at some point, but was put-off by the co$t and by some anecdotal evidence/word-of-mouth, of it being "difficult/finicky", so I went with the Stat-B, which I used for some years and liked. I finally had reliability issues with it, after replacing the first one.
I then moved to the B-Band Statement, which I really liked, but again, reliability issues arose, and s**tcaned it.(Contents of the s**tcancan have included : Polytone-(the really old brass version), Realist( the version that installed under the E foot), something from Upton that looked, and sounded, like a Scrabble tile, 2 Shertler Stat-Bs, 2 B-Band Statements). Cha-Ching.
Next was the B-Band D-1 (I'm currently waiting for a replacement element from the manufacturer) - more reliability issues.
I'm currently using an Underwood (1 element only), as my 20yr. old "Undie", crapped out.
While a "celebrity endorsement" is not a strong criteria of mine for purchasing a PU, ( for ex: I don't know of any B-Band celebrity endorsers), I do think that at least good "word-of-mouth" among working bassists is relevant, if not priceless.
Thanks, again, for your time, expertise, and civility.
Show's Over...Nothin' to see here, folks.
Roll Credits!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jason Hollar, rickwolff and drurb
#17
Mark Twain 'keep your mouth shut' quote.jpg

I'm going to be foolish enough to ignore Mark Twain's sage advice and wade gingerly into the discussion pool:

Re: 'Balls' VS 'Acoustic Sound', like probably everyone else on this blog I would like, and have tried to (re)produce my 'ideal sound' on stage. What I have found, so far by experimenting with several different microphones AND the Headway BAND pickup is that I can get a 'killer sound' in my home studio but it never seems to make it in a live setting. I (so far) have invariably ended up using my Gage Lifeline on the gig. Does it sound like a good 'studio' or recorded sound? NO. But it does cut through quite well and allow me to be heard clearly. As I mentioned in another thread, I can run a cheap condenser mic directly into my H4N recorder on the gig and get a great recorded sound. I just can't seem to get that same sound amplified and communicated to the house. (The pickup would feedback terribly if run into my amp).

Perhaps I'm the victim of my own parsimonious nature. I'd love to get a DPA 4099 and a really nice head and run it all into a BigE 45 or 46, but being a weekend warrior of limited talent I can't find a way to justify that to myself (much less to She Who Must Be Obeyed). Oh, and I almost forgot, I'd love to try the EAP also but the same financial self-control comes into play.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled program and look forward to learning something from those of you much smarter that I.
 
#18
By the way, Don, I see you studied with James VanDemark at Eastman. Many moons ago (1968) he and I were stand partners at the University of Minnesota High School Musicians Project (needless to say, he was first chair to my second). Back then he was know as 'J.B.', the James came later. It's fun for me to think back to those days, and all these years later to recognize that he and I BOTH made the right career decisions. His, to become the youngest Full Professor at Eastman (if I'm not mistaken), and mine - to do something else.
 
#19
At this point in my ersatz "career", I'm less concerned with an ideal - "my bass, only louder" concept, and I'm more concerned with - "does my amplified sound allow me to function in the music?"..."can I hear myself for pitch/time"?, "can the drummer "feel" the pulse/attack of my quarter-notes"?, "can the pianist clearly hear me and react to my choice of bass note for a particular chord change"?, etc.
I understand the "Quest" aspect, but so far, I've not found the Holy Grail, but only a Dixie Cup that is useful, at best.
Thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Eisenman
#20
Don Kasper said:
At this point in my ersatz "career", I'm less concerned with an ideal - "my bass, only louder" concept, and I'm more concerned with - "does my amplified sound allow me to function in the music?"..."can I hear myself for pitch/time"?, "can the drummer "feel" the pulse/attack of my quarter-notes"?, "can the pianist clearly hear me and react to my choice of bass note for a particular chord change"?, etc.
I understand the "Quest" aspect, but so far, I've not found the Holy Grail, but only a Dixie Cup that is useful, at best.
Thanks.
Click to expand...

You're a smarter man than I. Some of us just can't resist playing Don Quixote (or as Sheldon on 'The Big Bang' told Penny "You think that 'Don Quixote is about a 'Donkey' named 'Hotey').

Your more practical goal is met for me by using the Gage Lifeline. By using a condenser mic into the recording I can hear and enjoy that 'studio' sound when I listen to the recording after the gig. And, truth be told, I'm probably the only one who cares anyway.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back