Yeah, what's next? The great sitar revival?![]()
That would be fretless with guitar strings.
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.
Yeah, what's next? The great sitar revival?![]()
Vic said:Yeah, this means that Jason, Jason, myself, and some others are in alignment on this, and differ from you.
In short, just means you're wrong. Now go stand in the corner and be quiet or we'll make you wear the hat.![]()
![]()
KJung said:To be clear, Vision (Jason) didn't dig it much either with his LM. It is just a different thing that some will like and other's won't. No big deal, and there are many different J tones.
I'm still trying to get somebody to try my "fat J" setting: dime the bass, dime the 220 mids, treble at noon.
I haven't been able to try it on a mix yet, but I did give it a go. Not boomy at all like I would have expected. I could see that working very well in a lot of settings. Reminded me of the tone that I hear on a lot of Cake tunes. Thick, deep, with a lot of punch and a relaxed top and upper mid. It seems to work well with rolling toward the bridge pickup a good bit without loosing any meat.I'm still trying to get somebody to try my "fat J" setting: dime the bass, dime the 220 mids, treble at noon.
I'm still trying to get somebody to try my "fat J" setting: dime the bass, dime the 220 mids, treble at noon.


I'm still trying to get somebody to try my "fat J" setting: dime the bass, dime the 220 mids, treble at noon.
Yeah, you ain't the only one diggin' that flip. And I still say I was the one that called it, way back when.I'm still just a little bit in shock to read such a sentence coming from Ken...![]()
![]()
![]()