"J" pickups discussion and comparisons.

[TonyP-]

I have heard that those Aeros are very grindy and aggressive with a late '70s J bass type of sound, and then I have heard they are very wide, deep, and extended.

I hear more of the latter


"very wide, deep, and extended" and what you give it (instrument wise) is what you get, in other words it caters to reproducing more accurately what your instrument is actually putting out then adding its own coloration.

When I hear the A basses that Abey created that are using them that more of what I hear.
Wider sounding, not compressed etended both in the low and highs to a bit (if you bass is naturally on the brighter side) like a maple board.

Just my $.02

 

[narud]

I just checked the website and here are the descriptions:



So, it says they are the same but it says the NJ5s are very fat sounding. I might email Carey.

I have heard that those Aeros are very grindy and aggressive with a late '70s J bass type of sound, and then I have heard they are very wide, deep, and extended.

an actual late 70's fender isnt very grindy imo. at least not grindy like some of these pickups are voiced.
heres a summary of different clips ive recorded of pickups and basses

62 jazz
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

75ri with duncans (voiced the same as my actual 78)
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

fernandes 5-with hipshot b and aeros
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
before the hipshot bridge
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]


to me the 62 and and 75 ri sound "prettier" to me which is accurate to the actual vintage basses ive played and owned. the aeros are more aggressive and grindy to my ear. its a nice change of pace.

 

[Ryan Mohr]

an actual late 70's fender isnt very grindy imo. at least not grindy like some of these pickups are voiced.
heres a summary of different clips ive recorded of pickups and basses

62 jazz
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

75ri with duncans (voiced the same as my actual 78)
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

fernandes 5-with hipshot b and aeros
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
before the hipshot bridge
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]


to me the 62 and and 75 ri sound "prettier" to me which is accurate to the actual vintage basses ive played and owned. the aeros are more aggressive and grindy to my ear. its a nice change of pace.

Really? I thought the late '70s J bass tone (heavy ash body, maple board, '70s spacing) was all about being aggressive and grindy. If not, what separates it from the '60s tone? This is the tone I think of when I think of a passive late '70s J bass: Very grindy and aggressive IMO.

Only the first clip would work for me. First of all, awesome playing! I think anything would sound great with your chops, but I do love that '60s J bass tone above all others. The rest of the soundclips said error and that I can't download more than one because I am a free user.

 

[narud]

Really? I thought the late '70s J bass tone (heavy ash body, maple board, '70s spacing) was all about being aggressive and grindy. If not, what separates it from the '60s tone? This is the tone I think of when I think of a passive late '70s J bass: Very grindy and aggressive IMO.

Only the first clip would work for me. First of all, awesome playing! I think anything would sound great with your chops, but I do love that '60s J bass tone above all others. The rest of the soundclips said error and that I can't download more than one because I am a free user.

i think rapidshare makes you wait like 15 minutes or something between downloading clips.

 

[narud]

This is the tone I think of when I think of a passive late '70s J bass: Very grindy and aggressive IMO.

i woudnt necessarily consider that upper mid grind. its got lots of attack because that bass is butt heavy but you can still hear the thinness/glass thats part of that bass (at least you can hear it on the non youtube compressed track)

 

[narud]

here's a zip file of them all. i forgot about the free user thing
Invalid Link Removed

 

[Ryan Mohr]

i woudnt necessarily consider that upper mid grind. its got lots of attack because that bass is butt heavy but you can still hear the thinness/glass thats part of that bass (at least you can hear it on the non youtube compressed track)

Oh ok, sorry I'm probably using the word wrong. Would you consider that tone very similar to a late '70s J bass? Maybe a better way to say it is that it is really quick and hits hard in the mids. I dont really dig sizzle, but I can dig an extended or "airy" high end above the quickness in the upper mids.

I'm actually buying this bass soon: Link Removed It is basically an SX take on a late '70s J: heavy ash body (10 lbs), maple board, '70s spacing, and even the black pickguard and white blocks and binding. I figure I will replace the electronics with quality stuff, while still remaining passive, put in SJB-1s, and slap on DR lo-riders and get a very similar tone.

I have one SX J, and I happen to dig the slightly oversized body and neck, and I can set up basses so the quality/playability doesn't bother me.

 

[Ryan Mohr]

here's a zip file of them all. i forgot about the free user thing
Invalid Link Removed

Thanks! I will go listen.

 

[Ryan Mohr]

Narud: I just checked out all of your clips. First off, your playing is amazing on all those clips. I have an old clip with the '62 with the lollar neck, and compared to the duncan clip, the lollar is a lot darker IMO. The '75 clip definitely has the most quickness, attack, and high end. I really dig that sound too. The Fernandes clip with Aeros does sound grindier than the '75 but you still captured that Mark Adams vibe perfectly.

On a side note, do you have really low action and pluck fairly hard not down by the neck? I can only get that sound down by the neck, because plucking that hard by the bridge clips my preamp. I imagine that's because my action is fairly high.

 

[narud]

Oh ok, sorry I'm probably using the word wrong. Would you consider that tone very similar to a late '70s J bass? Maybe a better way to say it is that it is really quick and hits hard in the mids. I dont really dig sizzle, but I can dig an extended or "airy" high end above the quickness in the upper mids.

I'm actually buying this bass soon: Link Removed It is basically an SX take on a late '70s J: heavy ash body (10 lbs), maple board, '70s spacing, and even the black pickguard and white blocks and binding. I figure I will replace the electronics with quality stuff, while still remaining passive, put in SJB-1s, and slap on DR lo-riders and get a very similar tone.

I have one SX J, and I happen to dig the slightly oversized body and neck, and I can set up basses so the quality/playability doesn't bother me.

i had that bass and it sucked. maybe it was mine, but the routing under the pickguard was bordering on strat style swimming pool. it made the bass sound kind of hollow. it brought the weight down to around 9 pounds though. i can only imagine how heavy it would have been without the routing.

 

[narud]

Narud: I just checked out all of your clips. First off, your playing is amazing on all those clips. I have an old clip with the '62 with the lollar neck, and compared to the duncan clip, the lollar is a lot darker IMO. The '75 clip definitely has the most quickness, attack, and high end. I really dig that sound too. The Fernandes clip with Aeros does sound grindier than the '75 but you still captured that Mark Adams vibe perfectly.

On a side note, do you have really low action and pluck fairly hard not down by the neck? I can only get that sound down by the neck, because plucking that hard by the bridge clips my preamp. I imagine that's because my action is fairly high.

thanks for the compliment. i set up my basses with really low action (my repair guy called me a weenie when he was working on the fernandes)and pluck over the bridge pickup up. i play fairly light, but with the action set so low, if i dig in just a little i can get a pretty hard sound.


im really digging having a bass with aeros for a different sound. its cool because they have the grind that a lot of the other pickups i bought had, but still have the air up top too. the fenders,fralins etc had grind but didnt have the sparkle too.

 

[Ryan Mohr]

i had that bass and it sucked. maybe it was mine, but the routing under the pickguard was bordering on strat style swimming pool. it made the bass sound kind of hollow. it brought the weight down to around 9 pounds though. i can only imagine how heavy it would have been without the routing.

Hmm, I have this model: Link Removed It also has the large route under the pickguard, but is about 9 lbs as it says on the website, so I was assuming the 10 lbs on the ash/maple was correct. I had no idea that could affect the sound.

 

[Ryan Mohr]

thanks for the compliment. i set up my basses with really low action (my repair guy called me a weenie when he was working on the fernandes)and pluck over the bridge pickup up. i play fairly light, but with the action set so low, if i dig in just a little i can get a pretty hard sound.


im really digging having a bass with aeros for a different sound. its cool because they have the grind that a lot of the other pickups i bought had, but still have the air up top too. the fenders,fralins etc had grind but didnt have the sparkle too.

Gotcha, that's what I figured because it sounds like you are playing hard, but you volume is very even without any volume jumps or clipping. One of my favorite bassists plays like that: go to about 5:50, I think that's a '65 Jazz.

Everyone seems to hear the Aeros differently, it's weird. Some people, like KJung and you, describe them as aggressive and grindy. Others say they lack upper mids and are very wide, deep, scooped, and even. Do you hear the NJ5s as being grindy, or just really fat and warm in the low mids? I was hoping for really warm and fat, but that's not what I'm hearing. I might just end up putting flats on this bass.

 

[narud]

Gotcha, that's what I figured because it sounds like you are playing hard, but you volume is very even without any volume jumps or clipping. One of my favorite bassists plays like that: go to about 5:50, I think that's a '65 Jazz.

Everyone seems to hear the Aeros differently, it's weird. Some people, like KJung and you, describe them as aggressive and grindy. Others say they lack upper mids and are very wide, deep, scooped, and even. Do you hear the NJ5s as being grindy, or just really fat and warm in the low mids? I was hoping for really warm and fat, but that's not what I'm hearing. I might just end up putting flats on this bass.

you have to take into context if the pickups were matched with a pre or not. aeros with almost anything will sound high mid scooped. pickups like in the old fenders will sound super thin and scooped with a pre. thats why i like the a/c so much.

the aeros i would say have a pretty wide frequency response across the board. everything gets represented pretty well.

the nord 5's had some grind but were fat in the lows and had almost no sparkle up top.

the guy that i take my basses to is the shop foreman at national resophonic guitars and he was telling me about some, iirc, mandolin pickups they got in from lollar. he was telling me that the pickups with the taller coil were more wide in frequency response and those with a shorter coil sounded more like a split coil humbucker. same wire and turns on both pickups. that kind of description sounds about right. the aeros are taller than your average j and the lollar i had was shorter than average (it sunk into the pickup cover a little) and it was glassier without as much growl.

 

[Ryan Mohr]

you have to take into context if the pickups were matched with a pre or not. aeros with almost anything will sound high mid scooped. pickups like in the old fenders will sound super thin and scooped with a pre. thats why i like the a/c so much.

If they sound scooped in the high mids, how can they be grindy? To me, the definition of grindy is very present in the high mids and low highs.

the aeros i would say have a pretty wide frequency response across the board. everything gets represented pretty well.

the nord 5's had some grind but were fat in the lows and had almost no sparkle up top.

I don't really like much sparkle in my sound, and my cab only goes up to about 4 kHz (tweeterless).

the guy that i take my basses to is the shop foreman at national resophonic guitars and he was telling me about some, iirc, mandolin pickups they got in from lollar. he was telling me that the pickups with the taller coil were more wide in frequency response and those with a shorter coil sounded more like a split coil humbucker. same wire and turns on both pickups. that kind of description sounds about right. the aeros are taller than your average j and the lollar i had was shorter than average (it sunk into the pickup cover a little) and it was glassier without as much growl.

Interesting, the SX pickups have very tall coils but sound very mid present and compressed to my ear. If the Lollars had a shorter coil (more compressed frequency range), wouldn't they not be glassy (extended) in the highs?

 

[narud]

If they sound scooped in the high mids, how can they be grindy? To me, the definition of grindy is very present in the high mids and low highs.



I don't really like much sparkle in my sound, and my cab only goes up to about 4 kHz (tweeterless).



Interesting, the SX pickups have very tall coils but sound very mid present and compressed to my ear. If the Lollars had a shorter coil (more compressed frequency range), wouldn't they not be glassy (extended) in the highs?

thats the thing, when matched with your average pre, the grind gets sucked out and i think thats where peoples "wide" description may come from because the aeros definitely have that grind and sparkle.

think about what a split coil jazz pickup sounds like. super extended top with very little grind and deep lows. the grind is gone, but they still have an extended high end present. the lollar wasnt quite that over the top, but it did still have the glass present and not as much high mids/low highs. i think they might make a great replacement in a late 70's jazz thats missing its original pickups, or a precbs thing that had pickups that werent wound that hot. the 70's had consistent wound pickups where as the 60's were allo ver the map. my 62 has a bridge thats 8.7k and a neck wound to 5.4. thats what made me replace the neck pickup in the first place. that kind of difference didnt happen in the cbs years.

 

[narud]

Hmm, I have this model: Link Removed It also has the large route under the pickguard, but is about 9 lbs as it says on the website, so I was assuming the 10 lbs on the ash/maple was correct. I had no idea that could affect the sound.

part of what i like about an alder/rosewood bass is the resonance and air to the sound. not so much in an ash/maple. thats the reason i dont do the sadowsky thing or the light lm5's. to me those sound like the attack comes from the grind in the pickups and the glass comes from the pre. i like the attack to come from the density of the body and the glass to come from the pickups (like an old fender). the two things sound different to my ear.

i bought the sx years ago, because i read reviews that they ran heavy. mine wasnt. that rout gave it some unwanted resonance to the tone. with a fret level, the action could have been great because the neck straightened no problem. i just didnt like the sound enough to get the work done.

 

[WarriorJoe7]

I love the shootout but it would have been nice to have clips...

 

[Ryan Mohr]

thats the thing, when matched with your average pre, the grind gets sucked out and i think thats where peoples "wide" description may come from because the aeros definitely have that grind and sparkle.

think about what a split coil jazz pickup sounds like. super extended top with very little grind and deep lows. the grind is gone, but they still have an extended high end present. the lollar wasnt quite that over the top, but it did still have the glass present and not as much high mids/low highs. i think they might make a great replacement in a late 70's jazz thats missing its original pickups, or a precbs thing that had pickups that werent wound that hot. the 70's had consistent wound pickups where as the 60's were allo ver the map. my 62 has a bridge thats 8.7k and a neck wound to 5.4. thats what made me replace the neck pickup in the first place. that kind of difference didnt happen in the cbs years.

I see, thanks for for that, I'm a passive guy so I wouldn't know.

The lollar is single coil correct? I'm definitely gonna try out the Lollars sometime, I have heard really good things about them (warm, round, growly, harmonically rich, low mid present, smooth, sweet) but I haven't heard glassy.

part of what i like about an alder/rosewood bass is the resonance and air to the sound. not so much in an ash/maple. thats the reason i dont do the sadowsky thing or the light lm5's. to me those sound like the attack comes from the grind in the pickups and the glass comes from the pre. i like the attack to come from the density of the body and the glass to come from the pickups (like an old fender). the two things sound different to my ear.

i bought the sx years ago, because i read reviews that they ran heavy. mine wasnt. that rout gave it some unwanted resonance to the tone. with a fret level, the action could have been great because the neck straightened no problem. i just didnt like the sound enough to get the work done.

I'm definitely a alder/RW guy too because of the reason you say, and the warmer, richer tone IMO.

I'm gonna have to try a heavy '70s style Jazz someday to hear what you are hearing.

 

[OrionManMatt]

My Aero-equipped Lakland DJ5 sounds worlds different passive than it did when the Audere preamp was installed. Just as an FYI to this on-going discussion.