Kala UBass Megathread, Part 3

[bad_andy]

Well, would you look at what some damn fool did with a set of TimWatson's ThunderGuts... Trying these out at practice Wednesday night. Looking forward to getting some feedback from the band members.

 

[theschnitt]

Bad Andy - I have a set of the 'guts coming in for my SUB any day now. How were you able to install them? There's not much info in this thread on the subject. Kala does not recommend them for the solid bodies, but it looks like yours came out great.

 

[Timmy-Watts]

Well, would you look at what some damn fool did with a set of TimWatson's ThunderGuts... Trying these out at practice Wednesday night. Looking forward to getting some feedback from the band members.

I have a hunch they will be well suited for a fretted solid body. They look great! I am interested in how you installed them. Pic, please.

 

[smo]

Just curious here fella's.

I've been thinking about getting a U-bass (the ukelele lookin one, not the electric).
Only thing is, I'd be looking to play it in different tuning than EADG.
Has anyone tried de-tuning the U-bass?

 

[bad_andy]

I have a hunch they will be well suited for a fretted solid body. They look great! I am interested in how you installed them. Pic, please.

Sure, and thanks again for these. FWIW, I'd originally ear-marked these for my spruce-top U-Bass 2, but since they were free, I thought I'd try them on the SUB first. With the stock Pahoehoes, my SUB's signal was hotter and bass-heavier than my acoustic, even with the bass rolled all the way back in the preamp. I wanted to compare these and see how they'd sound by comparison.

OK, there was a bit of fiddling to get these to work, but I mark most of it up to the fact that they'd already been installed once on an acoustic U-Bass, judging from the length TimWatson had tied them off. The trickiest bit was untying the knot in the D string, which was practically fused in place. The material is soft and retains wear and tear, so I had to take my time with two pair of small pliers. Also, the G-string slot in the nut had to be ever-so-slightly widened.

Also, because the E and A strings are so thick, the knots don't settle into the string recesses in the back of the bass the way the D and G string do. At my strap height (and given that I'm usually dressed on stage), it's fine for now. If I were to decide to keep them on this bass long-term, I'd probably try the crimped-tube trick solve this.

Initial impressions?

The pros and cons of these strings seem largely to live up to their reputations. The TB'ers who were bullish on the ThunderGuts praised them for having a tighter, more focused sound and for being a bit more playable due to the higher tension. So far, this seems true.

The material is soft and does give when bent or stretched, troubling in theory but in practice it doesn't seem to be a big deal. You can see it behind the bridge on the G string. It's there but doesn't seem to affect the sound or playability.

The fact that they're much more tacky to the touch than the poly strings is quite noticeable, but whether this is an issue remains to be seen. For years whenever strings seem to be sticky, I'd just swipe my fingertips over the bridge of my nose and that always seemed to solve things just fine for me. That trick seems to work here, as well.

 

[dougness]

Just curious here fella's.

I've been thinking about getting a U-bass (the ukelele lookin one, not the electric).
Only thing is, I'd be looking to play it in different tuning than EADG.
Has anyone tried de-tuning the U-bass?

I'm playing a fretted mahogany Ubass. I just pulled it out and detuned down a whole step and then down an additional half step. I thought the strings would rattle on the frets, but the lower tunings sound absolutely killer. Just huge. There was no problem at all with strings buzzing on the frets. Go for it!

 

[bryanspkr]

Down a step is an improvement in sound for me. closer to the original poly strings sound and tension.
Btw. A moment of silence for Duck Dunn please. I am so sad. If you can, check out his fingerfunk mastery on Elvin Bishops "Juke Joint Jump"

 

[caeman]

Last night was my try-out with a local Irish band. I used my Kala U-Bass for the three songs, because I felt the sound of an acoustic bass compliments the music really well. Also, I am fairly certain I would be the only bassist with one that is trying out. It went well. I made some little mistakes here and there, but nothing that I think will hurt me. Overall, they liked the sound of my baby bass. There is one more bassist to try-out next Monday, then they will make their decision by the next day.

 

[Timmy-Watts]

***Preamp shootout...more in-depth review***

Ok. I got a chance to put the Fishman and the L. R. Baggs Para-EQ head to head.

I used the Fretless mahogany U-Bass throughout.
Amp was my Walter Woods into my Kustom Tuck & Roll 2x15. 2 channels on the Woods. I put each preamp into the effects return of each channel and used a DOD A-B box to switch. First I plugged straight in to get a reference volume.

Initially I set both preamps flat and found a good input gain for each, then set the output volumes to match in volume.

For each, I played baselines from "I Want You Back," "Express Yourself," "Tricotism," and some Charlie Parker heads, as well as some general Jazz soloing and salsa-type montuno bass lines. I tried to make sure that I played the same things as I switched back and forth.

I'll jump around a lot, but I'll try to be clear. Initially, the Baggs set flat sounded basically like the bass does direct. The manual says the gain is boost only, from 0- +24dB (!). Needless to say, I had it all the way down. The loudest low notes distort the input if it is turned up even past 8:00. But not a problem all the way down. The Baggs had a clear, glassy top end despite the finger noise, and the built-in 35hz high pass filter really keeps the sound tight but with plenty of thumpy lows. The lows were strong and I found I didn't need I boost them hardly at all.

Set flat, I immediately detected a preset curve in the Fishman. The highs were more muted and the lows were tight as well. Even with the compression turned off I still detected a major softness in my attacks, and in comparison it sounds like it is "further away" than the Baggs. Probably because of the less present airy highs inherently.

I then went one by one and set the tones to my liking. I was surprised that the Fishman needed little tweaking to dial in a sound. The compression and EQ seem to affect the output and gain clipping a great deal so I needed to compensate often. I ended up with a woody tone and it looked like this.



Note not much compression, and that hi-mid slider is in the perfect place for the scratchy finger noise. I barely cut the hi slider, which is unusual for me. Maybe Fishman knows that this is why most people started to need preamps, to make the sound of their horribly BP-100 upright pickup passable. Seems like it is already predisposed to do that before you start tweaking. Anyways, I noticed that the compression needed to be set low for me, and even when compensated for in volume, higher compression settings just ripped the punch out of my sound. The depth knob was pretty usable through most of its range. I can see it being very usable in a louder live setting.

The Baggs ended up where I normally would set it, but with less lows boosted. The lows were strong yet tight, and this big amp and speaker in the corner needed no tweaking for good thump. I ended up doing major surgery on the mids and highs and had to attenuate all 3 of those knobs to rout out the scratch. It looked like this:




Note the the presence knob is cut all the way. And that 1.3 Hz area is the bulk of the honk. It sounded great, but for some reason I feel uncomfortable not being able to deal with both the higher mids (1.3k) and mids (500) at the same time. Maybe just ingrained in me. For this bass, though, 500 is a good, woody area and the higher mids and lower highs (2.5-5k) are the problem areas.

In comparison, both had great sounds. Live, I can see using both, depending on the room, P.A., instrumentation, music, etc. The Baggs was more "Present" sounding, with clearer highs and needed more drastic tweaking to the highs and high mids. The lows were tight but perfect from the start.

The Fishman was more flexible dynamically with the depth and compression, and the EQ seems optimized for a bass pickup (and I believe they give us a head start in the inherent circuitry). I needed to boost the low slider to get some balls in the lows, though not much.

Overall, I think I will keep both. The Fishman seems easier to use and needed less drastic settings. The Baggs had more built in punch and presence, and has a variable notch filter and parametric mid. Also is an effects loop. Those are big pluses in my book. That means any other pedals can be included in the direct out. And any problem frequency can be dealt with more precisely.

Like others have said, the Fishman is the Swiss army knife, and it seems to have one of everything and can probably the the job done. The Baggs is more like the small tool set with an adjustable wrench. More punch and power inherently but does not have a corkscrew.

I liked both. I play a huge variety of music and many very different instruments, so I can see making a decision at each gig. Also, if I ever double upright-ubass I would probably use both. Now to get the VTBass worked in...

More on the VT later...I'm going to bed now. I hope this is informative. And sorry, but the Fishman is not for sale.

 

[SBassman]

I am told Kala now has an endpin in stock, and they will soon start selling a set of Thunderguts with the pins - for use on the solid bodies.

Unfortunately, they are also saying they won't sell the pins separately, since it needs a special crimping tool to set up properly.

 

[Wes Whitmore]

Im having trouble finding a fretless mohogany. Local stores only have fretted, and Sweetwater, AMS, Sam Ash, and Musician's Friend/ Guitar Center don't seem to have them in stock online either. Anyone have any luck finding stock yet? BTW, Im only looking at teh fretless because most opinions say its a better choice. Im planning on using this for an acoustic band.
Thanks,
Wes

 

[jamesczar]

Keep checking eBay. One will pop up. That's how I got a great deal on mine.

 

[Wes Whitmore]

Will do! Something tells me I want a new version of these!

 

[GBassNorth]

***Preamp shootout...more in-depth review*** .....

I liked both. I play a huge variety of music and many very different instruments, so I can see making a decision at each gig. Also, if I ever double upright-ubass I would probably use both. Now to get the VTBass worked in...

More on the VT later...I'm going to bed now. I hope this is informative. And sorry, but the Fishman is not for sale.

Tim - great review, very informative and helpful. I eagerly await your VT review. I liked the Fishman but it just didn't do much of anything that I couldn't do with the VT, so in the end it went. I hope I didn't rush to an incorrect conclusion on the Fishman. I only gave it a month of studio play before returning it to GC and never got a chance to try it in a live band setting. Once you get the Fishman set on what you feel is the best tone for your Kala hollowbody I'd be interested in hearing if you were able to do as good or better with the VT. Keep us posted.

 

[jamesczar]

I agree that Tim's preamp review/shootout is great. And his details on the VT make me think...

But I feel like the Fishman Platinum Pro is the ticket for my Kala UBass and my Godin A4.

And I want to try the VT on my electric basses. I feel like it would do more for the sound I want out of them, than the Kala/Godin.

 

[dougness]

I just looked at pics of the fretless acoustic Ubass online. It looks like they put the side dots on the fret lines, is that correct? That makes sense to me on an unlined board, but my brain is so used to seeing dots between the frets that it doesn't know what to do with those misplaced dots. It actually throws me off.

Anyway, just looking for confirmation about this so I can adjust my expectations, if necessary, when I order a fretless mahogany Ubass.

 

[SBassman]

I just looked at pics of the fretless acoustic Ubass online. It looks like they put the side dots on the fret lines, is that correct? That makes sense to me on an unlined board, but my brain is so used to seeing dots between the frets that it doesn't know what to do with those misplaced dots. It actually throws me off.

Anyway, just looking for confirmation about this so I can adjust my expectations, if necessary, when I order a fretless mahogany Ubass.

Yes they did. It messed me up for a while, but I eventually got beyond it.

That's one of those things I just never understood - for any fretless design, not just the Kalas. I just don't get why the dot pattern isn't 100% universal.

 

[SBassman]

Im having trouble finding a fretless mohogany. Local stores only have fretted, and Sweetwater, AMS, Sam Ash, and Musician's Friend/ Guitar Center don't seem to have them in stock online either. Anyone have any luck finding stock yet? BTW, Im only looking at teh fretless because most opinions say its a better choice. Im planning on using this for an acoustic band.
Thanks,
Wes

Billsmusic on ebay is showing a fretless hog in stock right now. Same with MF.

 

[dougness]

Yes they did. It messed me up for a while, but I eventually got beyond it.

That's one of those things I just never understood - for any fretless design, not just the Kalas. I just don't get why the dot pattern isn't 100% universal.

Agreed. It's probably a case of overthinking. You know, a solution without a problem. It won't keep me from getting the fretless hog, but I may have to add my own dots with stickers.....unless someone has a better idea.

 

[Timmy-Watts]

Agreed. It's probably a case of overthinking. You know, a solution without a problem. It won't keep me from getting the fretless hog, but I may have to add my own dots with stickers.....unless someone has a better idea.

You get used to it.