• 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.

Official Elrick Club Thread!

Status
Not open for further replies.
#321
harrybosch said:
Here's a bass I just picked up. It's nice. I don't really like Elrick's, love the looks but most everyone I've played sounded terrible. His basses are just too light to sound good and get a nice natural lowend. Thankfully this bass has a little weight to it. I doubt it would work very well in a rock or country band but I didn't buy it for that. The upper registers are very sweet.
Click to expand...

I will start out by saying that I really like that bass. It looks awesome. I think you will be very pleased. The body of that beast is very similar to mine.

With that being said, I couldn't disagree with you more. The whole heavy weight = great tone is bologna. I never can understand why and how that myth got started. Great tone has almost nothing to do with weight. However, sustain and resonance is affected by weight, but most of that "tone" factor comes from way many more factors than the weight of the instrument. If you desire longer sustain, then go with a heavier instrument. If you like greater resonance, lean toward the lighter weight instruments. But there again, that too can be tailored. I really can't understand the statement of "natural lowend" either. What is that? What instrument has that?
I've only played one Elrick that didn't just kill in the tone department and played incredible. But honestly welcome to the family.
 
#322
Mr. Majestic said:
I will start out by saying that I really like that bass. It looks awesome. I think you will be very pleased. The body of that beast is very similar to mine.

With that being said, I couldn't disagree with you more. The whole heavy weight = great tone is bologna. I never can understand why and how that myth got started. Great tone has almost nothing to do with weight. However, sustain and resonance is affected by weight, but most of that "tone" factor comes from way many more factors than the weight of the instrument. If you desire longer sustain, then go with a heavier instrument. If you like greater resonance, lean toward the lighter weight instruments. But there again, that too can be tailored. I really can't understand the statement of "natural lowend" either. What is that? What instrument has that?
I've only played one Elrick that didn't just kill in the tone department and played incredible. But honestly welcome to the family.
Click to expand...

Your opinion is noted. Sustain is nothing I'm interested in. There's a reason a Jazz bass with a heavy ash body sounds beefier than a Jazz with a light ash body. It completely comes down to the weight. A heavier wood typically enhances the lows or maybe more correct loses some mids thereby giving the impression of deeper lows. Also, I didn't say more weight = great tone. What is great tone is subjective what has a deeper tone is not. When I say natural lowend it's just that: a bass that has a deep, round sound without the help of electronics. Also I think the wood is the most important factor in shaping an instruments tone. But that's a whole other argument. Elricks are well made basses. It's unfortunate that most sound so bad(to me) and deliver very little weight in the mix., because they are beautiful to look and play great. I love the 6 I just got because I intend to use it for instrumentals, chording, and soloing for which it will be great. A groove bass it is not.
 
#324
a bass that does not groove??? i think groove comes from within yourself not from an instrument.

my elricks will groove your socks off. :bassist:

189-1.jpg
 
#325
nalapit13 said:
a bass that does not groove??? i think groove comes from within yourself not from an instrument.
Click to expand...

Seriously. If you can groove, you can groove on whatever you're holding. I've yet to hear a guitar that sounds as deep and thick as a bass, and anyone who claims a guitar player can't groove as well as a bassist doesn't know music. If you are relying on depth and thickness of tone to simulate grooving, then, well, you're not grooving :D

While I'm posting, I'm now in the 4-5 month wait period again.....
 
#326
harrybosch said:
Elricks are well made basses. It's unfortunate that most sound so bad(to me) and deliver very little weight in the mix., because they are beautiful to look and play great.
Click to expand...

I don't own an Elrick, but have several basses with the Bartolini pickups and electronics. I also own several basses with very light swamp ash and I can assure you that there's no shortage of low end on these basses whatsoever. I don't think you're necessarily being clear on "beefy", but I've found most heavier ash basses to be a little more punchy than the lighter variants. Besides, that tone block that you have in yours should give you some of the tonal characteristics of heavier basses since it's quite possible to get the sound of a much heavier bass by having the center block much more dense.

My ultimate guess is that your amp is dialed in for an entirely different bass than your Elrick. I don't think Elrick users have any gripes and I don't either as a "distant cousin". Besides, with the Bartolini electronics, there's a ton of flexibility to EQ the bass to sound pretty much any way you'd want.
 
#328
You guys can disagree all you want. I respect your opinions, just giving mine pulled together from over 25 years of playing. I'm just saying that some basses won't work for all styles of music. I love Ken SMith's and have owned several. Tonally they would not work for say a blues or heavy rock band. Sure you can play all the right notes with the right feel, it just won't have the right impact or the right authentic impact producers, audiences, and musicians are used to hearing. Anyway, the 6 I just got is very nice. It has the sweetest upper register tone of any 6 I've ever owned and plays very fast. Great bass.
 
#329
I think the part I disagreed with was that Rob's basses were too light to sound good. Mine absolutely kills and only weighs 8lbs. "Tone" is so subjective, but I truly love mine and it fits great in the mix.
BTW, where did you pick up yours. I am really wanting a 6'er.
 
#330
A good example of light not equating to good tone is Rob Allen's Mouse model. One of the lightest basses I've played- around 7lbs or under- and it had one of the thickest, deepest tones I've heard from a bass.
 
#331
Bryan R. Tyler said:
A good example of light not equating to good tone is Rob Allen's Mouse model. One of the lightest basses I've played- around 7lbs or under- and it had one of the thickest, deepest tones I've heard from a bass.
Click to expand...

Actually most of the Mouse 30 models probably weigh in at about 5.5-6lbs, but I don't know how much a Deep Mouse weighs (features a body that's either 50% or twice as thick as a regular Mouse 30). These basses have zero shortage of a nice warm and deep tone.

The heaviest basses I can think of like a few Ernie Ball Stingray 5ers and many a' Warwick, I can't say I found the tone to be lacking what most would call a more vintage tone. Too much natural high mid and treble with minimal lows. On top of being murder on the shoulder and back, I never found something like that to be too versatile and pretty weak in the sustain department.

harrybosch said:
I'm just saying that some basses won't work for all styles of music. I love Ken SMith's and have owned several. Tonally they would not work for say a blues or heavy rock band.
Click to expand...

Ya see, the problem with these arguments is that I know you undervalue, underestimate, and under utilize the pre-amps on your basses. I can't comment on the Smith since it has been entirely too long since I've played one and when I did, I didn't really tap into what the pre-amp could do. The bass may not have the "natural" tone you'd like, but I assure you that anything with a 3 band w/multiple mid frequency selectors are quite capable of copping and immitating most vintage basses quite well. The only catch is that you must have a bit of head room (ie, cut the gain a tad), some trial and error, and some experience to make it work right. If you don't want to learn how to make the bass more versatile, it won't be versatile for you.

Heck, last weekend I was at a blues concert and the bassist was using an old Tobias 6er with virtually the same electronics as Elricks and the stuff I'm using. The bassist had zero difficulty sitting at the right place in the mix.

I realize most producers "don't like" these basses, but they haven't taken the time to understand these basses either.
 
#332
Mr. Majestic said:
I think the part I disagreed with was that Rob's basses were too light to sound good. Mine absolutely kills and only weighs 8lbs. "Tone" is so subjective, but I truly love mine and it fits great in the mix.
BTW, where did you pick up yours. I am really wanting a 6'er.
Click to expand...


glenn at bassspecialties has a bolt on evolution 6 on consignment at his store.
 
#335
You know there are so many variables to "great tone", "vintage tone", "tight B's", huge sustain, and great resonance. I personally think production instruments are a crap shoot. Roll the dice and good luck. I know preamps can definitely be used to shape your tone, but each instrument is different. I would also like to mention that different types of pick-ups sound WAY different. P's don't sound like J's don't sound like Soapbars, don't sound like MM's, don't sound like Aero's, don't sound like Delanos, don't sound like Nordstrands. That's not to say you can't dial in some tones, but anything with a single P pick-up will NEVER sound like something else with a single MM pick-up, no matter how much on-board preamp is used. As a matter of fact, I have owned two different Musicman Stingrays. One was a four string that weighed 12 lbs and sounded one dimensional; the other was a five string that weighed 9lbs and sounded amazing. But I could not call the five string an all around "everything" bass. But I won't go as far to say that light basses don't sound good and heavy basses sound vintage........too many variables.
 
#337
Yup. I loved that six- had to sell it when we were going through a worker's comp ordeal last year. I like my new six even better though, and I'm on the waiting list now for a fretless to match it- a 34" lined six-string singlecut with the pickups in the same lower position. No idea on the top wood yet though- Rob said to write him after NAMM to see what he's got. I generally prefer something really dark with a lot of sapwood (like the two ziricote Elricks I've had) or something multi-colored and crazy. We'll see what he's got.
 
#339
Lovin' the Elrick GS5 from a page or two back. Only thing is that I need to move to some different pickups. The wenge neck/board are so mid-focused that I don't like the pairing with the Barts. Does anyone have any of the Aero jazz 5's out of an Elrick they'd want to swap for the Barts, or for a pair of Nordstrand NJ5's?
 
#340
Ok, another bump. . . I'm also going to be looking to add something similar to a pickguard to this bass. Have any of you all added anything to the GS5's to act as a pickguard of sorts? For me it's just that I need something in there for me to be comfortable slapping. I'm used to VERY little space between the G string and the body/guard and the Elrick has a ton of space there.

Any thoughts?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back