I just measured, and they are near identical size.....the hol e under there is pretty much the same size too. Looks like all would be interchangeable....This is such a great pre I don't know why anyone would want to change it.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Is that the only difference that you can tell? About how much wider is the jazz plate approx?
Ultimately I'm wondering if it's possible to put a V7 preamp into a standard jazz bass using this plate:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Invalid Link Removed
Last edited:
Still waiting for somebody to tell the sound difference (if any noticable) between the ash/maple V7 and the alder/maple Vintage V7
Have tried searching this thread? There are some post with the answer you're looking for..
Wood is wood...that's just what I have witnessed in my 30+ years of playing/gigging.
It's one of those never-ending discussions, whether the type of wood really makes a difference or not. I think the only thing (most) everyone will agree on is that they look different, so maybe you should decide based on whether you like the looks of ash enough to be worth the extra money.
I agree with the overall difference in how the wood grain appears between the two woods. If I was looking for a transparent finish I would most likely look at ash. If not alder would suffice.
To my ears, Ash/Maple sounds very different from Alder/Rosewood. This video was posted earlier in the thread showcasing the difference ().
60s J-Basses would've used Alder, and Ash in the 70s. That said, the largest difference you'd hear between the V7 and Vintage V7 would be the pickup spacing, not the wood. If one were trying to be "authentic", I would imagine he should choose Alder for a V7, and Ash for a Vintage V7.
The Fender MM jazz is Ash with 70s pickup spacing. I found it a bit odd that he would've chosen 60s spacing for the original V7 (I'm not convinced it was his choice), but it is what it is.
My reason for choosing an Ash V7 was that I already have two Alder J-Basses with 60s pickup spacing. I didn't want another alder/sunburst/60s-spacing J-style bass laying around
Hey people.
Did you change the strings and put them through the body? Did you have to adjust the bridge?
Did you change the strings and put them through the body? Did you have to adjust the bridge?
I did change and string through the body. I didn't need to adjust anything until I started experimenting with larger string gauges.
It always seems like the maple fretboard neck is the main consideration..they are definately brighter....The bodies hmm...the juries will always be out on that, and endless debate. Even our ears change as a day goes by. The same bass will sound different to you 8 hours later...I KNOW my V7 sounds awesome, but some nights can strap it on and it sounds like crap..Everything in the signal chain is the same..It is your ears.
My bad, I said the Fender is wider than the Sire, it's not, both are 70 mm.
I had to punch a new hole cause on the Fender plate, holes space is 50 mm VS 46 mm on the Sire.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Just got around to weighing mine: looks like it's exactly at the 9 lbs mark.
For comparison my Fender Mexican Standard Jazzzz bass is 9.4 lbs.
My Ibanez Ergodyne is 9.4 lbs.
My Peavey T-40 is 12.4 lbs (lol?).
and my Hurricane by Morris Japanese P bass copy is 8.8 lbs
For comparison my Fender Mexican Standard Jazzzz bass is 9.4 lbs.
My Ibanez Ergodyne is 9.4 lbs.
My Peavey T-40 is 12.4 lbs (lol?).
and my Hurricane by Morris Japanese P bass copy is 8.8 lbs
So, being a "P" guy, I told myself I will only EVER have 2 "J" basses-- one "60's style" with the passive, stacked controls of the 1960 Deluxe bass, and one "70's style" with an active preamp.
The more I see of the V7 Vintage, the more I think I know what the latter is going to be. I just wish they could clean up the control layout a bit? I'm thinking Volume, Blend, Bass, stacked Mid\Mid-sweep, and a treble knob that acts as a passive tone control when pulled up (which also bypasses the preamp while doing so). This would eliminate the active\passive switch, as well as one stacked knob. Any chance of getting Marcus to give that a try?
The more I see of the V7 Vintage, the more I think I know what the latter is going to be. I just wish they could clean up the control layout a bit? I'm thinking Volume, Blend, Bass, stacked Mid\Mid-sweep, and a treble knob that acts as a passive tone control when pulled up (which also bypasses the preamp while doing so). This would eliminate the active\passive switch, as well as one stacked knob. Any chance of getting Marcus to give that a try?
Don't see the issue people have with the control layout. Unless you're doing wah-esque sweeps with the mid control, everything is pretty accessible, including the switch. I've also only ever had negligible give on a stacked pot when rotating only one control.
Switches are more accessible on the m7, but that's more to keep it aesthetically pleasing imo.
Switches are more accessible on the m7, but that's more to keep it aesthetically pleasing imo.
Thanks -- can you please tell me if the spacing between the eq controls is 29mm from center of pot to center of pot?
Ha! Maybe we should wear identifiable shirts or something. You have a Sire T shirt? I do but white t shirts make me look fat, lol. Maybe my black bBarefaced shirt, it is slimming
