Sound Check- Which bass sounds better

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by chongdog83, Oct 28, 2004.

  1. chongdog83


    Oct 28, 2004

    Hey guys, I just bought a new bass and cant decide if I like it better than my current bass, or whether I'm even going to keep my current bass. My original bass is a pedulla rapture j2000 5 string, just bought a Warrior Soldier 5 string.

    The rapture is deffinately a nice jazz bass, and the warior pretty closely resembles a stingray and a warwick (i was planning on buying a stingray but was able to purchase the warrior for 300 less than a stingray would have been).

    The recording are of both basses with treble and bass on their active preamps turned all the way up, the volume all the way up, run through an Avalon u5 into my soundblaster live! card. The different file names are the basses with different pickup configurations (bridge, both, neck) and then the bridge played with a pick.

    On which track do you prefer the tone?

  2. Dincrest


    Sep 27, 2004
    New Jersey
    In general, I preferred the tones in the odd numbered tracks. The bass in the odd numbered tracks just seemed to have a fatter, meatier sound that was nice and even. The bass in the even numbered tracks tended to get peaky, and sounded very tinny to me. Clarity was good, but it sounded thin to me. The bass in the odd numbered tracks could get the sizzly highs and clarity without losing the meatiness. Also, I found that the fret noise was less pronounced in the odd tracks.

    My personal favorite was number 1. Very even tone without peakiness and some nice meat to it which would sit well in a band mix.

    But that's just my subjective opinion. I have no clue which bass is which or if the tracks with each bass on it are jumbled up (i.e. the odd isn't always a particular bass), but to my ears, the odd numbered tracks were more desirable to me than the evens.

    I recommend that you put both basses through the paces with a band or something and see which one works for you and your bandmates. I can see both basses being good in certain situations.
  3. #1 and #6 sound good to my ears.....kinda supernatural. :)
  4. wulf


    Apr 11, 2002
    Oxford, UK
    I've listened to about half the tracks and, so far, I'm concurring 100% with Dincrest.

  5. 6-3-2


    Sep 20, 2003
    2,4,5 has good low end but the highs are weak, 7, that's it. The rest i didn't care much for.
  6. Whafrodamus


    Oct 29, 2003
    Andover, MA
    I liked 3. By the way, are you having a fret buzz problem?
  7. geshel


    Oct 2, 2001
    They all sound way too "scooped" to me. EG, they all sound like a bass with it's bass and treble controls maxed out. Not much "real" character comes through, IMO.

    P.S. Yes, the "even" bass needs a setup - way too much fret buzz.
  8. Tim__x


    Aug 13, 2002
    Alberta, Canada
    Flat EQ would make a better comparison. As would a recording that doesn't clip.
  9. Skorzen


    Mar 15, 2002
    Springfield MA
    As they are EQed, they all kinda sound like varying levels of crap to me(no offense IMHO) They tend to just kinda sound like mush from so much lowend and lack of midrange definition. I will say that the odd tracks did seem to suffer from this less, but that doesent really matter because we're not hearing the bass, but rather the preamp.
  10. pistoleroace


    Sep 13, 2002
    1,4,6,7 to my ears with probably #1 sounding the nicest. And you need to set up your basses to get rid of the fret buzz.