Continued from: http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=709876
Note: I don't give out numbers; I just started the new thread.
Note: I don't give out numbers; I just started the new thread.
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.
- Status
rockstarbassist
Inactive
lol this is moving right along...carried over from the last page:
I don't have a problem with the boost only design (seriously, who here actually cuts bass or treble?), but I hate that there are two volumes instead of a volume and a blend (at least on mine, I know it's an easy fix but still...). And also it's a little too clean compared to the other Spectors I have/have had. Maybe it's the fact that I gravitate towards the EMG pre/EMG pickup loaded basses but to me and many, many others that's the Spector sound. And lastly, the Tonepump is too damn hot! No matter what amp I've used, I've always had to kick on the dB pad and crank the gain way down. To me, it just seems a little bass-akwards compared to every other bass on the market.
I don't have a problem with the boost only design (seriously, who here actually cuts bass or treble?), but I hate that there are two volumes instead of a volume and a blend (at least on mine, I know it's an easy fix but still...). And also it's a little too clean compared to the other Spectors I have/have had. Maybe it's the fact that I gravitate towards the EMG pre/EMG pickup loaded basses but to me and many, many others that's the Spector sound. And lastly, the Tonepump is too damn hot! No matter what amp I've used, I've always had to kick on the dB pad and crank the gain way down. To me, it just seems a little bass-akwards compared to every other bass on the market.
I don't even know what Pre-Amp is in my NS5CRFM. It seems to match the wiring of an OBP though.
I have received comments that it is the hottest bass they have ever touched. Sonically, of course.
I prefer to be able to cut treble and pretend I have it as a passive tone knob, rather than boosting the frequencies I prefer. Results in a "less hot" output so I'm not blasting everything.
The hot aspect can be cranked down with the internal trim pot.
I had to crack Brad Savage's new hybrid Wimbish-Hill lefty open on the stage during his sound check at NAMM because it was WAY, WAY too hot. I turned the trim pot down to about 50-60% and that bass suddenly sounded so sweet.
I agree about the volume, blend, but I guess I see the logic in each pup's volume is the blend, and so if you want more neck and less bridge, you can do so without lowering the overall volume output of BOTH pups. So in this, I don't mind two volumes. I think the two volume setup actually allows for more flexibility. IMHO.
But I've done the round-and-round about the TP before. I'd prefer a USA 9volt circuit in all of my SPECTORS (besides my USA NS-4). But they are expensive and honestly I can get my TP based-models to sound enough like the NS-2 that I'm perfectly OK with them.
Since we're on pre-amps (and I haven't posted in part 8 yet 
) I want to ask something of you EMG experts and our Aguilar guy NKUSigEp.
I have an NS 4 string with a EMG PJ setup and a 6 string with EMG TW's.
They both have the OBP-1 pre in them, however, the OPB-1 in the 4 string/PJ is the original Spector issue. The one in the 6 string/TW's was the comercially available after-market version (but not the cube shaped one, it's the same size/shape as Spector's OBP-1).
These two Spector basses sound radically different with these supposed identical pre's.
The 4 string/PJ is much hotter (I have the pups somewhat lowered on this with the 6 string/TW's way up to compensate for the volume difference) and more midrange "bitey" that the 6 string.
The 6's output is less (if pickup height and volumes/tones are equal), but the tone is much more round with a fuller bottom (both pups in dual coil mode as they are basically un-usable in single coil mode due to severe volume drop).
Given the two probably different runs of the same pre vs. the PJ's / TW's differences, what's the theory for the big difference in output and tone? I could maybe understand the tone difference, but I would think the dual coil TW's would be as hot, if not hotter, than the PJ's.
) I want to ask something of you EMG experts and our Aguilar guy NKUSigEp.I have an NS 4 string with a EMG PJ setup and a 6 string with EMG TW's.
They both have the OBP-1 pre in them, however, the OPB-1 in the 4 string/PJ is the original Spector issue. The one in the 6 string/TW's was the comercially available after-market version (but not the cube shaped one, it's the same size/shape as Spector's OBP-1).
These two Spector basses sound radically different with these supposed identical pre's.
The 4 string/PJ is much hotter (I have the pups somewhat lowered on this with the 6 string/TW's way up to compensate for the volume difference) and more midrange "bitey" that the 6 string.
The 6's output is less (if pickup height and volumes/tones are equal), but the tone is much more round with a fuller bottom (both pups in dual coil mode as they are basically un-usable in single coil mode due to severe volume drop).
Given the two probably different runs of the same pre vs. the PJ's / TW's differences, what's the theory for the big difference in output and tone? I could maybe understand the tone difference, but I would think the dual coil TW's would be as hot, if not hotter, than the PJ's.
I totally agree with JPS on liking having two volumes, one per pickup, versus one master volume, one blended pickup knob. I have noticed the difference in the month that I've had my Kramer NS-2A versus my Rebop 5 and Legend Classic 4. put aside the pre differences, I like being able to control the volume of each pickup.
That's my pennies worth IMHO.
That's my pennies worth IMHO.
For me its a preference between gigging and recording, in recording its nice to have the more versatile two volume setup, but when gigging the difference isnt very noticeable, and having a master volume saves having to waste pedalboard space on a bulky volume pedal.
Hmm I just read through all those posts. Very interesting. And it makes complete sense now that I think about it.
I always wondered why there was such a huge jump when rolled up the EQ pots. Now I know.
Still kinda prefer my East Pre Amp in my Euro. Having 4 separate boost/cut controls is awesome. Two stacked mid cut/boosts with frequency selector to dial in the mids I want or dont want (I prefer this over simply scooping them) and a stacked treble boost(1kHz)/cut(3khz) and a treble boost (selectable freqs via internal switch).
Very versatile and combined with the EQ controls on my amp Im usually able to dial in just the right tone. It takes a little bit more fiddling around with at times, but I can have a very specific tone.
The Forte, being a USA model, has the option for the USA 9v tone circuit. The TonePump is designed to sound like the USA 9v... so you can with the Forte, in fact, have the real thing.
So if you want that Spector-growl, you can get that option. As a matter of fact. It's the only option the Forte line has.
Thanks for the info JPSBassist. So, I am the newest 1st time Spector owner as bought the #18 Forte 5. It is being shipped now and I am stinking dying to see/play it. It has to be one of the coolest basses out there - IMO. No one around where I live - ND - had one so I had to buy it without trying it. I saw on the Spector site that I can get the USA 9V pre. How hard of a switch is it. Plug and play or is there soldering involved? Is the OPB-2 close in sound? Thanks
Coopermax, we want PICS! 
I don't know if it's worth the trouble to change the obp-2 circuit. You don't like the sound of it?
I don't know if it's worth the trouble to change the obp-2 circuit. You don't like the sound of it?
They came stock with EMG's and the Euro 4's (pre-dating the Euro 4LX) came with OBP's.
I hadn't thought about the internal trim pot...I'll give that a try and see how it sounds. But as for the two volumes vs. the volume/blend, it actually inhbits my own personal style in that there are a few parts where I need to roll back the volume or cut it completely to mute, or turn it up and down repetitively. Having two volumes instead of a volume and a blend makes this impossible. There's literally nothing a volume-volume pre could do that a volume-blend pre could NOT do, but there's a lot that the volume-blend can do that the volume-volume cannot do.
- Status
