Dismiss Notice

Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

SR 400 vs SR 500

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by SGT. Pepper, Jan 20, 2006.


  1. SGT. Pepper

    SGT. Pepper Banned

    Nov 20, 2005
    Phila,Pa.
    Im aware of the plus and minuses of both basses. I want to know what you think, whats your preferences? I like the Pups and electronics in the 500 but I like the woods and pup configuration in the 400.


    The 400....

    SR Models[​IMG] SR400LA [​IMG][​IMG][​IMG][​IMG]3pc. Maple Neck Material[​IMG]Soft Maple Body[​IMG]24/Medium frets[​IMG]Rosewood Finger Board[​IMG]Accu-Cast B20 bridge[​IMG]IBZ DXP Neck PU[​IMG]IBZ DXJ Bridge PU[​IMG]Pearl Dot Inlay[​IMG]CK : Hardware Color[​IMG]Style sweeper
    and the 500

    SR Models[​IMG] SR500BM [​IMG][​IMG][​IMG][​IMG]5pc Wenge/ Bubinga Neck Material[​IMG]Mahogany Body[​IMG]24/Medium frets[​IMG]Rosewood Finger Board[​IMG]Accu-Cast B20 bridge[​IMG]Bartolini MK1-4 Neck PU[​IMG]Bartolini MK1-4 Bridge PU[​IMG]Abalone Oval Inlay[​IMG]CK : Hardware Color[​IMG]Bartolini MK1 3-Band
     
  2. Figjam

    Figjam

    Aug 5, 2003
    Boston, MA
    I dig the 500 a lot more, i think the pickups are a lot better and the bodt feels more comfortable.
     
  3. Pruitt

    Pruitt

    Jun 30, 2005
    Danbury, CT
    I've had my 506 for 6 months now and love it! :cool:

    Good luck and have fun!! :bassist:
     
  4. adept_inept

    adept_inept

    Jan 9, 2006
    i have had my sr 400 for 4 years:

    THIS ONE-> [​IMG]

    it sorta has that "flame maple" thing going on, and most aren't like mine (it's a keeper!)

    basically, its a great, quality, and inexpensive instrument. i love almost everything about it, except i do plan on putting bartolini pups/eq into it in the next month.

    for the look, i feel because mine has that unique body, its worth it. the mahogany probably has a better tone. mine tends to be a little too high on the mids/treble (probably the electronics, though, so the barts should solve this)

    otherwise, i love this bass and will never let go of it.

    so, that's my 2 cents.

    and yes, it is missing a string. its not a three string bass. hahaha

    although that is an interesting idea. everyone keeps adding strings. lets take some away!
     
  5. I chose the SR406 over the SR506 simply because of the woods used in the build. Both basses play and feel exactly identical. I chose the Maple bodied and necked 406 because I felt the 506 was a little too deep and low for my tastes. I figured that the Barts in a Maple body as opposed to a Mahogany one should sound more to my liking. So, in the distant future (hopefully summer) I will be installing a Bartolini set of soapbars as well as a three band preamp to match.

    -ryan-
     
  6. adept_inept

    adept_inept

    Jan 9, 2006
    exactly my thinking :D

    the barts will balance nice with the brighter maple and get the best tone.

    do you plan on changing the eq as well?

    or just new pups?

    i'm jus trying to figure out if itd b worth it. honestly, i'd prefer the simplicity of passive tone/volume.

    but theres just too many holes to fill!
     
  7. I'm going to replace it all, and make the volume knob a push/pull to activate a preamp bypass, so the passive pickups can sing without the nuse of preamping.

    -ryan-
     
  8. adept_inept

    adept_inept

    Jan 9, 2006
    ahh. i completely forgot about passive/active possibilities.

    i think i'm going to go for the bart pups with 2 band eq, and then volume, blend, and passive tone for when the passive switch is activated.
     
  9. I never contemplated a passive tone switch inplace of a mid selector before... Very good idea though, that be a hell of a lot of wiring though.

    -ryan-
     
  10. adept_inept

    adept_inept

    Jan 9, 2006
    yea, nice amount of wires. but well worth it. i'm just not a fan of most eqs mids. i prefer leaving mid altering to the amp.
     
  11. Use the normal font?
     
  12. Sako

    Sako

    Nov 4, 2004
    Charlotte, NC
    okay, i've got to jump in on this. i love the sr500 and 900 -- especially the neck, but not sure about the soapbars. i'm really interested in a PJ config. does the sr400 sound like a p and a j?

    yes i could upgrade to better pups later. then maybe add active eq. but is there another option out there similar to what i'm looking for?
     
  13. Stinkoman20xx

    Stinkoman20xx

    Oct 19, 2003
    I have owned a 406 and played the 505 and 506.I prefer the sound of the 500 series cause I like darker sounding basses but found for me it was as versatile as am 406.
     
  14. adept_inept

    adept_inept

    Jan 9, 2006
    yes, it gets a great balance between the two. and with the blend, you can solo each pup to get the j and p sounds

    granted, this isnt fender. but its different. and with some new pups. you're looking at the best of both worlds.
     
  15. i have extensivly played a sr400, its a 1997 but it is a very nice bass. the only 500 that i have played was a 505 and it was extreamly nice as well. overall i have more experiance with the 400 so i would reccommend that. also check out the new BTB basses, 450 and 550

    lowsound
     
  16. +1 on the 506...I love mine to death!! It rules!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :hyper: