• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

The Official MTD USA Thread

Well, any high quality rig that sounds good to you with other basses and which fits your gigging needs, style, budget, etc. should do well with an MTD. They are not highly dependent upon the rig to make them sound good.

That being said, I have found that Bergantino cabs seem to work very well with MTDs, especially the IP-series (which are devastating with an MTD!). Another highly viable (and more affordable) option is GK. While I like GK amps/cabs a lot, in general, they really seem to pair up especially well with MTD basses.

for some reason, Ampeg SVT stacks sound REALLY GOOD with my 635 fretless...

But + 1,000,000,000 on the IP stuff...greatest bass amp EVER...

Cheers,
Cameron
 
But + 1,000,000,000 on the IP stuff...greatest bass amp EVER...
I personally wouldn't go that far, but I will say this...

I still remember plugging MTD basses into a couple of these at Bowlus' howse ;) and man, that was COOL. They had enough power that, for probably most gigs, you wouldn't even need the outboard preamp to get the rest of the juice from them. What that meant was, all you needed was a Bass, a cord, and an IP. It was so cool to just literally plug the bass into the back of the IP and simply use the EQ controls on the bass for everything. Amazing!

If they weren't so crazy heavy and expensive (at least by my standards anyway), I'd probably own the 310 right now.
 
I have found that Bergantino cabs seem to work very well with MTDs, especially the IP-series (which are devastating with an MTD!). Another highly viable (and more affordable) option is GK. While I like GK amps/cabs a lot, in general, they really seem to pair up especially well with MTD basses.

+1. I play my 535 through an SWR 410 with a SWR SM 900 head, a GK 1001RB II through GK Neo 212 and 115 cabs, a Epi UL 902 C head, into a Epi UL 112, 310 S1 or 410 S2, or a Bergantino 112ER, and I also use a Markbass LMII, and my MTD kills in every configuration. IMHO the 902 C into the UL 410 sounds the best. Warm, fat, articulate, all of the things I look for.

I use an Ampeg SVT III or IV Pro through Eden cabs (the cabs are both over ten years old - I don't know how the current Edens compare).

for some reason, Ampeg SVT stacks sound REALLY GOOD with my 635 fretless...

But + 1,000,000,000 on the IP stuff...greatest bass amp EVER...

Doesn't Mike have a Glockenklang rig in his shop?

He does. I havent been there in a while but I remember him having an EA cab and some SWR gear also.

The IP rig is the ultimate with MTD. I also remember a Glock HeartRock through an S1 Epifani 410 being a fairly religious experience.

JC

Tom, Vic, Virgil, bass12, Cameron, emjazz, Joel,

Thanks very much for the info - I will have to check out some of that gear and see how I get on. The likelyhood of finding it all under one roof is pretty slim though.
I'm quite surprised about the GK's because I've never been too ethusiastic about how my MTDs sound through my MB150 combo, but I guess that is quite a different beast from the RB heads.
I really liked the Epi502 when I played one previously through a UL410, but went for the F500 given the size/weight differences. The Berg IP stuff sounds very worthy of consideration and I should be able to do that in the next month or so, I'll let you know how I get on.
I've got some money that I almost spent on a Sadowsky SA200, but someone beat me to it, maybe an IP112 is in my future. or a 3x10 if i can lift it :D

Funnily enough the best tone I've heard from my MTDs is direct through a Folio Notepad mixer into my Audio Technica ATH-M50 headphones. My neighbours love me ;)

cheers
G
 
Echoing Virgil (imagine that!) - MTD + Epifani = sonic heaven IMO. Lately I've been using a Genz Benz Shuttle 9.0 & Bergantino HT112ER, and the MTD sounds wonderful through that too. Very subjective, of course....what works for you may not work for me, yada yada. These basses...well, at least my bass - is remarkably crystal-clear across the frequency range. One example of a rig I don't particularly like for this bass is the Genz Benz Shuttle 6.0-12T combo. To my ears, and totally FWIW/YMMV, etc...you do need a rig that can "pronounce" those frequencies for you.
 
I'm quite surprised about the GK's because I've never been too ethusiastic about how my MTDs sound through my MB150 combo, but I guess that is quite a different beast from the RB heads.
Understatement of the year. :)

The older MB150 stuff was really pretty specifically targeted for upright players, and electric players will typically complain about it sounding very "boxy", which should come as no surprise noting its design. Uprights provide so much massive low end from their design and typical pickup system types, that they need most of their amplification help in the midrange, which is why a lot of really small-ish amps can do so well with them.

For an electric bass, you NEED and RB head if you really want to hear what we're talking about when we say "GK tone" in this thread. Absolutely night/day difference from the aluminum box MB150. No comparison.
 
Hey folks, I've just put up my Sadowsky NYC as a trade "feeler". The only thing I'm interested in trading for is a 535. If any of you have been thinking of making a switch let me know!

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?p=9724475&highlight=#post9724475

Oh, and Jerry - one of the 535s I'm considering trading for is Greg's alder/maple/rosewood that you have commented on.
 
I was just over at the Sadowsky forum and it's been interesting hearing from people who felt that their MTDs sounded great at home but got "lost in the mix" when it came to band settings. I've definitely noticed that my ash/ash/maple doesn't cut as well as my ash/wenge, but the ash/wenge couldn't cut through any better than it does! I have, however, noticed a tendency with certain "full range" (if that makes sense) modern-sounding basses - they sound rich and beautiful on their own but just disappear in live performance settings. Any thoughts?
 
I was just over at the Sadowsky forum and it's been interesting hearing from people who felt that their MTDs sounded great at home but got "lost in the mix" when it came to band settings. I've definitely noticed that my ash/ash/maple doesn't cut as well as my ash/wenge, but the ash/wenge couldn't cut through any better than it does! I have, however, noticed a tendency with certain "full range" (if that makes sense) modern-sounding basses - they sound rich and beautiful on their own but just disappear in live performance settings. Any thoughts?
IMHO, it's not really about MTD vs Sadowsky.

For different people and different prefs, it's gonna' be about wood combo first.

On the "cut", I love both Sadowsky basses and my 535's. Neither one cuts better than the other, just a totally different sound. The MTD cuts like one of the best modern sounds I've ever heard... still my fave... big huge and wide, but not scooped or weak in any area... at least in my case, and for my prefs/style/gear. I've heard the scooped comments before, but I think that's typically simply been the wrong wood combo for the wrong player. My ash/walnut ash/maple bass cuts like crazy. NO problems there AT ALL. Even my chambered alder/redwood maple/ebony 535... same thing... definitely no getting lost in the mix with that bad boy.

The Sadowsky cuts like the best J bass you ever heard, but with the Sadowsky bump in the mids, and no D/G string disappearing out from under you, which is part of what he does with his preamp and/or pickups.

IMHO, there's really no way to directly compare these two, because they're going for a totally different tone base. It literally is just about which one speaks to you more. On a quality level, you can't do better than either one, so that's a wash.

Chasarms really said it best here, and you can literally interchange Sadowky and MTD in his comment. He was actually talking about yet another modern bass in this particular case, but IMHO, it doesn't matter.

I have never laid eyes on a bass that surpasses Sadowsky. Further, they have an amazing tone that is unique and distinct yet very universal in application. I simply can not say anything negative about the build, tone or playability of instruments.

But, in my view they don't hold that distinction uniquely...
 
Never had a problem with my poplar/wenge 535. Live, it's like a hot knife through butter.

My only Sadowsky was a Tokyo 5er and it really shined in the mix, it never impressed me much solo at low volumes.

Although I've not gigged my ash/maple 535, it sounds sweet recorded, and again doesn't get lost in the mix.

I rarely have any extremes of EQ.
 
Vic, I don't see it as MTD vs Sadowsky either. I LOVE the sound of my Sadowskys and I honestly wish that I felt more comfortable on the 5 than I do. But more and more I've been aware that I resist taking it to my gigs (although I still gig my Standard 4) because I know I won't feel "at home" on it. Furthermore, when I'm playing my MTD (especially the ash/wenge) I never "miss" anything (as in "I love this bass, but I wish it slapped more like my...").

As always Vic, your feedback is appreciated!
 
Here is mine in the mix.

100_0428.jpg
 
Vic, I don't see it as MTD vs Sadowsky either. I LOVE the sound of my Sadowskys and I honestly wish that I felt more comfortable on the 5 than I do. But more and more I've been aware that I resist taking it to my gigs (although I still gig my Standard 4) because I know I won't feel "at home" on it. Furthermore, when I'm playing my MTD (especially the ash/wenge) I never "miss" anything (as in "I love this bass, but I wish it slapped more like my...").
This makes absolutely perfect sense.

I typically only object when folks start saying stuff like getting lost in the mix and such. Not referring to you on this, but I've heard it before. The only problem there is the mismatch between the woods and the player, IMHO. Case in point, the tulip/wenge combo for me. Just did not work at all for me, and yeah, I did have problems getting the presence I needed in a mix. However, with the wood combos I have now, a complete and total 180. None, no such, nada, zilch, zero, goose egg, never, a problem getting the presence I crave. Never. You know who solved that problem for me? Mike. Recommended something I NEVER would have imagined to choose on my own, but boy was it ever what I was looking for... for me, anyway, which is, again, the whole point I'm getting to here.

Mike's basses are SO SO SO dependent on the wood regarding what they do (or don't do), it's absolutely critical each player finds the right one. On the other hand, Roger goes for a more consistent tone base, so pretty much anybody that gets a Sadowsky is going to be at at least 90% of what they expect regardless of the woods, and with that little variation, people typically know enough to just get the right one the first time.

So I guess one big characteristic diff is Mike's basses are a lot more dependent on the personal fit than Roger's, which speaks directly to each one's business goals. It's also the reason, any time anyone asks me my opinion about MTDs, I very very very strongly urge them to also talk directly to Mike and/or a few other "wood/player matchmakers" and be VERY detailed about what they like/dislike and the music they play. I guess you could view this as either a positive or a negative. For me, it was a positive... part of the quest/adventure, and at least in my case, the holy grail definitely lay at the end, and I drink from that cup very happily every single time.
 
Mike's basses are SO SO SO dependent on the wood regarding what they do (or don't do), it's absolutely critical each player finds the right one. On the other hand, Roger goes for a more consistent tone base, so pretty much anybody that gets a Sadowsky is going to be at at least 90% of what they expect regardless of the woods, and with that little variation, people typically know enough to just get the right one the first time.

From what I know of each builder and their basses I think you're right on point here.
 
Vic, I don't see it as MTD vs Sadowsky either. I LOVE the sound of my Sadowskys and I honestly wish that I felt more comfortable on the 5 than I do. But more and more I've been aware that I resist taking it to my gigs (although I still gig my Standard 4) because I know I won't feel "at home" on it. Furthermore, when I'm playing my MTD (especially the ash/wenge) I never "miss" anything (as in "I love this bass, but I wish it slapped more like my...").

I tend to agree, and I'll also echo the sentiments that so much hinges upon the "what works for you" factor. With my MTDs, my ash/maple/wenge/wenge 435 and 535 just nail "my tone" better than any other wood combination I have tried (but I know that this wood combination does not work as well for others). On the topic of Sadowsky's, my mahogany/koa/maple/ebony 24F 5 is not the "prettiest" sounding bass in my arsenal when played solo, but it sits in a mix better than any other bass I own. My PJ/5, though, is probably my Swiss Army Knife. It just seems able to do it all.

I definitely love my MTDs AND my Sadowsky's! :bassist: :bassist: :bassist: :cool:

Tom.