• 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.

Vintage Yamaha BB Series???

#82
JW56789 said:
Oh well . . . . . but I can tell you the ones they sell now as BB's are nice basses I suppose, but nothing at all like these.
Click to expand...

Have owned two BB1000S and a BB3000A and a BB350F and also have played a few other ones. Still have one BB1000S. Never liked the BB3000A thought. Sounded to compressed to me, not sure why. But that might be that specific specimen. The newer BB's are also nice. Don't know how they compare to the old ones but they sound good on their own right. The clips of the newest ones remind me somehow of my BB1000S. Not exactly the same but it's in the ballpark.
 
#83
Had an 85 BB5000 for a little while in the late 90s. I wanted a 5 string and it was priced right at the time, in the $400 ballpark maybe $450+ if I remember. At the time I wanted an active bass with the ability to get the fieldy clicks or dirk lance/claypool percussive snap, and this bass didn't do that, so being young and stupid I let it go. I didn't fully appreciate what I had, I mean I kinda did because it was after I found my dream guitar, 1984 SBG2000, so I knew top end yammies were good, it just wasn't the bass for me at the time. A Warwick FNA fit the bill better, and had much clout in the "pimp rock" scene back then.

Now I could really see the benefit of holding onto that 85 Yamaha. One of several regrets in my bass selling over the years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dave Neal
#84
JW56789 said:
I was obsessed with these things, and owned quite a few in the 80's and beyond.

My intro was the original BB1200. Massively built, big neck, reversed P-pickup, which was the Achilles' heel for some on these axes: They did not easily interchange with DiMarzio's or any other aftermarket pickup because of their different mounting ring system. Otherwise, a great P-Bass, and different than a Fender, gorgeous in that cherry over yellowed natural finish. Stout bridge, and the adjustable tension keys are fantastic IF you score the little spanner wrench you need to adjust their tension. All these axes ran a 33 7/8" (!!) scale, which with their pickups gave a more airy, not quite as dense a tone as most Fender pickups, great for recording. MIJ at Yamaha Music Craft.

The BB2000's were groundbreaking in that they were the first fully-realized P/J bass. Essentially built on the 1200 with the additional pickup, these were the s**t back in their day, and you saw lots of famous guys with brought-over-from-Japan examples (the decal says 'Broad Bass', a name never used by Yamaha in this country) in pics and on album covers. That blade pickup had a lot of talking to do, and these were great basses . . . except for some guys, it had a BIG neck, like the 1200. Which led to . . . . .

Yamaha in Cali was courting a famous bassist (you WOULD recognize the name) who liked the 2000 but raged about that thick neck and a few other fine points. This led to the BB3000 which to me is WAY better than 2000's, as the neck is just that much more useable, and they just look too cool with the brass pickup surrounds. They are a bit thinner back to front, so they're a little lighter, not a bad thing. BTW, said player over time wore out his welcome and the proposed signature model never appeared, but the changes he pushed resulted in the 3000. The orginal passives are fine, and the A models with active electronics (vol-bal-bass-treble) are good and sound somewhat EMG-ish. Of the fours, the BB3000's are the best.

These all ran the same wood recipe: Alder body wings glued to a maple/mahogany neckthru, with a thick Macassar ebony fingerboard, so they are zingier than darker. Yamaha was cool in that they didn't dye the fingerboards to all black, so most have that wonderful curvy chocolate stripe running thru the grain. Again, all of these MIJ by YMC.

And then, the BB5000. Essentially the 4-string BB3000 'subdivided' from four to five strings, same neck and fingerboard width, so it's a little tight at the nut end, not a big deal if you're used to Jazzes or Rics, but it can be a bit much for some. Yamaha added the original 3+2 P pickup (not adopted by the rest of the industry until recently), built a accompanying blade pickup at the bridge, added a 5-string bridge, and a 5th key on a slightly bigger headstock, and that was that. Same wood recipe as its' 4-string brothers, and essentially a BB3000 with one more string.

The 5000A1 was the second version, the bass above with the active electronics package of the 3000A with corresponding new active five-string pickups. MIJ.

The 5000A2 was a completely different animal. Made in the then-new Yamaha Taiwan factory (now closed, as they've moved all non-Japanese production to China), this was a different, bigger body, and previewed the electronics and pickups from the forthcoming TRB basses. Same wood recipe, but a bigger, different body, and a MUCH wider fingerboard (though the neck shape was fine, kinda flat oval). Still a fine bass, but for me it somehow lacked the gracefulness of the MIJ axes.

I owned all of these, and a 400 and a 1600, and my faves (by a lot) were the 3000A and the 5000A. Like all the Japanese makers, they abandon classics at a stupendous pace and throw something else against the wall to see what sticks, but I wonder what the hell they were smoking to think RBX's, Motion Basses, and TRB's were replacements for the BB's. Oh well . . . . . but I can tell you the ones they sell now as BB's are nice basses I suppose, but nothing at all like these.
Click to expand...


Yup

IMG_1675.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: woodyng2
#85
RBJ, that metallic red one is a real score: Only a handful were ever brought into the US.

BTW: IF you would like the brass rings to look like new (though some prefer the brass to have 'patina'), it's very simple to remove the brass rings (the P will come clear of the pickup, the J-blade will come with it so unscrew the pickup screws and remove it once it's free of the body), and work the brass with ultrafine steel wool (they're typically not clear coated). Once you get them like you want them, rub a tiny amount of VO5 (yep, the old school hairdressing in the toothpaste tube), and they'll stay shiny for a long time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rockdoc11 and InnerBass
#87
JW56789 said:
RBJ, that metallic red one is a real score: Only a handful were ever brought into the US.

BTW: IF you would like the brass rings to look like new (though some prefer the brass to have 'patina'), it's very simple to remove the brass rings (the P will come clear of the pickup, the J-blade will come with it so unscrew the pickup screws and remove it once it's free of the body), and work the brass with ultrafine steel wool (they're typically not clear coated). Once you get them like you want them, rub a tiny amount of VO5 (yep, the old school hairdressing in the toothpaste tube), and they'll stay shiny for a long time.
Click to expand...


That's brilliant - Thanks J Wilson!

These basses are the shizzle !
 
#88
Les Fret said:
The shape of the BB3000 looks really different from the BB3000A. The BB3000 looks more like a BB1000S but the BB3000A body looks somewhat thinned out. Didn't know that.

I has a BB3000A once but did like the sound of my BB1000S more.
Click to expand...


Hey Les -

The BB3000 has more of a Lakland 44-14 body.

The BB3000a is a more traditional J style body.

I can't believe e how much I dig these basses.
 
#92
Pretty darn close, huh?

The upper body contour seems longer and deeper on the 1988 MIJ 3000a near as I can tell.

The upper body contour on the early 80's BB1000s looks more like the body on the early 80's BB3000 - not as long or deep.

Playing both of them, I can tell you that the neck profile on the MIJ 1988 BB3000a is thinner and the fret spacing feels more "modern".

The neck profile on the 1983 MIJ feels more U shaped and the fret spacing feels larger. The whole vibe of the bass feels more "vintage", even though the build is a neck through.

They both kick complete ass - I'm now a fanboy.

:thumbsup:



01-2.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lowdownthump, woodyng2 and Badwater
#93
Funny, my main basses between around 1986-1991 were two identical BB1000's...through necks, one P pickup, passive. Really loved em at the time, but the stock pickups were horrific. But they looked nice and played great!
 
#94
I had a neck thru BB1200, great bass, a bit heavy. I wanted an Alembic, like everyone else in the early 80's, couldn't afford one. McCartney had one, but the guy who made me check them out was Jimmy Hislop, I saw him with Al Jareau and he was playing one, sounded great. The only construction flaw I've noticed with the older ones Is I see alot of them with cracked headstocks (like Gibsons). I think they were a little weak at the headstock-nut area.
 
#98
I really dig the pickups on my MIJ 83 BB3000 - just perfect for the bass.

I also like the low z pickups in my 88 MIJ BB3000a - the preamp seems fairly transparent. It comes across as subtle yet full.
 
Last edited:
#99
Les Fret said:
What did you find so horrific about the pickups? I think the pickups on the BB1000S are just fine.
Click to expand...

I'm having to trust my memory on this, which is a dodgy proposition, but...at the time, I found them to be weak and thin sounding, so I swapped em. That was in the mid 80's. No idea how I'd feel today! Bottom line is they were fantastic basses!
 
  • Like
Reactions: RBJ11

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back