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.

Warwick and Bartolini...again

Discussion in 'Pickups & Electronics [BG]' started by buckethdd, Dec 16, 2002.


  1. buckethdd

    buckethdd

    Jan 15, 2002
    SF, CA
    I know this topic has been done, and i have looked through all of the archives, and still have a few questions:
    Ok...Warwick Thumb 5 '97, active mec pickups, 3 band eq. i want to change the pickups (and most likely the preamp) because i am looking for a less harsh tone...i like the midrange and the aggressiveness of the bass, i just don't like the brittleness of the highs. From the research i've done here, elsewhere, and from playing various instruments, i think barts are the way to go because they tend to be warmer, and fatter, but still with a strong midrange punch. i'm thinking the 59J1's...the question that i have is that on the bartolini website it says these pickups are recommended for string widths measuring 66-72mm. well, the string width at both pickups on the Warwick is about 63.5mm. so i'm wondering if i will get a balanced tone from all strings or if there will be some unwanted inconsistancies. the other question is that the mec pup's are active, whereas the barts are passive, so i'm wondering if the output will be unacceptably low (if i don't also install a bartolini preamp.

    So, i am desperately calling on anyone with a Warwick Thumb 5 string that has made this change (59j's replacing mec's), who can answer these questions, and give me any other thoughts, reviews or information. thank you very much.
     
  2. David Wilson

    David Wilson Administrator Staff Member Administrator Supporting Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Lower Westchester, NY
    Hi there,
    I just went through this the other week. I'd been meaning to change the stock MEC's for a while, then they started cutting out on me which forced the issue.

    After searching here and getting conflicting information, I ended up talking with Mr Wagner, the Bartolini Distributor. He was a big help, and I bought from him directly.

    I have a Thumb 90, and used the 59J#1 pickups and the HR 3.3 918 preamp - as my bass was an older Thumb, it only had 2 band eq controls so I kept that part he same. I don't know the knob configuration on the newer thumbs, so you'll probably want a different preamp than I used.

    I'd recommend changing pups and preamp at same time. Once they were installed, I noticed that the highs were much less hissy than they had been previously with the MEC's.

    I'd recommend the upgrade, and wish I'd done it sooner.
     
  3. buckethdd

    buckethdd

    Jan 15, 2002
    SF, CA
    thanks for the reply david...i have a couple more questions.

    1) regarding the info on the bartolini website that the 59j's are designed for string spacing of 66-72mm. you are not experiencing and lack of balance across the strings?

    2) you got the pair of 59j#1 long's right?

    3) do the pickups have a copper base plate, or are they sealed in epoxy? i heard bartolini is using epoxy now to remove microphonics being picked up.

    4) did you do the install of either the pickups or preamp or yourself, and did it involve any routing as far as the preamp is concerned?

    5) you say you recommend changing the preamp and pup's at the same time...is this for tone reasons or something else like low output, or something not working correctly?

    6) how would you categorize the change in tone? i'm hoping to get a bit more fatter and warmer tone but with good articulation, and smoother highs. would you say this is a good choice?

    thank you so much for your help. i really appreciate it.
     
  4. David Wilson

    David Wilson Administrator Staff Member Administrator Supporting Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Lower Westchester, NY