Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Basses [DB]' started by Groovski, Nov 25, 2003.
I think most players will agree that the most important things are going to be the fingerboard, bridge, nut, strings and soundpost setting. Those are the things that will make a bad bass playable, and if screwed up will make an excellent bass unplayable. Everything else is going to just be details that will make the bass sound or feel slightly better or different.
(note: this is all assuming the bass itself is in functioning order; i.e. the neck isn't coming off and the top is glued on more than 3/4 of the way around...)
I have been playing upright for about a year now. I have a (Palatino) cheap bass, my first, thats really hard to play. It feels real stiff and has a boomy sound. My other (Strunel) bass has a much better feel. It plays itself and has great tone. What is the difference? Is it only because one is cheap and the other isn't? All help is appreceated
I think it's safe to assume that the strunal isn't better because it's more expensive, but it's more expensive because it's better.
Why is it better. Well, better construction and materials would be the easy answer. But with DBs the setup is extremely important. Also, instruments are a very subjective thing. Although the chinese BSO (bass shaped object) doesn't have many fans in these parts.
Well, not always. Setup is very much the key to a playable bass, BUT....in your case it also has to do with the undisputed fact that the crapatino is not a bass, but in fact a bass-shaped wooden object. Look, my Christopher Hybrid (IMO) sounds better than my teacher's old tarantino flatback. And his is a much more expensive instrument.
It is a combination of quality of bass, setup, and.....how you play it. Remember - Michael Moore uses a $15 bow that's been broken several times.
Sell the crapatino and fix up that Strunal - they can be quite nice basses when setup correctly.
I had a Carlo Robelli (a Sam Ash brand) plywood that I got for $700.00. I never had it worked on, it was tough to play, sounded OK and held together. 6 months after that I sold it and got a Strunal, with no set up work done and the same strings that were on the plywood the bass sounded and felt a whole lot better. It inspired me to get it set up at David Gage and 4 years later I still have it, who knows about the BSO.
IMHO, the BSO is not an instrument to spend money on, if you spend $400.00 dollars on a set up then you've got a $1100.00 bass that still is a disapointment, plus try to sell that bass for that kind of money. I agree with Mingus Fingers, sell the BSO, invest the proceeds from that sale in the Strunal, you wont be sorry.
Well I take the Palatino to outdoor gigs, festivals and such. It projects really well but as it was said earlier, Its really hard to play. It does help to strengthen my hands. I just love the Strunal though. Great tones, great playablitiy straight out of Sam Ash in Nashville, which leads me back to the question. What makes this one more playable? What do you change in the setup to make the crappy one more playable or if I was going to have one kinda put together for me, what do you ask for? Thanks for all of the replys guys.
One thing you could do is have your bridge cut for lower action. You may have to have your fingerboard plained to allow lower action. Depending on where you live this may be more money than you want to spend on a BSO. You could also look into strings, maybe Obligatos, they are rather comfortable. I can't explain the reason why the Strunal is more playable out of the box than the Palantino though.
uhhh...you sure about that? Michael Moore?
No he doesn't.
CHUNKY FUNGUS - i think you're thinking of edgar meyer. his bow has been broken and repaired a couple of times.
oops. Yeah, that's right, I think it was Edgar. need less coffee.
And I ain't chunky. And be nice to Mr. Mingus.