Double Bass Which first: better bass or amp gear?

[pskelly]

Hope someone can shed some light on this newbie question:

I currently play a plywood bass, an Englehardt, and would like to upgrade to a better bass. But I also now need to buy a combo or amp/head to play out. I've been borrowing a combo until recently.

Should the new bass come before the amp equipment or is the order not crucial? I ask because in reading past threads some people have said that they particularly liked the sound of their bass through this or that particular amp. But it also seems reasonable that good equipment designed to reproduce any incoming sound as closely as possible will do so with whatever is put into it.

Thanks for any help.

 

[dfp]

if your current bass sounds good enough for the work you could get with it, i'd go for a good amp and start gigging, a new bass will be a great pleasure to you, but it won't instantly get you into any gigs you couldn't have gotten with the Englehardt. provided you have that Engle set up well...

but you are worried that you'll get an amp now, then later get a better bass and not like how it works with the amp you chose? could happen, but if you get a tried and true combo like the GK MB150, it'll make the sounds that most people will accept (and many even like a lot!) as amplified upright bass with any bass and most pickups. a good combo and 2 or 3 bass pickups can go a long way toward finding a great sound, for your money. a great new bass will be a better investment after you've played a while and have more experience "hearing" bass...

these are my opinions, good luck!

 

[PB+J]

It depends on your situation, it seems to me. If you're already gigging in situations where you need a lot of amplification, then I'd say the amp--If the amplified sound is mostly what people are hearing, then upgrade the amp. If on the other hand it's more acoustic, then upgrade the bass.

I do a lot of gigs where I'm really just barely amping the bass, or I'm using the PA, so it makes sense to upgrade the bass. But in a lot of situations a good carved bass is actually going to make some aspects of your life harder--it'll feedback much more readily, for example. So if youre playing in a loud rockablly combo, then bump up the amp first

 

[junglebike]

When you get a better bass, you're also generally getting better playability. I agree though, if you're heavily amped, you're mostly hearing the amp and pickup, so upgrading basses will not result in a huge impact. Of course, if your better bass allows you to play more comfortably then that'll result in a big sonic improvement!

 

[fdeck]

To me, they are almost unrelated issues. I play an old Kay, and it would probably be good enough for gigging forever. It is almost criminal what I get away with playing on -- an old beater that I originally got for free.

I have upgraded my amp gear when I needed more sound, and have made some incremental improvements to portability and ergonomics. This I consider to be just taking care of business.

While I am in the market for a nicer bass, I have to be honest with myself, that it is mainly for the pleasure of playing at home and enjoying the pure acoustic tone.

 

[pskelly]

Thanks for the help. I didn't know the acoustic sound of the bass and the amplified sound were two such different animals. I will definitely have to go amp first, since that's currently the weakest link in the chain (not counting the operator ) Thanks again.

 

[Ed Fuqua]

While I am in the market for a nicer bass, I have to be honest with myself, that it is mainly for the pleasure of playing at home and enjoying the pure acoustic tone.

You are, of course, speaking only for yourself. Being the poster boy for No-Amp, I have precisely the opposite view. Amps may come and amps may go, but playing the bass that you love, that coalesces meaning from chaos is a joy that is unparalleled.

I've heard FAR too many players who have gotten lovely sounds out of whatever piece of crap the venue provided to place much countenance on gear oriented purchasing. Certainly style of music is going to be a determining factor; if you're playing psychobilly at volume levels that will rival a metal band, you don't need a Panormo. {You actually don't even need an acoustic instrument, but that's another rant.}

But if you are playing jazz or other primarily acoustic forms of music (bluegrass, some folk music; generally anything that they put microphones in front of instruments rather than plug something into them), you may want to rethink the whole amp/instrument ranking....

 

[ToneRanger]

If you're already gigging in situations where you need a lot of amplification, then I'd say the amp--If the amplified sound is mostly what people are hearing, then upgrade the amp. If on the other hand it's more acoustic, then upgrade the bass.

Nicely said.
Unless you're playing purely acoustically, the amp is part of your instrument. As a sound guy I'm sick of players who turn up with only half an instrument and expect me to create their sound.
If you're playing amplified, you need a complete bass & amp rig that you can get 'your' sound from. As others have said, start with basic generic gear if you need to; buy second-hand if possible so you can get your money back when you upgrade.

 

[fdeck]

You are, of course, speaking only for yourself. Being the poster boy for No-Amp, I have precisely the opposite view. Amps may come and amps may go, but playing the bass that you love, that coalesces meaning from chaos is a joy that is unparalleled.

I've heard FAR too many players who have gotten lovely sounds out of whatever piece of crap the venue provided to place much countenance on gear oriented purchasing. Certainly style of music is going to be a determining factor; if you're playing psychobilly at volume levels that will rival a metal band, you don't need a Panormo. {You actually don't even need an acoustic instrument, but that's another rant.}

But if you are playing jazz or other primarily acoustic forms of music (bluegrass, some folk music; generally anything that they put microphones in front of instruments rather than plug something into them), you may want to rethink the whole amp/instrument ranking....

+1

Absolutely if you are doing any acoustic playing at all, then the bass reigns supreme. I notice that you are located in NYC, and it is easy for us provincials to forget that acoustic music is even possible.

Out here in the sticks, for reasons unbeknownst to me, jazz gets played loud. Maybe it's the combination of electric keyboards, large venues, cheap housing, and easy transportation. When I get called to play in an "acoustic" band, and I arrive late, I have to carefully thread my bass through a thicket of mike stands, cables, mains, monitors, and so forth. In case my amp is not already loud enough, the bandleader is standing there impatiently waiting, and hands me the XLR to plug into my DI.

At those volume levels, it does seem like the upright bass is more a piece of furniture than anything else, but bands want upright bass. When I ask if I can just bring my electric, the bandleader says: "We are an acoustic band." Oh well, regardless of the volume level, the upright is still its own beast, and I still enjoy playing it.

One factor I have considered is that a better bass might let me play some of my quieter gigs without an amp. And I did say that I am looking for a better upright. That brings up another difference between amps and basses -- buying an amp is not nearly so nerve-wracking as shopping for a good bass. Last time I went out to try out a bass, my wife told me: "For that kind of money, if it doesn't sound better than your Kay, don't bother coming home." As it turns out, I took along my Kay, the bass did not sound better, and I passed on the deal.

 

[bribass]

A good amp can greatly improve your sound over a not so great one, BUT the bass IS more important ultimately. It's the SOUND you're amplifying. Sure, past a certain volume level a plywood might even be better than a fine bass because you can get louder before feedback w/it, BUT at any volume before that point , a carved, finer bass will sound just that .. finer. Not to mention the superior feel and response of the fine instrument will make you play better. I'm blessed to own 3 basses: a fine c.1829 Prescott, a good early 20th cent. German carved bass, and a 1950's Juzek plywood and a great rig (Acoustic Image Focus 2R III w/ a Wizzy-M cab). They all sound great thru this rig, but the German and the Ply can't touch the Prescott, no matter if it's thru the Focus or my c.'82 Polytone or my little Yorkville 50BM or w/ no amp at all.
There's S*** and there's Shinola and you can only polish a turd so much.
my .02

BG

 

[drurb]

While I consider the quality of the bass to be of paramount importance, you are asking a question regarding practicality. You NEED both a bass and an amp to gig. You don't have an amp and I am assuming you cannot keep borrowing forever. If you can borrow for an indefinite time AND the rig is a fine one-- well, yes upgrade the bass first. If you cannot keep borrowing and/or the rig is not satisfactory, then by all means upgrade the amp first.

In short you need A&B, you've got an A and no B-- get a B.

 

[bribass]

PS KELLY if you need a great sounding amp for low dollars I highly recomend these:

Invalid Link Removed

Their

• Invalid Link Removed
• Invalid Link Removed

Are great sounding sturdy combos at a low price. You just can't go wrong w/ Yorkville stuff at any price. Also great 2 year warranty.

Maybe you could get one of these on your way to saving up for a better bass.
I beleive the XM50C is less than $300.

Also one of my students has a small combo , one of the smaller Rumble series from Fender. Was inexpensive and sounds good. Both of these small combos sound nice and full for small boxes.

Just INMHO.
PS I'm in no way an official endorser of Yorkville. Just like their stuff.
BG