Author Topic: Karl's Stanley deluxe and friends (Read 604 times)

jazzyvee · « **Reply #15 on:** May 31, 2006, 11:44:49 PM »

When it gets warm and dry here, i'll pack the stuff in the car and post some photo's

I had meant to do that a while ago but just never got round to it.

If it's sunny at the weekend and I'll try to make some time to do it then.

Jazzyvee

adriaan · « **Reply #16 on:** May 31, 2006, 11:49:40 PM »

Great! Make it a separate thread, just to keep things tidy around here.

jacko · « **Reply #17 on:** June 01, 2006, 12:34:52 AM »

Good idea Adriaan. We can all contribute to that one - I'll get some pics of my car packing nightmare this weekend;-)

Graeme

haddimudd · « **Reply #18 on:** November 17, 2006, 10:04:08 AM »

Hey Karl,

Congratulation on your sweet collection, I like all three of them! Now that you have both, Kingbass and SC, how do they compare in balance. Is the headstock of the SC more of an issue compared to the headless neck of the Status? On the other hand the Status seems to have a bigger corpus. Is it heavier than the SC?

I am curious because I keep fancying about a SC, but at the same time I do like the headless concept of the Status which I will never get on an Alembic (I guess) - and probably not want on an Alembic, who knows.

Hartmut

karl · « **Reply #19 on:** November 20, 2006, 04:13:41 AM »

Hi Hartmut,

Thanks for the congrats! Yeah, I love the headless concept - it makes the bass much more compact and portable, and quick string changes are a breeze, and I really don't understand why it isn't the norm for bass guitars now, rather than still being the exception. To answer your question about balance though, there is simply no comparison. The KingBass balances beautifully. The SC doesn't. And while the body of the KingBass is ever so slightly bigger than the SC, the whole thing is probably slightly lighter than the SC, given that it has no head and the neck is made of carbon fibre composite rather than wood.

However, in terms of sound and playability, the SC is in another league. While both the SC and the KingBass have distinctively 'hi-fi' sounds, the SC just has a warmth and musicality to it that the KingBass lacks somehow. It's difficult to explain, but when you're playing the Kingbass it could be any modern bass. It looks good, it feels good, it's reliable and it will always get the job done, but it's just a tool of the trade at the end of the day. But when you're playing the SC, it feels like something special. Very difficult to explain, but when you play one, you'll know what I mean :-)

K.

haddimudd · « **Reply #20 on:** November 20, 2006, 05:16:34 AM »

Karl,

Thanks for the reply. That is interesting. I have played a SC when I visited Alembic a few years ago, but I never strapped it on, so I don't know about balance issues. And I have yet to get my hands on a KingBass Status to compare.

BTW, I just realized the string scale seems longer on the Status. Is it not a short scale, too?

Hartmut

karl · « **Reply #21 on:** November 21, 2006, 02:43:18 AM »

Hi Hartmut,

Well, please don't let the balance issue put you off an SC - most people, myself included, compensate for the neck dive well enough with the help of a good wide strap, wearing the bass high and a bit of bracing from the right elbow - you get used to it quickly enough!

And yes, the KingBass is usually a 32 scale (so still not as short as the SC at 30.75) but the inclusion of the BendWell thing (see the Status site for an explanation of what that's all about - it basically allows behind-the-nut string bending on a headless) makes them look like a regular long scale. However, mine in the picture above IS actually a regular long scale (well spotted!) with no BendWell - I requested that as a custom option because, at the time, I was used to long scales and I had no use for the BendWell. In retrospect, having found the shorty SC so enjoyable to play in the meantime, I would probably go for a short scale Status, with Alembic's narrower string spacing, if I were ever to get another one. The SC really has converted me to short scale basses - I've realised that the so-called disadvantages of a short scale (looser string tension and slightly 'darker' sound) are actually beneficial to my playing - I have quite a light touch, so the lower string tension doesn't bother me and actually allows me to get some nice triplet effects that I can't always pull off on a higher tension bass - and I naturally have a rather percussive and trebly tone, so the slightly 'darker' sound of the short scale warms it up nicely for me.

Anyway, I love both the Status and the Alembic, but if I had to have only one, it would be the Alembic every time!

K.

haddimudd · « **Reply #22 on:** November 21, 2006, 06:32:49 AM »

Hi Karl,

Don't fear, I am not thrown off the SC at all. I have a Series II double neck full scale and while it may have some neck dive, it isn't really that much and never bothered me. As you say, it all comes down to the proper strap position and adjustment.

For a future short scale Alembic project I am currently photoshopping myself through various possible body shape alternatives, more looking towards the standard point body but scaled down proportionally. That would also provide a longer upper horn compared to the standard small body. In the end the Alembic staff would have to be the judge on the electronics to fit inside or not.

And yes, I know about the BendWell. It is a very smart solution.

I too am looking forward to a lower string tension, I really like that.

As soon as I stumble over the next pack of $20.000 notes you will see me handing in my order for my favorite Bonsai Alembic the same day.

Hartmut