Author Topic: The Layout. (Read 453 times)

terryc · « **Reply #1 on:** October 09, 2015, 05:56:29 AM »

Can someone explain to me why you need so many controls?
And would anyone in the audience really notice ?

hammer · « **Reply #2 on:** October 09, 2015, 06:04:13 AM »

I've always assumed it was an exercise in just how good can we make the sound and provide onboard control. A challenge that those involved could not resist. I also assume that a lot was learned in the process that eventually found its way into the basses we play.

sonicus · « **Reply #3 on:** October 09, 2015, 06:47:01 AM »

(Double Post Abatement)

(Message edited by sonicus on October 09, 2015)

sonicus · « **Reply #4 on:** October 09, 2015, 06:55:23 AM »

Brian , yes .
I think that you capsulize the technological era and mentation behind the conceptual aspects behind Mr. Lesh's amazing Alembic Modified Guild above. At the time when this bass was the one that he was regularly seen with I was studying audio engineering and was completely drawn in by it. At the time I was deeply inspired by it and was influenced to try to follow with an affordable version at the time for my self . That bass can also be found on this site.
Here are other threads inclusive of this topic;

http://club.alembic.com/Images/411/1926.html?1431021854

http://club.alembic.com/Images/411/2792.html?1262960781
You all have most likely already seen these .

Wolf

terryc · « **Reply #5 on:** October 09, 2015, 08:58:53 AM »

Still not the answer I was looking for, surely it is the music is the most important, Jaco had two passive volume controls and a tone control and an amplifier that wasn't exactly top of the range but EVERYONE can recognise his playing.
Stan has a Series 1, okay a few controls on his bass but not as many as that and we still recognise his playing!
It might be a lesson in 'on board control' but sometimes I get confused with volume, pan and two filters and two Q switches !! LOL

811952 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 09, 2015, 09:12:48 AM »

Tone, ultimately, is in the fingers. Being able to dial-in an instrument to best capture that tone is what I think has driven everything Alembic has developed. Are all those knobs necessary? Most likely not, but having them on that instrument surely helped figure out which knobs are.

John

lbpesq · « **Reply #7 on:** October 09, 2015, 09:21:28 AM »

As I understand it, Phil also came to the conclusion that it was a bit much. I see this set up as essentially an on-board SF-2.

As for the audience, I strongly suspect that 98% of the audience hears no difference from one bass set-up to the next. It's like my theory on mistakes: For every ten mistakes I make, my band mates notice one. For every ten mistakes I make that my band mates notice, the audience notices one.

One of the things I LOVE about Alembic basses, (from the perspective of a guitar player and/or audience member) is that the tone is so clear and present that even non-musicians often notice the difference.

As for Jaco and Stanley, along with such notable Alembic players as Phil Lesh and John Entwistle, they all prove that 90% of one's tone is in the fingers. (Of course the late, great Yogi Berra would add that the other half is the bass and rig)

Bill, tgo

sonicus · « **Reply #8 on:** October 09, 2015, 09:27:14 AM »

Terry . I Love Jaco's playing and try to incorporate some of my perceptions of his technique . I agree on your thoughts regrading Jaco ! In context to the instrument in question of , in this thread , is what it appears that Brian and I may agree on. The technology incorporated in the topic of this thread appears to have been an important era of electric stringed instrument technology led by our hosts here ; Alembic Inc. ___________________!

Unprecedented developments and products were born as a result. Still none better to my own ear.

Terry, in a different context I also agree with you ! It is all in perspective .
I would have loved to have heard Jaco play an Alembic. Like even more wow , man !

Wolf

(Message edited by sonicus on October 09, 2015)

hammer · « **Reply #9 on:** October 09, 2015, 10:59:12 AM »

From what I have read Phil got a bit confused too and the full capabilities of the bass were rarely, if ever used in concert.

I'd agree with you Terry that anything beyond what I have with my Signature Basses would be extremely confusing to me and probably not used very often. With an SF-2 and an F1-X in the mix I've never really thought that acquiring a Series Bass would be justified since all of my playing is live and the only real advantage would be the stereo capacity.

Maybe someone who knows more about the history of this bass can confirm whether its development was undertaken at the request of Phil or if it was initiated by one or more of the electronics wizards who were really interested in how far they could push the envelop so to speak.

jazzyvee · « **Reply #10 on:** October 09, 2015, 11:47:14 AM »

I've read a lot of forum debates around the internet about about tone and all being in the fingers and whilst it's plainly obvious fingers help develop tone, I'm not completely convinced that the percentage is as high as many people claim. That said I wouldn't want to even suggest a percentage for it.

I still firmly believe many listeners confuse tone with a musicians playing style and notes choices and not the actual sound of the notes they are hearing. For example if I stand next to Stanley Clarke whilst he is performing on stage and roll all the top end of his filters his tone will be completely different because the the controls are influencing the sound output from the bass, but you will still recognise it's him because of his playing style not his tone specifically. I think saying a huge part of tone is in the fingers is far too simplistic, there are so many more factors involved. If the percentage of finger influence is so high what would be the point of buying Alembic when we could just buy something significantly cheaper and get the virtually the same tone from that. However we buy alembic because we know they are designed with a different approach to tone development.

I'm open to to be educated on this.
Shall I get my coat?

mavnet · « **Reply #11 on:** October 09, 2015, 03:23:17 PM »

I've got a superfilter channel in my basses (plus one normal cvq lo pass, plus a few interesting switches), and after 35 years, it's hard for me to only have regular controls on the bass i'm using while the fretted alembic is (sadly still) in the shop getting an oil change and refin. It becomes second nature very quickly to just expect to be able to tweak things as you need it. If i knew then what I know now, i'd have done two sf channels.

jazzyvee · « **Reply #12 on:** October 09, 2015, 03:30:19 PM »

I've read a lot of forum debates around the internet about about tone and all being in the fingers and whilst it's plainly obvious fingers help develop tone, I'm not completely convinced that the percentage is as high as many people claim. That said I wouldn't want to even suggest a percentage for it.

I still firmly believe many listeners confuse tone with a musicians playing style and notes choices and not the actual sound of the notes they are hearing. For example if I stand next to Stanley Clarke whilst he is performing on stage and roll all the top end of his filters his tone will be completely different because the the controls are influencing the sound output from the bass, but you will still recognise it's him because of his playing style not his tone specifically. I think saying a huge part of tone is in the fingers is far too simplistic, there are so many more factors involved. If the percentage of finger influence is so high what would be the point of buying Alembic when we could just buy something significantly cheaper and get the virtually the same tone from that. However we buy alembic because we know they are designed with a different approach to tone development.

I'm open to to be educated on this.
Shall I get my coat?

terryc · « **Reply #13 on:** October 10, 2015, 05:30:09 AM »

Well there have been some great answers to which we all seem to be coming from the same boat, okay it is the playing style but as I said you instantly know who it is when they play, another fine example is the late BB King's rolling vibrato on a note or without the use of amplifiers, Miles Davis's trumpet playing, if you have listened to these guys for a long time you know it is them.
The 50's rock 'n' roll band I am in I am using a Squier J bass(fitted with fender Noiseless PU's) because I am trying to emulate the sound of a double bass, no high end on the amp at all, deep bass button depressed and the tone control turned to the bass end plus I am looking for a stage presence authenticity..yes I know I should really have a P bass ! The Alembic would do the sound but I don't think it would look RnR at all and I don't need to fiddle with the controls to get the sound I want.
Getting back to basics isn't a bad thing especially when the music doesn't really call for all that technology

hieronymous · « **Reply #14 on:** October 10, 2015, 03:06:48 PM »

I would love to be able to select high-pass or band-pass filter mode for the bridge pickup. This bass allows for that. Also, two of the knobs are for the quad pickup. Once you wrap your head around what's going on with this bass (Series with built-in SF-2 & quad) then it's not that different from a regular Series bass.

There's also nothing wrong with a good ol' Fender bass - I started on a Precision, moved to a Jazz, now I'm back to Precision. But I also like Rickenbackers. And Gibsons and Guilds. Hmm, the Guild kind of shoots back into Alembic. I'm glad to have options - everyone playing Fender gets boring!