Author Topic: Not getting it?  (Read 341 times)

David Houck

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 15597
Not getting it?
« Reply #15 on: February 25, 2006, 11:09:13 AM »
Jim; when I wrote that statement I thought about it for a while.  I tend to think that moving the selector switch will lessen the desirability for some folks and not for others.  For some folks, having that blank brass plate sitting where the switch used to be is, well it's a blank brass plate sitting on the lower horn.  Thus I think it could lessen the overall market value somewhat.  I can't recall if you've posted elsewhere the details of your particular bass (I don't remember much beyond this morning ), but if you're patient, you should be able to come across another S1 with the switch in the new position.  I believe they moved the location around 1986.  As I think about it, I do tend to think that it might actually take a while for a late 80's bass to come around, especially if you want the same wood combination that you have now; and the 90's basses are going to be a bit pricier.  So maybe moving the switch is the best solution for you.  Other folks have moved the switch in the past; some with less than pleasing results.  Ideally, you would want to have Alembic do the work.  Of course, Mike Lull is a very well respected and well known name.  When you go to sell the bass, one question you'll get is who did the modification.  What you may want to do is take your time and think about it for a while.  The new position will need to look natural; the spacing relative to the other controls should look right.  You'll need to look inside the control cavity and see if there is room in the location where you would like to have the switch.  And of course you'll need to have a new plate put in the old position.  Most people who have done this have chosen a brass plate.

David Houck

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 15597
Not getting it?
« Reply #16 on: February 25, 2006, 11:17:51 AM »
Hey Bob; you're faster than I am!  Bob's right; one option is if you don't really use the switch then you don't really need to drill a new hole.  I seem to recall that someone once just moved the switch inside the cavity; but my memory might be wrong on that.  Also, if I recall correctly, the addition of a master volume is a bit of an expensive mod.  And with a master volume, you would really be wanting to work with Alembic; a non-Alembic modification to the electronics would lessen the value of the bass.

pinchdawg

  • club
  • Junior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Not getting it?
« Reply #17 on: February 25, 2006, 07:39:51 PM »
Thanks Guys, I am going to ponder this whole series thing a bit then make a decision .I do appreciate all the suggestions. Thanks again, Jim

811952

  • club
  • Senior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2507
Not getting it?
« Reply #18 on: February 27, 2006, 06:17:57 AM »
I can get a believeable Stanley sound with both volumes full, neck filter set to lowest frequency with Q switch up (no boost) and bridge filter set to highest frequency with Q switch all the way down (most boost).  I can tweak it in a little closer by playing with the volumes a bit and sometimes opening up the neck filter a bit to introduce some mids for definition if I want something a little different.  As others have posted earlier, you really need some 10s and/or a horn to get that sizzle Stanley gets.  I'm using a couple of Kustom 410H cabinets with an Ampeg B5R and I can get any sound that's in my head, usually without touching the controls on the amp at all (they are parked at or near flat most of the time).  The beautiful thing about the Alembic is that you'll discover a brazillion other very nice sounds by accident.  One tone I've been using lately is to set my controls somewhat opposite the Stanley settings (neck filter open, bridge filter closed, if you will).  It's like a P-bass on steroids.
 
John

jazzyvee

  • club
  • Senior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8707
  • Bass, Guitar, Preamps.
Not getting it?
« Reply #19 on: February 27, 2006, 12:20:25 PM »
I've done some gigs doing Stanley covers with my SC Deluxe. Using it with the SF-2 get close enough to the sound to be credible bearing in mind the audience probably are not aware of the finer points of his sound.
 
Even if we used his rig and bass we'd still sound like ourselves playing through his rig.
But at least the challenge is rewarding. :-)
The sound of Alembic is medicine for the soul!
http://www.alembic.com/info/fc_ktwins.html

pinchdawg

  • club
  • Junior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Not getting it?
« Reply #20 on: February 27, 2006, 09:07:46 PM »

dejan

  • club
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 57
Not getting it?
« Reply #21 on: February 28, 2006, 01:55:40 AM »
Hey Jim,you have the real Alembic.When people said Alembic,I think about a bass like yours!Congrats!

88persuader

  • club
  • Advanced Member
  • *
  • Posts: 433
Not getting it?
« Reply #22 on: March 01, 2006, 12:43:10 AM »
You guys all gave great advice and suggestions but unless i missed it reading this thread I didn't hear what i think is the most important thing that gives Stanley his sound ... it's his fingers! His Technique!! It doesn't matter what Stanley plays he'll always sound like Stanley.  
 
I've let other bass players sit in with my band playing my SC standard and ampeg amp and NONE of them sound like me. (Mind you I'm NO Stanley!;-) So much of your sound comes from the technique you use it's rediculus. Look at Mark King ... he's probably recorded and gigged with Level 42 using  at least 6 different companies basses that i can think of. Mark does NOT exclusively use Alembic. But regardless of this fact Mark King ALWAYS gets the Mark King sound. And when you talk about sound in the studio keep in mind MANY bass players don't even used amps. They go through processors or directly into the sound board.  
My opinion is why try to sound like Stanley anyway? Be inspired by Stankey but sound like YOU! :-) That's my 2 cents.

bsee

  • club
  • Senior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2658
Not getting it?
« Reply #23 on: March 01, 2006, 06:58:11 AM »
Absolutely agreed, Ray.  I know I started to write that message, but I guess I never finished it.  You can look at all of our Who fans and the work they put in to mastering John's actual playing techniques.  Some are easier to copy than others, I would suppose.  Stanley has fairly large hands that may put more mass into his technique than most of us can muster, and there's not much we can do to copy that.
 
The other thing I was going to point out is that your string choice can affect your tone significantly.  I have not played Rotosounds in quite a few years, but my recollection is that they are more like Lo Riders than Hi Beams tonally.  I could easily be wrong on that, though.

pinchdawg

  • club
  • Junior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Not getting it?
« Reply #24 on: March 05, 2006, 04:08:17 PM »