Time Factor on your First Series Bass

[flpete1uw]

In considering what Mica and Harry said and spent a good amount of time last night experimenting with different types of strings also learning how to ?Scope? as per Edwin. I?m finding myself closing in on a starting point from there the Sky will be the limit.  
  I reread the pickup height posts and Bass setup post for good measure. The one thing I may have an issue is the neck pickup clearance. My Bass is circa 1975 SN#215 ( She is Beautiful) however the last owner / owners might have tightened down on the screws a bit too much causing a warp age. As of now the pickup is at its bottom and the clearance is not at the starting point ??. The string being to close could be causing some of my difficulties?  I?m thinking about maybe shaving off some of the corners to gain some clearance.
  The other thing it looks like I may have to use my Mesa Walkabout EQ / tonal control to get the sound I want. Normally that?s a last resort.
Man! This is good stuff! To think it all started with my misrepresentation of a Stanley Post. I have watched him in many videos sculpting sounds its Magic.
I am relieved I?m not alone.
Thank You All for all your inputs
Onwards to the next Sculpture
Pete

[afrobeat_fool]

I keep them separated. But, I have been told that the sound man combined the signals into one path for the mains. His point was that it was better for the audience. I can't do anything about that. I tried to explain, but he said the sound sucked when it was separated. Whatever.
 
 Don't piss off the sound guy!

[edwin]

I can see his point. I have experimented with running in stereo, separating the speakers on the stage (two fEARful 15/6s) and sending two lines to the PA, which were also panned wide. Truthfully, it wasn't as dramatic as I had hoped. Even in stereo in ears, it was hard to tell. I've since gone to a mono rig, although sometimes I'll run each pickup through its own channel on an F2B. Of course, once effects enter the picture, it's a whole different story.

[tubeperson]

JazzyVee, I think by bass shy, people are really saying Alembics are bloat shy.  The reason that Alembics cut thrugh the mix is the lack of bloat on the tone.  The low bass frequencies are there, they are free of extra pounds (something I wish I was).  I am told by our club members that an SF-2 will give you back the bloat, which most sound engineers are so used to havng in the mix.  This is why so many of them want a Fender bass.  I recently made a comment that sometimes I wanted that bloat using one of my Alembics, and the resulting response was to use the SF-2.
 
This exchange and sharing of ideas really makes me proud to have been allowed to enjoy the perks of discussions just like this.

[slawie]

I am currently trying two amps in my set up.
One TCElectronic RH750 and 2 x RS212 + delay for the neck pickup and
One Aguilar TH350 and an RS210 + octaver for the bridge pickup.
It is taking me forever to try and dial it all in.
Once I get there sound should be rather unique I dare say.
slawie

[that_sustain]

Alembic is bass shy?  They're the only bass I know of that is capable of complete boominess, if desired.
 
One day I'll own a Series for a more established comment on the matter.

[rjmsteel]

JazzyVee and all;
This is what I'm thinking lately. Thanks to this great discussion thread!
 
Since I use my SF-2 as my outboard filter (system) for my Series custom, purposely ordered Sans Filter, (the idea could still be used on a Fully Filtered Series Bass), I setup with the following scenarios:
 
1.) DS-5 set as mono out and daisy chain Ch. A and Ch. B out to a mono amp head.
2.) DS-5 set as stereo, neck to Ch. A, Bridge to B on the SF-2 and sent to two heads/cabinets.
 
Both Scenarios require challenging pickup volume tweaking, at times, even with the Master Vol. while trying to switch tone(s) between or worse yet during songs.
 
With that said, what do you all think of another idea I had:
3.) Ch. A from the SF-2 to a Solo Loop Switcher, Ch. B to a second Loop Switcher, (using the send/return jacks), Loop Switcher Solo then from the switch outputs combine the two outputs into this Pan Pedal electro harmonix pan pedal, to create a Mono output to a mono amp head or other Mono input device, while keeping the stereo control up to this point. Now you could pan just how much Neck vs. Bridge pickup you would desire, plus have the ability to bypass either channel on the SF-2 or both!  
 
You could, theoretically have the ability to switch between three different tone settings between channels, or bypassing, on the SF-2 in addition to blending the signals all done on the floor.
 
Thoughts?

[edwin]

Just to chime in, I really loved the vol/pan setup that was in my SI shorty. It made life a lot easier when going to different tones. It was still fully stereo.

[pasewark]

I haven't played out with my new short scale yet, but its a very interesting bass. Last night we rehearsed and it got a little loud, so I cranked it and the tone I was getting was phenomenal. It started growling too. This thing has a life of its own.

[tubeperson]

This thing has a life of its own.  I like that, except that this thing has much more of a life than I do!

[flpete1uw]

As a follow up, after sending the electronics / Pickups back to the Mother Ship for the once over. I found some of the issues of phasing with both pickups on in Mono have been taken care of. An improper Q switch was replaced sometime in her life.  
 So having a fresh starting point I thought it prudent to start with a fresh way of thinking. I?m finding myself keeping the Low pass filters all up on both pickups and adjusting for tone using the volume controls. The more that is allowed to pass the better she sounds. I?m fine with whatever works but this is counter intuitive to what I?m used to. Even on my Distillate I use the Low Pass to adjust but this Series just likes being full tilt.  
Anyway back to Chromes and still on the learning curve.
Thanks for all your input
Pete

[gtrguy]

Gawd forgive me, but I am totally from the 'find a good sound and leave well enough alone' school. I like to dial in a good tone with both pickups on my series one short scale and then maybe hit the switches once in a while for a little more or less bright sound. It is so much up to the sound person with bigger shows and I don't want to second guess them too much or throw them off. I may talk to them between sets to let them know I want to crank up my amp on stage so I can hear myself better.
 
Am I bad...

[edwin]

I'm with Pete right now. I'm experimenting with running in stereo: Showman on the neck pickup with double 15 JBLs (K 140s) and a Bandmaster on the bridge pickup with a 12 JBL K120. It's really different from how the same rig sound mono, much more open and clear. I love it! So the primary tone adjustment is the volume knob for each pickup (and some of the amp EQ). Using the filters to adjust the attack of each pickup is a lot of fun, but it takes a lot of the weight off the filters for achieving overall tone.
 
I find myself adjusting fairly often, depending on the songs. Sometimes they need pretty drastic adjustments.

[jazzyvee]

So Edwin when running a stereo rig is it better to split  the signals by frequency or by pickup?
My inexperienced logic in this area thinks that using the split by frequency method you can feed signals to cabs optimised for low and higher frequencies which would remove the problem of asking any one speaker cab to reproduce a wide frequency range from one box.
 But then splitting by pickup you could/would be asking the cab to reproduce a larger range of frequencies in each cab. Which may or may not be a good thing.  I'm not sure which is preferable.
 
That said if you were someone using effects then the ability to have them on the pickup route of choice would be a different benefit of having separate outs.
 
I've only really tried the crossover method using F1-x, splitting the mono signal by high and low frequency and could not get as full a sound as I did using a mono and full range out to both cabs.  
 
Once I get a 2nd pre-amp, ( hopefully F1-x) then I can experiment a little more.
Jazzyvee

[edwin]

I'm splitting by pickup. What seems to be happening is that the blending of the pickups is now acoustic (although for the FOH, it's still happening electronically) rather than electronically and that seems to make it somehow different.
 
Going the crossover route is cool, I did it for years, but it's a different kind of clarity. With a good cab like a fearful, it's not necessary, though. A passive crossover can be just as good or better, it's just not cheap and does suck some power.  
 
All I can say is that 140 watts (85 for the Showman and 55 for the Bandmaster) has never sounded so good. It's a very dynamic sound.