Corvette STD Ash Vs Corvette STD Bubinga

Brilliant comparison mate thanks!

I preferred Bubinga for both, growlier low-mids in fingerstyle and less brash sounds in the slap, especially on the pops.

but it's pretty minor, I love them both :p
 
Thanks everyone ;) I'm glad you like the comparison and find it useful!

:d


Florin said:
As I was expecting the difference is more obvious with slap.
I think this is the perfect example of why the sound clips are not always a very good indicator. I know very well what is the difference between them, especially in a band context, and you cannot hear that difference in those clips. I mean, you hear a difference, but it is hard to say.... they feel totally different, and they have a very different character in the mix.
I like the ash one for slap and pick better, and the bubinga one for fingerstyle.
Click to expand...

Florin is definitely right. I mean - these isolated clips do illustrate a difference between the basses, and that's all good and well to listen to them in a solo context, but is it with the band, how they sit in the mix that counts

:d

I took the Ash 'Vette to our gig last night. Had a great gig - the place went off! ;) There's no doubt the Ash 'Vette's tone is lovely and is what I prefer in a solo context, but the Bubinga 'Vette certainly cuts through the mix better and has a more prominent presence. The Ash 'Vette lays back in the mix more, but it's bigger bottom could really be felt and you could see the booties on the dance floor really enjoying it. I loved the tone of the Ash 'Vette in a couple of solo sections I had and in songs where there's more sonic space to let it's character come through - but for this band Bubinga's probably a better fit for most of our songs.

For some jazz stuff and some other things I do - or when we're playing an acoustic set I think the Ash 'Vette really has it going on.

:d


Florin said:
Nice slap technique :-)
Do you know to play with a pick? The slap is pretty much similar in one way... you have to let your hand loose, to roll. Always an up- down unstoppable movement. I feel like you treat each note separatelly, and don't let the arm - hand move like a big unstoppable rolling ball :-)
Click to expand...

Thanks Florin ;)

I'm not realy a pick player - almost exclusively fingerstyle. I have played a song or two with a pick where I thought it would fit best, but not very often, and my picking technique isn't very refined.

Listening to those slap clips you're right - I do sound very stiff and seem to be trying to articulate each note individually.

I'll try and loosen up some!

;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cheers for the clips luke!

i had to spend a good 10 mins listening to them all to notice the difference (i've got some kef speakers played through my eden WT800). I'm a firm believer of neck wood having a bigger effect than body wood and i think these clips helped to re-affirm my thoughts.

The difference i heard was the ash was more open whilst the bubinga was more compressed(suprise suprise! - i mean its not like warwicks got that on the website or anything!). Ash had bigger lows and a nicer high end whilst the bubinga, well less lows and more muted high imo! - guess like what everyone else said about these woods is true!

Personally i prefer the ash in both clips, i like the lower notes to shake under the growl!

OT but i found just slapping the bass unplugged and just slapping it trying to get a fluid slap pop going really helped (you don't have the self consious amped sound to worry about so you can relax a bit). - ofc this is with a metronome then when your happy plug your bass in to the amp, might seem silly but it helped me build my slap confidence!
 
Thanks for your thoughts Callum, and thanks for the tips RE: slapping ;)

Much appreciated.

:d
 
Ash vs Bubinga 'vette is the mother of all A/B comparisons. :)
 
I wonder how different the two basses would sound, if they both had a passive setup.

I tend to like passive basses more than active, and I think my next bass will be a standard corvette.
 
The actual sound is not very different... The biggest difference comes from the "positioning in the mix"
So the ash vette will sit lower in the mix, the sound will be fat, ground shaking, also with a very sexy growl when you dig in. The bubinga vette it is tighter, more mid oriented, more in the stomach.
 
I dont wanna sound like I'm trying to pick a fight when I say this,so here goes.
I cant,for the life of me understand what makes some people say they prefer passive tone to active.I really wish someone could explain to me what a typical passive tone sounds like.They both sound the same to me.ime I've tried fully passive basses that performed flawlessly.But I dont think the fact that they were passive,was the reason.
I understand it when someone says they prefer passive,so there's less that can go wrong.I remember Billy Sheehan saying that.With all his complicated amplification,he feels a simple 9 volt battery is too much of a risk to consider an active bass.Anyway,I love ya Billy.
Enlighten me guys.I'd like all the die hard passive guys to tell me what's persuaded them to go passive.Please,dont make me ask talkbass.
**forgot to say,
I really like the versatility an active bass gives.The fact that you can boost & sometimes cut the bass,treble & mids,& with some systems,select the mids to boost or cut.I'd love to see a preamp lets you select the frequencies on the bass & treble as well as the mids,without having to access the internal electronics &/or having more than a few switches & pots on the bass.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey Mastah Greg!

First of all, when we are talking about active cs passive basses, we should mean active vs passive pickups (not electronics)
So you probably know the story, the passive pickups are... you know, some magnets and some coils that transforms the change of magnetic field in electricity.
The active pickups are the same, but have a lot more lower impedance. Because of the lower impedance, they are more sensitive, but they are more quiet too. That's why they have a built in little preamp.
So the pickups are different, the sound is different. The passive pickup is similar to a dynamic microphone, and the active pickup is similar to a condenser.
The active electronics are another thing, they are simply an onboard EQ. I prefer not to use one, because I am very happy with the high end EQ in my Hellborg Preamp, so I don't want to include in the signal chain a lower grade preamp...

I don't have a preference, it depends on the bass really... I've noticed that I like more MEC J active pickups than passive, but I like more passive P pickups than active MEC's.
I also like the 3 way MEC eq, and I use the Warwicks with 2 way eq, with the preamp bypassed.
There is no need to make a definitive choice... like "Hey, I use passive pickups only!" There are sooo many pickups, and preamps, sooo many choices :-)
 
this is a really cool thread, nice work Luke!

I could definately tell a difference between the two (wouldn't b able to say which was which if you asked, though) and I gotta say that I actually prefer the sound of the ash. I've never heard a corvette standard being played before and the tone they produce is awesome!

If i was ever gonna get one of these two, it would definately be the ash.
 
there are 3 possibilities:

1) passive pickups, no onboard eq
2) passive pickups with active electronics
3) active pickups (doesn't work without active electronics)

now, let's see:

1) passive pickups have high impedance, that that makes the tone depend on which cable you are using, and how long it is.
so, unless you use wireless or a very short cable, the tone will lose some highs and lows, and make the bass sound warmer and midrange-heavy, which some people like, but not me. i don't like the idea of losing my tone in the cable... (or the idea of spending hundreds on one)
plus, the magnetic field of passive pickups is very strong, to have an output that is high enough, making them prone to catching noise.

2) one could simply add active electronics to passive pickups, in order to be able so manipulate the sound with your onboard eq, and have higher output. plus, the impedance gets lower and the tone doesn't lose highs in the cable.
but this also amplifies the noise of the pickups, because we still have passive pickups with a strong magnetic field.

3) active pickups have a weak magnetic field (that's why EMGs are that close to your strings), they have a broad frequency range, they have a low impedance which means that the cable doesn't eat frequencies ;-)
the only problem is, that active pickups need batteries in order to operate.
but this is a little thing to do for good tone, right ?

since i'm not sheehan, i prefer active pickups.
i also like a sound that's a bit mid-scooped, or let's say: heavy on the lows and highs.
 
I prefer the bubinga one actually. hm...maybe a streamer stage isn't for me...
 
Two woods

It's Amazing the diference how the two distinct types of wood resonate differently with the same notes. I just bought an ash bodied Corvette, for the very reasons why everyone's little computer speakers are cracking. FAT low end, warm soupy tones.
Rock on!
 
I'm just surfing on this forum, I can read it for ages :).
Really nice job, nice comparison between ash and bubinga; as I expected as well, so I even more like it.
So; I just bought corvette proline (maple/maple) - so, where does that one fits in a line between those two? I would say it is more like ash, as I heard mine. But, it is close to ash in to the direction to bubinga or to another way?
And yes, I agree; true time is, when playing with the bend; and I know that there is bubinga the winner - in your face; but it is also good with a hard bend, hard riffs and so on?
And, where can be maple in cutting through mix? Cutting through mix is everything, I don't like that bass is just shaking the floor ... no no, it has to be heard, notes and tones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top