New preamp for FNA jazzman!

Frikkn

Frikkn

Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
I'm STILL unsure of which preamp to get for my 5 string FNA Jazzman at the moment :((

Choices at the moment are the Bartolini AP 4.7 preamp or an Aguilar OBP-3

Can anyone comment on either of those or can anyone indeed state some differences in sound? I'm looking for quite an aggressive sound and midrange grooooooowl!

Thanks in advance!
 
Hi Frikkn. I guess my initial reaction is: what's wrong with the preamp that's in it now?

Take it from someone who's tried, and I'm sure there are lots of others here that will echo my statement, if you're chasing tone, play with your EQ and amp... Use the bridge pup; set the push/pull on your volume pot 'down', crank the mid and zero (center) the low and high pots; EQ your amp with a frown, and play over or just to the neck edge of the bridge pup.

That Jazzman should be a "Frikkn" beast as it is, my friend.

By the way, the Aguilar Tone Hammer pedal will allow you to do a lot more for your sound than another preamp... Beef, guts, and brawn as well as the "AGS" circuit that will add some sick overdrive (albeit with a volume boost). You can also use it as a primary EQ and preamp or negate the need for an onstage amp if you have proper monitoring. Plus the DI is phantom-powered so you really don't even need to plug it in if you run to the board...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Basically the onboard EQ doesn't hit the right "sweet spots" if you get what I mean. I had the same problem with my Corvette and changing the pups and preamps worked wonders..it brought out all the characteristics that I love about Warwicks even more! The current MEC preamp doesn't really do much, the mid pot has a barely noticeable difference, the treble just brightens up the extremly high frequencies and the 3 way switch doesnt really alter sound as much as it alters the volume output which anoys me because I barely touch it now..The only EQ pot thats halfway usefull is the low which kinda does its job.

The seymour duncan preamp on the Corvette just hits all the right spots for me and I've heard a lot of people mention that the MEC preamp is a bit of a warwick "weakness", even if im reluctant to admit that Warwicks have any weaknesses at all :P

I like having a lot of control on my actual bass as I'm not a fan of running a lot of pedals.
 
I hate pedals, too. Don't like anything between the bass and amp at all, to be honest. My contention is, the more crap you add in a chain, the less it matters what you play. Anything ends up sounding like anything else at some point. :)

OK, so that being said, the Aguliar OBP-3 is probably the best preamp I've messed with outside the MEC. The differences, however, were modest. Never tried the Bart because all I've ever heard from anyone beyond Bart fanboys is that they are merely the 'fad' and not worth the extra money. I stuck with the MEC because once I saw how much tone could come from a few tweaks, I thought it unnecessary to keep searching.

Good luck, brother. It's never ending.
 
I mean ultimately if I'm not happy with the result I can always change back and re-sell the preamp, I'll take that loss in money as a necessary expense on the quest of finding the perfect tone because reaching that goal is so so so worth it :P

Could you elaborate what you mean by tweaks?
 
Absolutely. But let me digress a bit first.

You can make a $100 Squier P-bass sound like the most amazing thing ever built with enogh trial and error. Put enough switchable boxes and expensive electronic gadgets between your fingers and the speaker from which the sound emanates and the result will eclipse your wildest tone dreams... But you gotta lay out the cash to do it.

You have an instrument that cost enough that it should prove to be the be-all end-all to what you want to hear. The tweaks I referred to are the ones made through its EQ and that of your amp.

A few questions I have, not to by any means minimize your experience - please believe that, are regarding your goals and the equipment you already have:

1 - Your bass is one of the ultimate instruments available. You've already spent the money for an amazing tool - is its internal configuration the true culprit?

2 - What amp are you using?

3 - Are you judging your sound by listening to yourself in a closed-room practice environment or are you being objective by hearing yourself in the mix of a band situation?

Lots of variables here. I really do NOT want to dissuade you from trying different things, but make sure your objective meets reality somewhere along the line. Again, I've been there. :)
 
I agree with Doc. Sometimes it is tempting to modify things when there are other less drastic and more effective things you can do. And it's always good to think of alternatives. For example, instead of reaching for your preamp knobs mid-song to boost a little bass for a specific part, you can have the same effect by plucking closer to the neck while playing that part.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I say, let the man try if the money are not an issue. I personally avoid the onboard preamps as much as I can, but if you like them, then why not experimenting.

In the end the only thing that matters is how YOU like the preamp, and how it fits your needs. I am afraid nobody can answer ever to this question, buddy. You can read some comments, like "Bartolini are mid - oriented", etc, and try a few preamps. I guess you can try some basses with thise preamps, you can get an idea about what they do.

Cheers,
Flo
 
I have Bartolini NTMB-918F in my Thumb NT '92. nice pre but I'm going to replace it with OBP-3
IMHO Aguilar is better. tried Ibz 3006E wit obp-3 and it was gorgeous. before aguilar there was installed some bartolini and...I didn't like it :)
 
Hi Root, I am very interesting on the OBP-3 installed with Thumb NT too.

Is the Jazz Man using Bassline STC-2 or STC-3 ?? I am not sure, if the preamp is Bassline....I will took them out too, MEC, OBP and Bartolini preamp is better than the SD bassline preamp.

I just had Bartolini 2 band preamp installed in my Dolphin instead SD, it sound better, the range is bigger and the mid freq. select is better too.

I had OBP-3 installed in my SSI 5 instead SD pre., way better, the range is way better, modern and clean...

I think you will not go wrong with Bartolini or OBP-3, or MEC 3 band is good too.
 
It was always beyond my understanding why Warwick uses MEC pickups and preamps.
I have 5 Wicks and NO MEC inside.
There are way better pres and pickups and I don't wish to vauch for any manufacturer in particular.
 
MEC is the company owned by Mr Vlado Hansal. In the 60s and 70's he was making pickups for Framus basses and guitars, so he has some experience.

The HQ of MEC pickups is in the same place as Warwick :-)

I guess it is only a matter of taste, for most of us MEC are the best pickups for a Warwick. I wanted a vintage vibe to my sound so I have Bartolini.
 
Let me be clear, Warwick is favorite bass of my choice.
I own several way more costlier basses in collection (top of line Ken Smith, Status, Sadowsky, Wal) and five Wicks, so no doubt about preferences and appreciation for brand itself.
In my honest opinion, MEC pickups and electronics (except possibly those made in 2010/2011 which I didn't try) are weak link of otherwise excellent instruments. It is obvious that majority of players are happy with them and don't change anything on bass (I bought all 5 Wicks used and all were 100% stock equipped).
Needless to say that on all five Wicks I swapped pickups and electronics with various alternatives from Bartolini, Nordstrand, Audere, John East, Delano and DiMarzio Model J.
They are different to each other (some being on very clean side like Delano, Audere or John East preamps) and some nicely coloured like Bartolini, but all without exception offered clear step up in dynamics, noise floor, EQing without any obvious drawback (well, except some money/time to be invested in them).
On pickups side, I agree that it might be matter of taste and that some players might prefer sound of MEC over sound of Bartolini or DiMarzio ModelJ (very obvious difference and mellower Bartolino sound might not be right thing for all), but even in this case there is clear feel that Bartolini's sound is more fundamental, complex and balanced than MEC.
Nordstrand or Delano pickups are like strong, refined versions of MEC, better in all respects while retaining Wicks original character. To say that MEC can do 80-90% % of same job is true, but difference will be evident to the player.
I think that no compromise is needed with any Wick that costs over 1500 $.
Also, there is no love for MEC among boutique bass builders (their choice is split between Bartolini, Nordstrand, Duncans, EMG, Villex, Delano, Q-Tuner, DiMarzio or some in house-made option), but practically no MEC.
We can argue to death about differences and tastes (I'll not continue on that), but fact is apparent that many Wick owners replaced MEC for something else and never looked back. I'm not aware of counter tendency for that.
For sake of being the best choice for bass players, Warwick should equip (at least) Dolphin NT, Thumb NT and Streamer NT models with better pickups and electronics, even at cost of increase of price (if done at factory it would cost fraction of price when bought from retailers). MEC can be used for Wicks lower level instruments for which many bass players don't care anyway.
If not, it is still the best choice, although it require further 100-400$ invested in upgrades.
 
Nothing can make me change the stock active J mec pickups on a streamer stage II, or thumb bass. It is perfect for my taste...

I think one of the reasons other builders don't use MEC is that it is very brand related with Warwick s that will make them admit that they borrow Warwick Technology :-)

Just a speculation...

To me, especially in pickups there is no such thing as good vs bad, there are just different pickups for different players :-)

Cheers,
Flo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top