Jump to content

isaac42

Moderators
  • Posts

    43,214
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by isaac42

  1. 13 hours ago, 1001gear said:

    Curious, can you mount the magnet outside the pickup?

    Not sure what you're asking. The magnets are stuck to the bottom of the pickup. Here's a picture of a pickup with four circular magnets stuck to the bottom:
    39969350-7544-475F-ADF6-37608A4EE4CA.jpeg

    So, they are outside the pickup.

    The magnets I bought are rectangular, each one taking the place of two of the circular ones shown above.

  2. The so-called magnet trick is a simple, easily reversible mod for Rickenbacker 4001 and 4003 basses. Could be done on guitars, too, I suppose. Works best on their high gain pickups.

    Background first. As most folks know, the amplitude of a vibrating string is usually greater farther from the bridge, closer to the neck. If pickups are identical, then the neck pickup will be louder than the bridge pickup. Some manufacturers will simply lower the neck pickup so that it's farther away from the strings, reducing its output to better match the bridge. Others will use different pickups. The Rics have always had different pickups. Originally, they had a horseshoe pickup for the bridge and a toaster for the neck. Later, both had high gains, but the bridge had a larger magnet.

    Now things get a little tricky. The Ric bridge pickup came with a capacitor in series with the pickup. That cap reduced its bass response and thus its volume. That was okay, because the neck pickup picked up the slack. The neck pickup ismounted in such a way that it can't be brought too close to the strings, limiting its output, so the two match pretty well. But a lot of players would bypass or remove the bass-blocking cap to get a better sound from the bridge pickup. Once that is done, the neck pickup can't keep up.

    What to do? Well, I recently learned that some players will put a neodymium magnet underneath the neck pickup. This increases the magnetic flux and thus the output. Conveniently, it does this without increasing the electrical noise picked up by the single coil pickup. One guy complained that, after doing this, his strings buzzed on the frets because the magnets were pulling them down! Fortunately, I didn't have that problem.

    Anyway, I opened up my 1979 4001 MG (mapleglo) bass and put a couple of neo magnets on the bottom of the pickup. Put it back together and tried it out. Noticeably higher output from the neck pickup. No increase in fret buzz, no other noticeable effects people sometimes get when the magnets are too strong. At least one guy said that he had to lower his neck pickup because it was overpowering the bridge pickup, but I didn't have that problem, either. On some models, the pickup leads come out in the middle of the pickup, so the magnet has to be broken in the middle, but I used two smaller magnets, so that wasn't a problem, either. I think my smaller magnets are also weaker, so I didn't get too much of an increase in output.

    So, I'd say that this was a success. I'm looking forward to trying it on my 4003W.

  3. 2 hours ago, DeepEnd said:

    Unless the neck has been replaced that's a "Harmony" logo on the headstock. Beyond that, I have no clue.

    That's why I guessed that it was made in the Samick factory. Most were badged as Hondo II, this one was badged as Harmony. Same bass, different brand. Happens all the time.

  4. Did a little digging on Google, and now I'm guessing.

    It looks pretty much exactly like a Hondo II H830 bass guitar. Those were made in South Korea in 1980 (or so. Sometimes 1979 is mentioned, but sometimes they say that production didn't start until 1980). Probably made in the Samick factory, or what became the Samick factory. Very early models had a Maxon pickup, which looks like what is on your bass. Not long after, they switched to a split P pickup.

    So, my best guess is that it's a 1980 Hondo II H830 bass, rebranded and sold as a Harmony H830S. Is the S for Samick, a company that ran a factory making huge numbers of instruments for multiple brands? Your guess is as good as mine.

    What's it worth? Who knows? Ultimately, it's worth what someone will pay for it. Here's an ad for a Hondo II H830 with Maxon pickup for $300.

    https://www.batonrougemusicexchange.com/products/1980s-hondo-ii-h830-bass

  5. On 1/1/2020 at 10:42 AM, Sheldon graves said:

    I know these posts are kind of old but I'm going to give my two cents... I kind of agree about Wooten he's technically very sound but I don't found find his music to be that compelling... I disagree with all the people criticizing Stanley Clarke the greatest concert I ever saw was him playing with Return to Forever in 1982 they got five standing ovations people were throwing flowers on the stage and I had never seen anything like it, and he was by far out of all the players in return to a forever the most compelling and that includes Chick Corea.... I think all the people who criticize bass players as not being Musical either have that Dave Chappelle bias that white people have for guitar players or whatever... I'd like to know how many people are on this site are black Or Hispanic... As an African American male I love great bass players and drummers so I think there's a cultural aspect to this criticism as well a lot of times we just look at music differently

    But again, that was Victor in a band context.

    Personally, I'm not familiar enough with Wooten's solo work to have an informed opinion on how musical it is or isn't.

  6. According to the FEC, foreign nationals are prohibited from contributing or spending money in domestic elections. The term "foreign national" includes foreign corporations. I don't know if the decision today changes any of that, as it is very long and I haven't gotten through it yet, but I'll be looking into it.

     

    An American corporation can be held in large part by foreign interests and still remain an American corporation. I could be wrong, but I think what determines whether or not a corporation is American is where is is incorporated.

  7. I'm actually doing my law review article on this decision, so it's been interesting to see what people have to say.


    Some things to consider:


    1. The overwhelming majority of corporations in the US are very small, with only one or a few shareholders.

    2. This decision only strikes down the ban on corporate expenditures that are made independently of a candidate. A corporation can not contribute a dime directly to a candidate, nor can it coordinate with a candidate about an expenditure.

    3. The only sufficient reason for limiting political speech is the prevention of corruption or the appearance thereof. The Court ruled long ago that independent expenditures did not contain risks of corruption.

    4. The NRA and the ACLU were both on the side of Citizens United urging the Court to rule as it did today. I figure it must be a damn good argument for these two groups to agree.

     

    I'm not so sure. The ACLU is not necessarily on the side of the people, but of the Constitution. If one assumes that corporations are people for purposes of speech, and that money = speech, then this was the correct decision, and the ACLU is bound to support it. However, I think that both of those premises are wrong.

     

    The NRA, I suspect, simply wants to reduce restrictions on its ability to influence elections, which only makes sense.

  8. It's troubling to me that the Court feels that corporations and similar entities should enjoy the same status as individuals when it comes to political spending. This has the potential (IMO) to turn political races into contests of who can get the most corporate support, completely shutting out the voices of the electorate.


    In short, he with the most money wins, and corporations can now be legally regarded as "he."

     

    This, and that money equals speech.

     

    Corporations having the rights of people and money equaling speech are, in my opinion, the two biggest hindrances to government, of the people, by the people and for the people.

  9. Most of those in disagreement with the current administration (and its would-be successor) are more in a mind to "Love it and stay here and fight for it".


    You bozos are once again making the absolutely incorrect assumption that most people who disagree with this administration and the Republican / "conservative" agendas do not love their country. We do. That's why we're upset. And that's also why we're going to win.


    Edit: I don't mean to lump you into that crowd unfairly, chubrocker, but that oh-so-typical "love it or leave it" attitude from the far right totally misses the point.



    Exactly.

    As Mark Twain put it: "Loyalty to the country always. Loyalty to the government when it deserves it."

×
×
  • Create New...