SR4+Kent Armstrong Pickup+Aguilar

[kakobass]

I'm thinking to give an SR4 a makeover.

I was thinking to drop a Kent Armstrong MM pickup in it and a 3-band Aguilar preamp, and have a passive/active volume-pull switch.

Has anybody had any experience with any of these two components?

Does the Aguilat pre fit nicely in the cavity?

Any other suggestions? Thanks.


(BTW, the reason whyI'm thinking on doing this is because I don't like the exposed pole-piece pickup, I want a passive option, I like the Aguilar preamp, and I don't the orignal preamp much. )

 

[Golem]

I'm thinking to give an SR4 a makeover.

I was thinking to drop a Kent Armstrong MM pickup in it and a 3-band Aguilar preamp, and have a passive/active volume-pull switch.

Has anybody had any experience with any of these two components?

Does the Aguilat pre fit nicely in the cavity?

Any other suggestions? Thanks.


(BTW, the reason whyI'm thinking on doing this is because I don't like the exposed pole-piece pickup, I want a passive option, I like the Aguilar preamp, and I don't the orignal preamp much. )

Try posting this on the DudePit in the Dr Dolan section. Dr Dolan is all about mods and luthiery.

 

[barkatozz]

I'm thinking to give an SR4 a makeover.

I was thinking to drop a Kent Armstrong MM pickup in it and a 3-band Aguilar preamp, and have a passive/active volume-pull switch.

Has anybody had any experience with any of these two components?

Does the Aguilat pre fit nicely in the cavity?

Any other suggestions? Thanks.


(BTW, the reason whyI'm thinking on doing this is because I don't like the exposed pole-piece pickup, I want a passive option, I like the Aguilar preamp, and I don't the orignal preamp much. )

Only thing you'll get here is people telling you you're crazy for doing it.

 

[kompressaur]

if you are going to change the pup I'd go for a Bartolini over the Kent Armstrong.fatter sounding imo

 

[strummer]

I'm thinking to give an SR4 a makeover.

I was thinking to drop a Kent Armstrong MM pickup in it and a 3-band Aguilar preamp, and have a passive/active volume-pull switch.

Has anybody had any experience with any of these two components?

Does the Aguilat pre fit nicely in the cavity?

Any other suggestions? Thanks.


(BTW, the reason whyI'm thinking on doing this is because I don't like the exposed pole-piece pickup, I want a passive option, I like the Aguilar preamp, and I don't the orignal preamp much. )

I'm not too big on mod's, but I do have one suggestion. A couple, actually.
First, get a Bart.
Second, go with the OBP-2 (or obp-1, but the 2 has the same hf eq as the 3) so you can have the active/passive switch in one knob hole. Push-pull volume knobs are cool when new, but they get worn fairly quick.
And the obp should fit nicely, just leave some cable so you can nudge it around when putting the control plate back on.

 

[todd4ta]

I've had a few Stingrays that I've picked up that had other brands of pickups and preamps in them until I could find the proper spares to get them back to normal (stock). I haven't found a single option anywhere that's better to me than the original.

There are a couple of other pickups out there that sound OK, but to me:

Bart MM = Eunuch

 

[bdgotoh]

I agree Todd. The Bart MM pickups I've tried have always sounded scooped with a noticeable lack of mids, not good.

I've tried a lot of preamps and pickups in my time and the stock Stingray parts sound so good. I'd be more likely to put EBMM parts into a different bass than some other parts into an EBMM.

 

[bovinehost]

I've never felt the need to do a lot of experimenting with the aftermarket stuff, but two things:

1. I always say, "It's yours, put fuzzy dice on it if you like it better." In other words, you just MIGHT get some naysayers here that do indeed think you're crazy for making changes, but as long as you're not routing the body or something structurally insane like that, so what? You can always reinstall the original parts if it suits you.

2. There is probably a belief that I've had a big belt of EBMM Koolaid. Guilty.

Which leads me to consider the two posts by Todd and Brad above, both of which say, in effect, "What's wrong with the original equipment?" Neither of them are Koolaid drinkers, both of them have done some considerable experimentation with replacement parts and are mature, accomplished players.

I'm just saying that if you don't want to listen to me (and I wouldn't much blame you), I'd at least consider listening to them.

In the end, it's yours. No one has a right to tell you what to do with your possessions, unless it's your wife.

Jack

 

[todd4ta]

I'd be more likely to put EBMM parts into a different bass than some other parts into an EBMM.

+1

I'm actually working on an idea like that right now.

If you do actually go through with any transplants, be sure to save your stock pickup and preamp - Word to the Wise

 

[Psychicpet]

as resident "moustache painter"..........

I've heard good things about Kent Armstrongs and I do love the Aguilar family of pre's. A friend of mine put an Alnico magnet Nordstrand p/u into his StingRay 5 and an Aguilar OBP-3 and it sounds great.
all the best in your quest.

 

[bdgotoh]

If you do actually go through with any transplants, be sure to save your stock pickup and preamp

Or much better - sell them to me. I love those things!

 

[kakobass]

I guess I should have mentioned that I did put a Bartolini on an SR4 once (not the one I have now) and keeping the stock preamp, and while the sound improved a little, the Bart MM is too tall, and when adjusting the action low, to my liking, the pickup was too close to the strings. I would have had to route the cavity.

I love EBMM SR4s, my main problem (besides the exposed pole pieces) is that I don't hear a lot of fundamentals when playing live. My notes get lost in the mix, and all I hear is rumble - and other band members experience the same. And yes, I did play with the EQ -flat, more mids, less mids, put TI flats, etc.- you name it, I tried everything possible to make the fundamentals come out.

I always thought that the lack of fundamentals in SRs was because the MM pickup location, but then I had an MTD Kingston for awhile, passive, and I could hear all the fundamentals I needed and then some (same band, same venues, same amps).

Hence my theory that if I change the pickup and pre and have a passive option, I will have the great playability and quality of an EBMM with a sound that I can use.

I have had a love/hate relationship with EBMM basses for that reason. I love the playability and quality, but I can't make them work live. - So this time, I'm thinking there has got to be a solution!

I once did a whole tour with a single SR5. The very reputable house engineer was very happy with the sound, commenting often how good it sounded - but I wasn't having that much fun on stage.

Maybe it is all in my head?

 

[bovinehost]

Oye, Kako, otra cosa....y la otra cosa se llama "bongo".

 

[kakobass]

Yo sé, Jack, pero me gusta mucho la forma del cuerpo del StingRay. . . I like the generously rounded hips of the original SR4!

 

[bdgotoh]

my main problem (besides the exposed pole pieces)

Is it the look of the poles that bothers you or how they stick up out of the pickup physically? I've had problems with sharp poles in the past and fixed that with cardboard shims. It brought them down so the outer poles were flush with the pickup cover surface.

 

[strummer]

Hmm, the "rumble" is most likely the fundamental, you know?
What's your amp setup? How's the eq on that?

I cannot think of a replacement pick up that would cut through the mix better than a stock MM.

The fastest way to make the pole pieces go away would be to simply tape them over.

 

[Psychicpet]

yep, I'd suggest the Kent Armstrong then AND the Aguilar, it alone would probably give you more of what you're looking for