Having Thoughts About Burner Electronics

[Roger Vaughan]

Hey all,

I got a Burner CR4 in a trade deal, and I really am liking this bass. I've spoken to Mr. Smith about it, and it'll be getting shipped home to PA for a sprucing up. It's got an electronics issue and I can't seem to be able to play it plugged in, which leads me to this:

I have noticed, through listening to youtube and other samples of the Smith sound, that the tone generally appears to be very refined... kind of narrow, clean, and midsy. Sweet, actually! Now I understand that there is actually a range of 'sounds' available via tone knobs, eq and p'up blend; yet I have to say still that I'm generally from the more 'knucklehead' school of rock n' roll as concerns the sound I like to hear coming from my bass- I like a little inherent grind, or dirt in there. Not that I want to go find an EB-0! Been there... but I'm after a little more grunt and grind, a little more 'phat', as opposed to that pristine voice that Hadrien Feraud (for instance) gets. My playing, with that sound, in my own humble opinion, would be a little like a mud-bathing pig wearing an expensive felt hat (I opted off of the 'lipstick verion of that remark, thanks). Then again, maybe it's just not my bag. Probably a better remark!

I love playing the bass, and I really like good music- whatever style it might represent. I don't consider myself a hack-player by any means- I dip into a pretty big bag of influences from Jaco to the Dead Kennedys- I'm genuinely enthusiastic at having procured this nice Smith axe here! Been wanting one since I started playing, 30 years ago.

I just like my sound to be a little thick, a little 'pushy', as opposed to 'polite'. No intent to make a presuming remark... pardon my poor use of descriptive language. I'm just after what I'm after.

So the bottom line is, 1) am I missing the mark here, and 2) in case I'm understood and not missing the mark, what would you guys recommend as a replacement for the stock electronics? There's a ton of stuff out there, including the new Villex stuff- as well as Aero, Nordstrand, Fralin, et al. Mr. Smith? Any thoughts?

Thanks for your opinions and comments!

[Bob Faulkner]

I'm not as familiar with the burner electronics package, but my 5 knob + 2 switch fretless can be dialed in to just about any tone I want.. From cone flapping mud, to tweeter crushing clarity..

I think you should get it back, and experiment some more. The tone you're after is likely in there..

[Roger Vaughan]

This does occur to me. From my few and evil years as a bass player I have come to understand that clean and bright is better than dark and muddy. You can always darken or dirty up clean signal much more easily than you can brighten or clean up mud... but I have to ask because all I've heard out of a Smith of late (except for Phil Lesh back in the day- and I'm no Deadhead, but his sound has always nailed it for me in a way- though still not grungy enough!) has been "clean, pressed and folded", as it were.

I'm looking for my old sweat, blood and beer stains... thanks Bob.

Post edited...

[Ken Smith]

Burners made from 1993 and after have the exact same 9v circuit as the BMT did but without the Midrange. The Pickups are different though. Want fat? Try our Burner Strings or Slick Rounds like Phil Lesh uses and Mike Gordon of Phish. That is a fatter sounding string. Also, you have active bass and treble controls that you can EQ.

The more you alter a Smith Bass with other brands of parts, the more you devalue the Bass.

[Roger Vaughan]

Well the value for me will be more related to the sound I can get out of it, but again, I may be looking at it too hard. Strings is a good point, I had a set of rounds on a beater bass and it sounded kind of sour and awful. I moved the set onto another bass I like quite a bit, and then that bass sounded awful too! So that was pretty defining for the scope of influence strings bring into the mix.

I played the Burner for a set last night at a low-rent bar gig, but without the active eq. I'd thought the bass was unplayable in passive mode, but was incorrect. Sweet player, but very honk-ish sounding. This may have been due to the fact I was playing through a small, cheep mixer for a pre into my Crest power amp! Nonetheless, I'm thinking it let me know the passive tone of the bass without the benefit of ''proper'' bass eq. Gonna have to do something for this, here, and I'm guessing I'll go ahead with the original plan of the replacement pre circuit. There is a reason I like Lesh's old sound so much- like the bass line on "Casey Jones"- and though he used a different Smith (with the pickguard and a hundred knobs and switches!) and different guts too, this is as close as I'm getting for now.

So just out of curiosity, what's the difference between these p'ups in here now- the J's with the Smith logo- and the ones in the previous models? Anything remarkable?

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Roger Vaughan

Well the value for me will be more related to the sound I can get out of it, but again, I may be looking at it too hard. Strings is a good point, I had a set of rounds on a beater bass and it sounded kind of sour and awful. I moved the set onto another bass I like quite a bit, and then that bass sounded awful too! So that was pretty defining for the scope of influence strings bring into the mix.

I played the Burner for a set last night at a low-rent bar gig, but without the active eq. I'd thought the bass was unplayable in passive mode, but was incorrect. Sweet player, but very honk-ish sounding. This may have been due to the fact I was playing through a small, cheep mixer for a pre into my Crest power amp! Nonetheless, I'm thinking it let me know the passive tone of the bass without the benefit of ''proper'' bass eq. Gonna have to do something for this, here, and I'm guessing I'll go ahead with the original plan of the replacement pre circuit. There is a reason I like Lesh's old sound so much- like the bass line on "Casey Jones"- and though he used a different Smith (with the pickguard and a hundred knobs and switches!) and different guts too, this is as close as I'm getting for now.

So just out of curiosity, what's the difference between these p'ups in here now- the J's with the Smith logo- and the ones in the previous models? Anything remarkable?

Never compared them all that much. It's just the Pickup design I chose for the Bass when I was in Japan finalizing all the details. The Burner is the Burner. I don't know the condition of your circuit or battery now and without seeing it, can't tell you if it's even working right or our circuit to begin with. When you buy an old Bass used, more often than not it needs a trip to the shop to be put back on track and sound like it's supposed to.

[Roger Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

Never compared them all that much. It's just the Pickup design I chose for the Bass when I was in Japan finalizing all the details. The Burner is the Burner. I don't know the condition of your circuit or battery now and without seeing it, can't tell you if it's even working right or our circuit to begin with. When you buy an old Bass used, more often than not it needs a trip to the shop to be put back on track and sound like it's supposed to.

I'm there with the trip back to the shop, you're definitely going to see it as soon as I can pull up the scratch.

There seems to be, for me, a lot of mystery concerning the sound that comes from a circuit and what components or combination thereof make that sound. Eq is eq... is eq,... in that a freq or bandwidth is really an objective idea. But we come up with a circuit to give us a 'pre-shape' eq curve, and that circuit also often adds a 'color' of it's own. Examples: Joe Meek, Trace-Elliot, Ampeg... Honestly, the stupefying number of preamps (both inboard and outboard), amplifiers, rack-mount systems, processors and pedals available is enough to put a knot in my head. And of course now we're talking about pickups...

For years I've steered clear of active stuff just to avoid the clutter of too many items in the gain-chain! But I now have 2 active basses. So the moral is that if it sounds good, it is good- and that's where the thinking stops. Thank God.

Glad to have the bass, we'll get 'er fixed up. Thanks for the banter Ken, folks!

Edit: Oh, and about my previous post above concerning the sound of the Burner "passive", I don't know what strings are on it. Maybe it's the strings...

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Roger Vaughan

I'm there with the trip back to the shop, you're definitely going to see it as soon as I can pull up the scratch.

There seems to be, for me, a lot of mystery concerning the sound that comes from a circuit and what components or combination thereof make that sound. Eq is eq... is eq,... in that a freq or bandwidth is really an objective idea. But we come up with a circuit to give us a 'pre-shape' eq curve, and that circuit also often adds a 'color' of it's own. Examples: Joe Meek, Trace-Elliot, Ampeg... Honestly, the stupefying number of preamps (both inboard and outboard), amplifiers, rack-mount systems, processors and pedals available is enough to put a knot in my head. And of course now we're talking about pickups...

For years I've steered clear of active stuff just to avoid the clutter of too many items in the gain-chain! But I now have 2 active basses. So the moral is that if it sounds good, it is good- and that's where the thinking stops. Thank God.

Glad to have the bass, we'll get 'er fixed up. Thanks for the banter Ken, folks!

Edit: Oh, and about my previous post above concerning the sound of the Burner "passive", I don't know what strings are on it. Maybe it's the strings...

The Burner Bass and all other Smith Basses are actually made as Passive Basses, with Passive Pickups, Passive Volume and Pickup controls but with an Active EQ that is either Bass/Treble or Bs/Mid/Tr that is mainly colorless, like a graphic type EQ. The Bass can be set flat in the Active mode and have within 95-98% of the exact sound as the Passive Push/Pull (up position) By-Pass sound. There might be a tad 'bleed thru' from the active EQ circuit when in passive bit it is NOT designed at all to color the sound of the Bass, just to EQ it like you would in a studio, boosting or cutting a particular Frequency point with the range above and below the EQ point shaping the sound.

[Roger Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

...There might be a tad 'bleed thru' from the active EQ circuit when in passive bit it is NOT designed at all to color the sound of the Bass, just to EQ it like you would in a studio, boosting or cutting a particular Frequency point with the range above and below the EQ point shaping the sound.

Do you happen to know the frequencies where the EQ affects the signal for lo and hi? It's shelving, I would assume. I'm just interested.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Roger Vaughan

Do you happen to know the frequencies where the EQ affects the signal for lo and hi? It's shelving, I would assume. I'm just interested.

The Bass 'shelf' then I think was set at 100hz. The Treble is a peak filter and the center is about 3500-4000 hz (3.5-4k).

This means little unless you know how the 'shapes' work. The Treble lower part of the 'cone' is about 1-2k and is cut off at 20k. The Bass shelf cuts off at 20hz bottom and goes up the the mid area at the tail of the shelf.

Tech talk. Means little unless you can taste it from cross town from, just seeing the smoke!

[Roger Vaughan]

Well I'm going to be very interested to hear/play this baby when she gets back from home. Thanks for all the informative replies.