M-85 article in Bass Player Magazine - lame?!!!

hieronymous

Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2007
Messages
415
Reaction score
125
Location
Northern CA
Guild Total
1
Not available yet so I won't go into detail yet, but when it's available on the web version I will post it here. It's in the Phil Lesh cover issue - no mention of the hollow-body version, no mention of bi-sonics, just lame lame lame! I love my Guild-humbucker-equipped fretless solidbody, but also appreciate the history of the model - unlike the author of this article!

STAY TUNED...
 

hieronymous

Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2007
Messages
415
Reaction score
125
Location
Northern CA
Guild Total
1
Still waiting for the article to get put online - looks like Bass Player Magazine has been having some problems - they lost their editor and someone else, so I'm not going to fault them. The Phil Lesh cover story is available, so maybe it's only a matter of time...
 

billbass1

Junior Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Location
New Jersey, USA...close to the old Hoboken factory
Well, a bit shallow on info .
More so for folks like us who are more familar with Guild basses.
The association of JC and the sound of Dave Pomeroy's instrument is perhaps
the biggest blunder since, as far as I humbely know, Jack's Starfires
had the the Hagstrom Bisonic PUPS and Mr Pomeroys demo instrument
has the Guild humbuckers instead.
He does mention a tragic fire at his home back in January so he
does deserve much needed sympathy for that.
He has written many fine articles in the past, on a variety of vintage basses, includeing one on what
I believe was a 67 Starfire.
 

fronobulax

Bassist, GAD and the Hot Mess Mods
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
24,708
Reaction score
8,836
Location
Central Virginia, USA
Guild Total
5
+1 for writing but beyond that I'm sad to say there are nits to be picked.

The "switch" is often called the "suck switch" because "it sucks out the tone and makes it suck". Guild advertising of the time called it a "Bass boost". Electrically it is a treble cut or a low pass filter. (Did I remember that right - a low pass filter passes the lows and cuts the highs?). So the effect has nothing to do with phase. The presumption that it does is often made because contemporary Guild guitars had the same physical toggle switch wired as a phase switch.

While Jack has produced many sounds over his career, the original signature sound is usually associated with Starfire/Hagstrom and then Alembic. Thus if there is a way to make a M-85 II with humbuckers sound like a Starfire with a Hagstrom and kind of like Jack, I have not figured it out. (I am presuming that no one could hear the difference between a solid JS-II and a solid M-85 II, both with the same PUs, but if someone else can then maybe my problem is trying to get the sound on a JS).

That said, I am rediscovering the tone of my JS and deciding that it is not bad, just different. Thus the comment about a versatile boomy sound rings true.

It's not fair to slam anyone for not writing the article I expected, but if there were more space, an acknowledgement of the hollow body M-85 would have been appropriate.

In this case, any publicity is good so I'm glad the time was taken to write and publish.
 

fronobulax

Bassist, GAD and the Hot Mess Mods
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
24,708
Reaction score
8,836
Location
Central Virginia, USA
Guild Total
5
billbass1 said:
Hey guys, not to change the subject or anything, but
I decided to sell the original Guild humbuckers from
my 1973 M-85 II bass.
Please look in the for sale section on the Forum if
you are intrested .................Thanks

Veer? Never.

Saw the listing, did not realize it was one of us. Good luck.
 

hieronymous

Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2007
Messages
415
Reaction score
125
Location
Northern CA
Guild Total
1
Well, I obviously wasn't happy with the article, as I posted originally. Maybe this article would have been OK ten-twenty years ago, before the internet, but all the guy had to do was go online at his local library and done a little bit of research. Personal reflections are OK, but some facts would have been nice. Not noting the original hollow body version - which has the exact same model number - is just lame. Not noting the whole issue of bisonic vs. Guild humbucker is lame too, especially with the Jack Casady reference. Oh, and of course, no mention of Alembic, which were a fundamental part of the transformation of the Guilds of Jack Casady and Phil Lesh.

If it was someone's homespun website then that would be one thing, but this is a magazine with national, if not worldwide, distribution. If I hadn't just bought an M-85 then maybe I wouldn't be so bummed out, but I was hoping for some real information. But I know the right place to come - here!
 

fronobulax

Bassist, GAD and the Hot Mess Mods
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
24,708
Reaction score
8,836
Location
Central Virginia, USA
Guild Total
5
hieronymous said:
Well, I obviously wasn't happy with the article, as I posted originally.
IMO a good article would not have mentioned anything before 1974, i.e. Bisonic, Lesh, Casady or Alembic. Those have no real bearing on the object at hand. In a "buyer beware" mode I would mention that there was an earlier hollow body bass with the same model number but not go into the history. I would mention the modern interest in the solid body M-85 because of Ms. Crow and Sir Paul's bassist. If I had not exceeded my word count with a description of the bass and sound, I might mention the contemporary JS which for all practical purposes (IMO but if you disagree, please start a new thread and let me know why) is a double cutaway version of the same bass.
 

hieronymous

Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2007
Messages
415
Reaction score
125
Location
Northern CA
Guild Total
1
fronobulax said:
hieronymous said:
Well, I obviously wasn't happy with the article, as I posted originally.
IMO a good article would not have mentioned anything before 1974, i.e. Bisonic, Lesh, Casady or Alembic. Those have no real bearing on the object at hand. In a "buyer beware" mode I would mention that there was an earlier hollow body bass with the same model number but not go into the history. I would mention the modern interest in the solid body M-85 because of Ms. Crow and Sir Paul's bassist. If I had not exceeded my word count with a description of the bass and sound, I might mention the contemporary JS which for all practical purposes (IMO but if you disagree, please start a new thread and let me know why) is a double cutaway version of the same bass.

I wish I had a JS to compare it with!

For what it's worth, here is the same author's article on the Starfire Bass - a much more nuanced discussion of Phil Lesh and Jack Casady and the Alembic connection. You're right, the M-85 article has a lot of info that just isn't relevant.

OK - I'm over it! :mrgreen:
 
Top