# NBD Ibanez BTB7 comparing to a Conklin GTBD7



## 7stg (Jul 11, 2013)

So, my Ibanez BTB7 showed up today. Here are a few pictures that compare it to a Conklin GTBD7.

The label on the box that shows what Ibanez warehouse it came from.






Stickers on the case.





The bass as shipped. 





The volute: BTB7





Neck comparison: BTB7 top, GTBD7 bottom.





Neck joint: BTB7





Neck joint: GTBD7





Nut width: GTBD7 Left, BTB7 Right





Bridge width: GTBD7 Left, BTB7 Right


----------



## 7stg (Jul 11, 2013)

The basic differences between the BTB7 and the Conklin BDGT7 are:
The BDGT7 string spacing at the nut is more narrow 
The BDGT7 neck is very thin where the BTB7 is normal.
The bridge spacing is the same. 
The BTB7 has a 35" scale vs 34" for the BDGT7.
The BTB7 is missing over half a fret.

Electronics wise:
the BTB7 2 pickups, balance between pickups, 3 way eq, eq on/off, and volume
the BDGT7 2 pickups + peizo, Peizo blend, 3 way eq, 3 way mid freq selection, 3 way high freq selection, and volume


The case that the Ibanez BTB7 came in has a tiny neck slot maybe the size for a 4 string bass so it floats a little high.


----------



## DavidLopezJr (Jul 11, 2013)

Thoughts on how the compare in quality? Which one are you prefering?


----------



## straymond (Jul 11, 2013)

those are friggin' monsters....
as a guitarist, I have to ask:
do you have to develop "new" techniques to avoid hand-cramping when you play those?

OT: it's really sleek and beatiful, man. congrats!


----------



## 7stg (Jul 11, 2013)

DavidLopezJr said:


> Thoughts on how the compare in quality? Which one are you preferring?



Quality between the two is comparable, they both are well made. 

Between the two its a bit of a toss up. I like the Ibanez BTB7 for the neck profile which is more comfortable to me, I like thicker necks and the Conklin GTBD7 neck is a bit to thin for me. Also, the 35" scale is nice. The Conklin GTBD7's things I like are the string spacing at the nut, better electronics, and full 24 frets.



straymond said:


> those are friggin' monsters....
> as a guitarist, I have to ask:
> do you have to develop "new" techniques to avoid hand-cramping when you play those?
> 
> OT: it's really sleek and beatiful, man. congrats!



Not really, just standard proper position thumb mid neck and all. The left hand does move around more and the first position is a bit more of a stretch, the 5th fret is the equivalent to the nut of a 25.5" scale on 34" scale (GTBD7) and 26.2" on the 35" scale (BTB7). It's a great exercise and going back to the guitar makes the guitar seem tiny and reaches that may have seemed like a lot before are no longer that big of a deal.


----------



## TolerancEJ (Jul 11, 2013)

I own a GTBD-7 and these BTB7's have been intriguing me. When you play your BTB7, how would you compare the sound & feel between the two?


----------



## LordCashew (Jul 12, 2013)

Wow, thanks for posting this thread! I've actually been wondering about how these basses compare over the past few weeks.

I play a six 90% of the time and I've finally gotten to the point where I actually utilize the highest range quite a bit. I already own a GTBD-7 but haven't been using it live yet, and now that I'm seriously thinking about switching to a seven as my main axe the BTB7 materializes... and for my taste it's far better aesthetically than the BD. I'm debating selling my GTBD-7 to fund one.

Now generally I prefer 35" basses, but I wonder about the 35" scale in conjunction with a high F. I notice that the stock strings on the Ibanez use a plain F versus the wound F on the Conklin. Does the plain F mesh well with the other strings? Is it even possible to use a wound F at 35" if one prefers to?

Thanks for your insight on the construction and quality of your basses. Any chance we could hear a recorded comparison of some kind?


----------



## DrAleksi (Jul 12, 2013)

LordIronSpatula said:


> I'm debating selling my GTBD-7 to fund one.



That's a wonderful idea from my point of view. I've wanted a GTBD-7 for a good while but I seriously can't afford one because I'm still a student. I'm also not allowed to buy any more instruments, but I'd love a GTBD-7

Let me know if you're selling it and how much for...


----------



## 7stg (Jul 12, 2013)

I am going to be busy for the next couple days. I will answer your questions when I can.


----------



## insanebassninja (Jan 10, 2014)

straymond said:


> those are friggin' monsters....
> as a guitarist, I have to ask:
> do you have to develop "new" techniques to avoid hand-cramping when you play those?
> 
> OT: it's really sleek and beatiful, man. congrats!



I would Play a 5 sting first and move your self up the lanter.


----------



## abandonist (Jan 10, 2014)

I just can't imagine needing that extra string for myself.


----------



## Chuck (Jan 10, 2014)

^ gud 4 u bruh


----------



## 7stg (Jan 10, 2014)

insanebassninja said:


> I would Play a 5 sting first and move your self up the lanter.



I would go straight to 6 or 7 string basses. 

As a guitarist there is a really short learning curve. The notes should already be memorized as they are the same, just 1 octave down. Also, it's also a good exercize to play the bass for 30 minutes to an hour then go play the guitar.


----------



## LordCashew (Jan 11, 2014)

straymond said:


> those are friggin' monsters....
> as a guitarist, I have to ask:
> do you have to develop "new" techniques to avoid hand-cramping when you play those?





7stg said:


> I would go straight to 6 or 7 string basses.



I agree. After only a few months on a four, I went straight to six. Most of the learning curve for me was just learning how to play bass in general - right hand technique, different fingerings in the lower register to keep my hands relaxed, etc... The number of strings was never an issue for me. I can comfortably bounce around anything from four to seven strings without needing time to adjust.

I know it's going to be a little different for everyone, but I hear more about guys having problems moving up from four strings after years of experience than I do about new bassists adopting any given number of strings early on. I say just go straight to what you want to play because doing it incrementally will probably take longer and cost more.

As for worries about your hands - you should be able to come up with technique that's comfortable for you on any instrument with the help of a good teacher. I mean, there are videos of little kids shredding on six-string basses and plenty of tiny women who can play technically demanding stuff on uprights.


----------



## pushpull7 (Jan 13, 2014)

abandonist said:


> I just can't imagine needing that extra string for myself.



Hmmmmmm. I personally think that if you can swing the time to put into your craft, there is NOTHING wrong with having more stings.

Personally, I'm comfy with a 5. I've played 6's and I have infant sized hands. A 7 is only scary to me in that I'd probably be a bit meffed at getting strings  BUT, with circle K and some others, this is nowhere near the issue it was when I played bass regularly. 

Bottom line, if it suits you, DO IT!


----------



## abandonist (Jan 13, 2014)

Oh totally, I play a 6 and if a 7 is what you want, then cool. I just can't imagine needing to go higher on a bass.


----------



## cGoEcYk (Jan 15, 2014)

7stg said:


> As a guitarist there is a really short learning curve. The notes should already be memorized as they *are the same, just 1 octave down*.


----------



## TemjinStrife (Jan 15, 2014)

7stg said:


> I would go straight to 6 or 7 string basses.
> 
> As a guitarist there is a really short learning curve. The notes should already be memorized as they are the same, just 1 octave down. Also, it's also a good exercize to play the bass for 30 minutes to an hour then go play the guitar.



I would not jump right in, as hand size and technique becomes a factor. I have owned a few very nice six-string basses, but I cannot play them effectively with my smaller hands.


----------



## abandonist (Jan 15, 2014)

I'll second that - I have very long, extremely flexible fingers and I only get by.

Though if you're just playing rhythm, and no real intricate bass work, it may not be a problem.


----------



## 7stg (Jan 16, 2014)

cGoEcYk said:


> 7stg said:
> 
> 
> > I would go straight to 6 or 7 string basses.
> ...



My 7 string guitars are tuned:
E4
B3
G3
D3
A2 
E2
B1

My 7 string basses are tuned:
E3
B2
G2
D2 
A1
E1
B0

Sure with a bass the B0 often comes in with a 5 string but that would just be the top 5 strings on a 7 string guitar 1 octave down.



TemjinStrife said:


> I would not jump right in, as hand size and technique becomes a factor. I have owned a few very nice six-string basses, but I cannot play them effectively with my smaller hands.



I agree, The prospective bassist must get an instrument suited to their physical proportions, and if one is not familiar with said limitations a trip to the guitar store is in order to find out. Spending a lot of money over the internet for an instrument that is too big is an expensive mistake. For compairison, an 8 string guitar is 55mm wide at the nut and a 6 string bass is 54mm wide at the nut.


----------



## abandonist (Jan 16, 2014)

Not to mention the _massive_ scale difference.


----------



## jonajon91 (Jan 16, 2014)

Dude, what (if you don't mind me asking) did they both cost and how much do each of them weight?

---edit---

If you don't know how much they weigh, which is lighter, how do they feel compared to other instruments.


----------



## 7stg (Jan 16, 2014)

jonajon91 said:


> Dude, what (if you don't mind me asking) did they both cost and how much do each of them weight?
> 
> ---edit---
> 
> If you don't know how much they weigh, which is lighter, how do they feel compared to other instruments.



The Ibanez BTB7 was 1,299 and the Conklin GTBD 7 looks like it is 1,869 now Conklin Guitars GTBD-7 7 String Bass Guitar | Musician&#39;s Friend but I bought mine along time ago so it was several hundred less, I can't remember exactly now much though.

I will see if I can get weights later.


----------



## amigoz2k (Feb 23, 2014)

what about the availability of the strings and how they cost ?
can you find the high F Or (E in your case ) separately sold ?


----------



## TolerancEJ (Feb 24, 2014)

I order Snakeskin 7-string sets from Conklin but they're $75.

Conklin Guitars Snakeskins Extended-Range Bass Strings

Some more affordable options are made by Dean Markley & Ken Smith: They are included here. (I have no affiliation with this website.)
Buy 7 String Bass String Sets from Bass Strings Online.


----------



## loomismilitia (Jul 21, 2015)

I know this is an old thread...but I wonder which one is heavier?

I own an GTBD-7 and it is a quite heavy...


----------



## stinkoman (Jul 21, 2015)

I was getting ready to post my own thread about asking of a comparrison of the two.

Which one would you feel easier to play for somebody with smaller hands? I have owned 5 different 6 strings and had a GTBD7, though I didn't find it hard to play it was a bit cubersome but seen the btb7 and thought that the narrower spacing might make the neck easier to mange. I prefer a tighter spacing and was under the impression the btb7 was narrower and hopefully have a smaller neck.


----------



## LordCashew (Jul 22, 2015)

loomismilitia said:


> I know this is an old thread...but I wonder which one is heavier?
> 
> I own an GTBD-7 and it is a quite heavy...



I also own a BD-7 that could double as a boat anchor.  I played one of the original "limited edition" BTB7s and found the weight to be comparable. It would vary from bass to bass of course.



stinkoman said:


> Which one would you feel easier to play for somebody with smaller hands? ... I prefer a tighter spacing and was under the impression the btb7 was narrower and hopefully have a smaller neck.



I'd say the GTBD-7 would be easier. For one, the Conklin is a standard 34" scale, but the BTB is 35". Also, the Conklin has a very shallow, thin neck profile and a super ergonomic design overall, while I remember the BTB feeling more like a regular bass scaled up to 7 strings.

According to the manufacturers, the Conklin string spacing is about 16mm at the bridge, and the BTB monorail is 15.5mm. At the nut, the BD is 7mm center-to center and the BTB is 63mm overall (which probably comes out close to 9mm center-to-center - I couldn't find apples-to-apples specs on that measurement.)

So between the shorter scale, slimmer neck carve and narrower spacing at the nut, I think the Conklin wins for the small-handed. I have fairly large hands and I still prefer the Conklin neck - in particular, playing the middle strings farther up the neck seemed more manageable on the Conk. But the BTB is way nicer looking.


----------

