Leaderboard

Halfway through my little stint depping with the Stones covers band. Three down, three to go! All went well. Loads of people in and all seemed to be thoroughly enjoying it..including a few die hard Stones fans, wearing all the appropriate gear.🙂 Many thanks to our own KevB for coming along! Really nice to catch up. A good friend (also a muso) was kind enough to give me a lift in his van and help me load in and out which was much appreciated. On the way home, we stopped for a curry which I paid for out of my earnings for the night. My friend declared this made me a proper musician at last. Another milestone reached! 😎

I am finally there and 100% happy. Barefaced 6x10 is mighty sounding and super light. Aguilar DB751 same but not light. Fender P ‘69 or ‘64 depending on rotation. Incredible sound and people always comment how good it is, so must be doing something right.

I like this one but fear our lead guitarist may take it too seriously

It means that, given a starting point (a note..?) the possible 'harmonically correct' notes are calculated, such as root to fifth, or root to third etc. These 'note choices are then sorted in order of preference; as suggested next note to play. This 'next note' is then, in turn, used to suggest a third note, and so on. The 'harmonically correct' part stems from music theory; the preference ranking, too, is based on well-accepted principles. All of this is based on music theory anyway, and so one's own studies would tend to confirm the suggestions made. It would, potentially, save time over working out theoretical note choices from scratch for those wishing to compose using these 'standard' guide lines. Most experienced composers would have this type of reasoning ingrained from their own experience and studies, but it could help either those starting out, or those wishing to 'break the mould of habit' and see what alternatives could be used. Not for everyone, maybe, but an interesting exercise in combining music theory and programming skills. That, in itself, is no mean feat. Some folks climb mountains for fun, others like scuba diving. To each their own pleasures in life. Subject to completion, correction and/or contradiction from others; hope this helps.

LOL Looked at this a few times and I think it has been pretty much nailed! 'Personally' I feel the pre 91 basses were generally made from/of better quality woods and materials (other than the chocolate output jacks... buy a Switchcraft and be done with it). Why W can't role the fingerboard edges on new basses is beyond me mind, that would make such a difference. Electrics are pretty much standard now, though I did prefer it when you could have EMG, MEC, Bart, SD even Alembic. Neck profiles are so personal that it's a case of meat/poison; I have to admit to having some pretty skinny neck Wicks but also possess a very full (maple) necked 07 NT Corvette and I love the feel. I agree the whole catalogue is pretty messed up and dilution of the brand has occurred. Replaceable truss rods were a good thing BUT you shouldn't need to do it anyway and tbh the stories grow bigger in the telling, I've had basses with issues (2 out of 40+... is that good/bad ratio) but all are fixable (unlike some manufacturers). Oh and one shouldn't place 'too' much faith in the official emails/info supplied by Warwick... it may not contain 100% accurate info. Finally, never buy a new Warwick; you may as well drive down your street throwing tenners out the window.

Loving this thread. I did not realise that people still liked Warwicks apart from handful of us. Nothing sounds like a Warwick and this thread has made me want to gig my Thumb next weekend.

A friend of mine does the same to his Marshall cabs. The ply they used in the 70s and 80s was nicely grained, finished in a satin finish they look more like a piece of furniture than musical equipment. Peterson have the right idea.

Not much of a start but this is the wood I have in for these builds, messy workshop, I will have a good clean up before I start work again. I'm going to call CapitalCrispin on Monday and see what they can do in the way of constructional veneers for use as contrasting laminates in the neck. Gibson use Walnut or black Walnut as it's known over here but I'm tempted to go for something like Beech or Maple/Sycamore. Again Gibson use four Walnut laminates, I think I'm going to add another one dead centre to make it a total of 11 laminates for the centre section So without further ado.... the wood!! Doesn't look like three new basses does it?

Now then, I know what some of you are thinking. You're thinking - 'Yes - 25 feet is a tighter curve than you imagine. And surely he's going to run out of wood to get that X-brace to fit?' Which is why I'm splicing extensions to the four ends of the X-brace struts... Another one for the Andyjr1515 bloopers DVD, @LukeFRC ?

My kids bought me this T shirt years ago - I've even worn it at gigs

You cannot beat getting hands-on with the instrument. Some good points in this thread, but all to be taken with a pinch of salt unless they're referring to the bass you're looking at. I've owned a few Warwicks made between '94-'04 (SSI, SSII, Thumb BO, Streamer BO, Streamer Std), 1 was a dog, 1 was a gem that I shouldn't have sold (the one that got away!) and I was reasonably happy with the others. All played differently though... you need to get hands-on with it to really have any idea what it's like.

Very good questions! I'll try. This will be a bit long :-) Yes, the cost of pedal steels is high, and sadly cheap "beginner" models can be as much of a hindrance as a help. Back in the day, newbies used to start on basic models with "pull-release" changers (as opposed to all-pull, eg. pro-level Sho-Bud and a hundred other brands, or push-pull, eg. Emmons) steels to keep costs down. Vintage examples (such as the pull-release Sho-Bud Mavericks) used to be gettable for about £500 but they're a bit of a pain, to be honest. Stay away from the Carter Starter, the mechanism is made of cheese and the knee lever stop design is a joke… they're bad enough to put you off playing for good. TL;DR; buy a pro-level pedal steel or be prepared to want to throw the thing out of the window. Yes, 8-string laps exist (as do 10-strings, though they're uncommon). A six-string is probably the best way to start. You can easily and cheaply experiment with tunings… open E or A for rock, blues and some Americana, then maybe a C6 tuning for traditional '50s country/roots, then, oh, about a hundred others. Eight strings really expand your options and make other tunings such as 11ths worthwhile. With any tuning, though, pros are balanced by cons… you just need to pick one (or two, hence double-neck lap or "console" steels). The E9 sound on lap steel conundrum… players have been battling this for decades. On lap steels with no levers at all, it IS possible to partly replicate the E9 PSG sound, and this is done by a combination of selecting certain voicings to trick the ear and by slanting the bar (bloody difficult). But really, lap steel is potentially so much greater (and better) than just a pale E9 imitator. It's a brilliant instrument - and it also encourages the player to understand and use the whole fretboard, as opposed to pedal steel, which tempts you with so many (often corny) licks via pedals and levers without moving the bar. But I digress… B-bender type rigs can be found. The off the shelf solution is the Duesenberg Pomona lap steel, which costs nearly as much as a very used pedal steel. Luckily, the bridge, the Duesenberg Multibender, is available separately for about £200, and can be fitted to a regular six-string lap steel (as long as it has enough body behind the bridge… the Gretsch lap is a popular victim for this mod). Main problem: having levers sticking out over the bridge slightly hampers your picking, and also your blocking (the art of silencing unwanted strings). The Multibender comes with two levers that can be applied to any two strings. It's raise-only, no drops. Three levers can be rigged up, but that makes it much trickier to operate; two is enough to replicate the basic "classic pedal steel move", which is to raise the 5th to a 6th (this also gives a relative minor chord) and to raise the 3rd to a 4th. Used together, these change the open (no-bar) I chord to a IV and, like a pedal steel, give you a I chord at the 7th fret. Bingo. There are a few Multibender demos on YouTube, but bear in mind that you may very likely be better starting on a plain six-string lap steel and thinking about a bender later. There's so much to learn and have fun with in terms of bar control alone. Am I making sense?! Happy to try again if not.

Here she be. And a jolly nice ramp it is too, well finished to my exact spec, inc fingerboard matched curve. Indian rosewood. Cheers to Toby, whom I have no interest in promoting other than that he's a good craftsman who may be of use to other members. Affixed with double sided tape, should you ask.

I disagree. Wenge definitely looks better most of the times, and has a snappier more maple-ish sound, Ovangkol is mellower and not as beautiful, but sounds great. And it feels good to my fingers too. I have to say I prefer having Ovangkol in my 2007 Streamer Stage II. It sounds and looks amazing and it doesn’t need any more snappiness or clarity to its sound. Neck is massive, but you get used to it, I find it more comfortable for my hand, in fact. It feels a more natural ergonomic position for the hand. I have a 2003 Corvette Fna jazzman too, and the neck on the SSII is even chunkier, specially when in the upper frets. Not a problem, just a different design, you may like it and get used to it or not I have a 1987 cherry Streamer with slim wenge neck and is gorgeous looking and sounding, and you can feel it’s been hand made and unique. Love the sound and feel of that bass, though the routing of the pickups is not great, much tighter in a 1983 matsumoku I have. But you can definitely feel the difference between 80s Warwicks an 2000s. And yet, the Jazzman and SSII are amazing basses with its own voice. I like that. I’d like to play one of the new ones, but strangely lately I find I only want used, well played basses, with years of gigs if possible. My latest purchase was a 1982 Ibanez Roadster that sounds completely different to a Warwick and has many scars on it. I wouldn’t change it for any new Wick, no matter how shiny and great sounding. I guess I’m getting old. ovangkol on a 2005 SSII I traded some years ago:

I have a Thumb 5 BO, 2004 or 2005 (I can't remember which, 90% sure it's 2004), ovangkol neck and body, ebony fingerboard. Supposedly the worst of the worst for Warwicks, but it sounds amazing and plays beautifully - the action is lowest out of all of my basses, if it was fretless you'd be able set it up almost impossibly low. It is brighter and growlier than the all bubinga Thumbs, so it's probably not to everyone's taste. Just about the only upgrade I would make would be a brass nut but given that it only affects the tone on open notes I just don't think it's worth the hassle, not when it sounds and plays like it does now. Maybe I should be worried that the nut will snap, the neck will warp or the truss rod will break. Maybe I'll just keep playing it and enjoying it. If you've never played a Warwick, don't be put off by the "baseball bat neck" stuff. Sure, they're not Jazz thin, but they're more ergonomically designed than a tradition P bass neck, they have been made with the form of the human hand as a consideration. I was playing a Fender P this morning and couldn't get over how blocky the neck was. That said, I'm of the opinion that if you're of the right mindset, you can adapt to any neck type - I've got a Peavey Palaedium that makes a Jazz feel fat and I've got a Raro 6 string that is huge and I don't struggle on any them. If you can cope with a 4 string P bass you can play any Warwick without issue, as long as you have good left hand technique. If you tend to let your thumb slip over onto the fretboard you might have issues, but I think that would be the case if you were playing a 5 or 6 string from any manufacturer, not just Warwick.

It could be interesting on here for a while if you lot decide to go for a Rickenfaker

You're riding on the late bus / Trying to find your way back home / Darkness falling round you / Can't see ahead to where you're going You may be riding with whores and gamblers / You may be riding with the lonely and insane / Some of you may be laughing, some are crying / You're all trying to get home just the same

I actually wrote a song called "The Late Bus" as soon as we chose the name - a gospel-style take-off of "This train" - "The late bus ain't no train to glory / Them iPods ain't playing no gospel song / And when the wheels come off the late bus / Tell me how are you going to get home?" Turned out to be prophetic 😞

If you've got a Tool shaped hole in your life, Soen are probably the closest thing to it, they have former Opeth drummer Martin Lopez and the first album has Steve DiGiorgio on bass

Onto the installation of the rosette and purfling circle. This is a bit scary because it's got to be spot on. And it involves routing a couple of mm out of a top that is only 2.7ish mm to start with! First was to use the asymmetric holes in the centre of the cut out rosette as the template for a couple of similar holes in the top: Then remember not to cut out the centre until I've routed all of the other bits! First I routed the edges of the rosette - the inner using one of the pivot holes and the outer rout using the other one : So - what's going on on the right hand side? Well - it's a good illustration of a little tip for acoustic guitar rosettes: leave the join lines / gaps and test the rout position always at the neck end of the circle. Why? Because that will be covered by the fretboard And so if you pink torpedo up your measurement, measuring from the wrong side of the router bit: ...then you can correct it for the full circle and the pink torpedo up won't show because the fretboard will be over it Anyway - trying to remember which pivot hole to use far which area, I indexed the router a couple of mm each time each way to clear out the wood in the centre so I could fit the rosette Then a 1mm slot on the outside for some purfling: Then installed the purfling - it bends easily round this kind of radius dry and cold - and then some very careful scraping to bring the whole rosette down to top level and finally a deeper rout to cut out the sound hole. And here we have it: It's lucky that the c**k up slot is going to be covered, otherwise I'd have had to have added another piece of laminate as a 'feature' But luckily, on an acoustic, the fingerboard (or in my case it will be a stick on end magnetic pickup from a Shadow dual system) goes right up to the sound hole: I've said it before. Many regular builders will agree that we still make as many c**k ups as when we were beginners - it's just that we get more skilled at sorting out the consequences and hiding them!

Freshly roasted coffee. I was unknowingly drinking crap coffee for years until I found a great quality, freshly roasted coffee.

Superglue. Most definitely superglue. Looks quite spectacular from the photo! Good luck 👍

Thanks for that recommendation, excellent. I skipped around a couple of their videos and landed upon this. I shall be playing it every morning before breakfast for the next while.

Greetings folks Despite having played guitar for many a year, I've always wanted to become a proficient bass player. Unfortunately, I have, perhaps, only around a total an entire weekend's worth of playing time on the instrument, so, needless to say, I am a total beginner. Having guitar playing experience is a bonus... It's also a hindrance as it's clear changing my mindset and approach to playing is an important starting point, especially with getting the basics right. I've decided I will actually get lessons to begin with, just to get me off on the right track - something I never did with guitar. My first query is around thumb position... Should I be anchoring it against another string, or should my entire hand be floating? Not sure which to commit myself to trying seeing as both seem to have pros and cons. I've noticed my playing seems very 'quiet' and lacks the conviction I want it to. Again this may be down to technique and the fact that I'm just not used to playing with my fingers this way. I have resisted using a pick. Advice? Whilst I have modest goals, if I can at some point play Havona (one of my favourite tunes) I'll be more than happy 😎 In true 'putting the cart in front of the horse style' I bought myself a new P Bass (Fender Player), despite having an old Washburn gathering dust in a case somewhere:

Wow That’s worth knowing. Nice one fleabag 👍

Doooo it!

It sounds to me that you’ve totally lost the plot Andy, we’ll find out when your Dad puts his dinner on the table and it hits the floor where you’ve jigsawed a guitar body out of it.

Have you tried the old patch lead in the send return loop trick?

My good friend (who’s a guitarist) bought me this.....bar-steward.....it’s pretty much true though 😄

Good luck! Here we are...

About five years ago, I cut a fingernail-sized piece off the tip of the 1st finger of my left hand. I played a gig a few days later with the finger wrapped in bandaging the size of a golfball, and had to play everything without using that finger, which is obviously the finger I use most. Bear in mind my bass style in the band is kind of Squire / Entwistle-esque, so let's just say it was an interesting challenge. 😉

Also - can I request the poll be amended to include a "maybe" or "it depends" option? I'm probably not alone in being into the idea in principle but it really does depend on what - if anything - we can agreee on.

Hi Ped, I was just trying to message you. Yeah, fixed with double sided tape to save drilling holes in your bass! Anyway worked for me in the past. The curve on the B Bass 6 is quite shallow so rather than attempt to guess the radius of the curve I just measured the height of the end of the fingerboard off the bass top at the edges and the middle and sent him those figures . Be aware he works exactly to your instructions so don't try and second guess what allowances he might make for over or under or it will all go pear shaped. Hope that helps.

Agreed. Time wasters and dreamers on the whole, people trying to sell graphic design services, and the occasional person genuinely looking for musicians.

Don't they do a replica of the Ovation Breadwinner? That would be cool as a bass IMO.

No worries guys. Catch you at another one somewhere. There’s a few videos floating about. I’ll put some up in the ChangesTwoBowie thread in due course.

Not much help recommending GMR, because they're scarcer than hen's teeth, but if you ever see one of these, grab it! I bought this on BC for £350 - pleaded with the seller to take more, but he wouldn't. Stunning playability, tone, and build quality. Still feel bad about paying so little to someone who clearly needed the money, for such a superb bass.

derrière - I must be a year older than I thought

I think Kev has got it about right... 2013 is when they started focusing on making less higher quality (and price) basses, started using wenge then and using solid brass hardware. They went a bit mainstream with the whole nu metal thing around the millennium and the quality and neck size reportedly got worse. Pre 1997 is given as when the quality dropped according to forums... no idea why but mid 1992 they moved the factory to the former east Germany and fell out with Schaller which meant not using solid brass bits... so that seems to be a major change... 1991 or earlier are nice, often with thinner necks. My main bass is a 1991 streamer stage one which is amazing, although I’ve got Barts and an acg preamp in it. I’ve also a 1985 JD thumb bass which is amazing but I’m not jelling with as much but it’s pretty nice to have one of the first few thumb basses ever made

The frets have been levelled, crowned and polished (it was easier than I thought it was going to be!) Now the buzz has stopped!! Thanks for all the advice everyone Just got to sort the electrics out, do the refinish then do the shielding then it should be good to go 😀

Waterfall Graph (decay) LEFT SPEAKER: RIGHT SPEAKER: This shows how different frequencies decay over time; and it’s just as important as the frequency response. At this stage we’re really just concerned with the low end below 200Hz… and what we’re looking for is ‘modal ringing’ - those elongated spurs that stick out from the main body of the graph, showing frequencies that take longer to decay than others. These are caused by room modes - aka standing waves - which are determined by the size and shape of the room. Modal ringing is inevitable in every room, but too much of it can cause big problems when mixing (e.g. a ‘boomy’ low end that makes it difficult to discern between different bass notes). Generally speaking, you want the decay times to be as even as possible across the frequency range, mindful that some irregularities in the low end are inevitable. In Pete’s graphs, we can see clear evidence of modal ringing around 30Hz and 60Hz (seen in the measurements from both speakers), as well as other frequencies. The 30Hz ringing is especially gnarly, given that the speakers don’t seem to be producing much output at the very low end. So we definitely have a strong room mode acting at that frequency… and I'm guessing it's due to the room dimensions being of equal lengths (square rooms suffer from the worst modal problems). If so, this is going to be difficult to remedy without installing truckloads of acoustic treatment. But... 30Hz is a frequency that’s more ‘felt’ than heard, so it’s nowhere near as problematic as modal ringing at low end frequencies above this range. Other than that, both graphs look good in terms of decay times. No cause for concern, based on what I’m seeing here. The ‘Grand Canyon’ in the frequency response of the left speaker is very evident however. Definitely need to fix that, speaking of which…

My dad, who was a university lecturer, always said it was spending most of his time with young people that kept him young, and towards the end of his life combined the wisdom and perspective of age with a genuine compassionate rapport with his students in a way which I aspire to. Also, at my age one has outgrown the worries and constraints of earning money, bringing up children, and meeting other people's expectations. At long last I'm free to be selfish 🙂 It has changed dramatically in the course of two generations - my grandparents, as far back as I can remember, were definitely Old, past their best and out of touch, as were all my friends' grandparents, and I think that's why for a long time I was terrified of reaching the age I am now. My grandsprogs have a tattooed bass-playing Granny who is studying for an MSc on the way to a new career, and I hope they'll grow up with similar expectations for themselves.

Well, if you start at the top, there's only one way left to go..!

It's a bit of a sad day, on a par with the day David Bowie left us, we lost Aretha Franklin today one of the greatest voices of the 20th century. A bit daft maybe but I think I'm going to inlay a small AF into one of these, somewhere out of the way. Now could someone remind me about this when I'm cutting Mother of pearl in a few weeks please? Anyone or everyone Thanks

As recommended by Jamaaladeen himself...

Hey Leroy Here in the Northwest you expect anything from £120 to £350 for function work. I know some bands (or should that be brands) that put multiple bands out under the same name with a team of deps and they pay £120 a gig. But if you're a regular with them you may get multiple gigs a week as they're very busy. If I'm depping I start at £150 and add on for additional expenses/time. If I'm hiring a dep for my band I tell them what I have in the budget for them (usually what the guy whose gig it is was getting). It would be interesting to see how people price themselves and what they get paid.

Lot's of lefty basses in a limited space. This picture was a experiment with a extreme wide angle lens, just to see if I could make a acceptable picture with all the distortion going on, not a bad result I think.