Leaderboard

When you have to meet our favorite gear tart, Karl, at Lymm Services, you just know you're going home with a total rock machine. Just stunning.

I helped out a mate at an open mic night last night and ended up playing about an hour, my father in law came along to watch. He is ex bomb disposal but is a very quiet gentle bloke who is very very shy. After my first 20 minute stint I came back to sit down to find him talking to this old lady, I assumed he knew her and as it was my round I bought her a drink as well. Anyway to cut a long story short it appears he had ‘pulled’ the local drunk. She was with him all night and was hassling me for his phone number by the end. I think he was quite taken aback and embarrassed by it but I found it very funny.

Prophets of Rage.

I found myself writing something relatively coherent about this in the bass guitars forum so I thought I'd move it over here: In response to Parker's question about his bass being too quiet for his amp to be heard when rehearsing: "It is very rare for an amp to have insufficient gain to reach full volume even with a very quiet bass. The only way you'll get a 35W bass amp to be heard over a drummer is by sticking the amp in the corner of the room for maximum bass reinforcement, cut back your lows, add midrange, and give the drummer hotrods or very light sticks. Gain and volume (or more accurately Sound Pressure Level) are two very different things. It works like this: Movement of strings due to plucking generate peak voltage of, say, 1V in the pickups. This goes to the preamp part of the amp which adds, say, 5x gain, with the knobs at 12 o'clock. Thus the voltage is now 5V. This goes to the power amp section which adds gain of say, another 5x, with the knobs at 12 o'clock. The voltage is now 25V. This power amp is driving an 8 ohm load. 25V into 8 ohms equals (25x25)/8=78W. Now, say this amp has a maximum output of 100W. This means its maximum voltage output is 28V. Let's say that if you turn the preamp gain to max you get 10x gain. Let's say that if you turn the power amp gain to max you get 10x gain. This means that the amplifier has a maximum gain of 100x. So if you put your 1V signal in the amp will try to put 100V out - BUT IT CAN'T because the maximum voltage output is only 28V. If you put a preamp or booster in front of the amp you might be able to put 10V into the preamp but you still won't be able to get more than 28V out of the power amp. If an amp is not loud enough, no amount of louder effects pedals, outboard preamps, pickups, will make it louder. There is one thing that will make it louder and that is more sensitive speakers, or simply MORE speakers! The more sensitive the speakers the more dB SPL out you will get for the voltage in. So if you were to plug the power amp output of your little 35W combo into a very large efficient speaker cab or two (like a BFM DR280 on top of a Titan 48) then you would actually get enough volume to easily keep up with a drummer. But you wouldn't want to have to move that..." Alex

The ABM600 puts the "quieter" aspect in a small locked cupboard. I know exactly what you mean, having had ABM500s and MAG600s, I could get the volume I wanted from them, but for 500 watt rated amps the volume was being pushed. Whereas the ABM600, well that`s a different beastie, as are the Rootmasters. Stacks of volume that, from my experience in rehearsal rooms, can really drown out anything - found that out by twiddling the wrong controls when just bought the amps.Significantly LOUD!

Ooh very nice, I was admiring that for a while on the retailers website. I may get a gang of angry traditionalist after me with pitchforks for saying this, but I thought a tort guard would look amazing on that.....(runs for cover ?) lovely bass though, I am starting my savings tin in the new year for a CS Relic.

What a looker, very handsome.

Hi Jon I had the same dilemma when I had the EBS TD650 Likewise, running it through 2 barefaced BB2's. I subsequently acquired 2 Barfaced 2X10 cabs each 4 ohms so effective 2 ohms when used together . Obviously the BB2 and the 2X10 have different sound characteristics, but in terms of output with the same settings on the amp I would say there was no noticeable increased output when using the 2 2x10 cabs {effective 2 ohms].

Me, I’m just a lawnmower. You can tell by the way I walk.

I doubt any of them has the slightest clue what they're talking about. What they're actually referring to is that using two cabs sounds better than one. That's the case 99 times out of 100, and it has nothing to do with the impedance load, everything to do with the increase in sensitivity when you use more than one cab. How many of them did side by side comparisons of the same amp with two 4 ohm cabs and with two otherwise identical 8 ohm cabs? I bet you couldn't find a single one of them who's understanding of how a speaker works goes beyond 'you plug it in to an amp'.

Just had a quick jam with my son, thought I ‘d stick some close up shots of the cab for your judgment. I really like the brown piping!

It’s the same but you just don’t see the ‘bump’ comments. Bit cleaner if you ask me.

Sorry, I don't believe that any amp is going to sound any better at 2 ohm than at 4 ohm. Especially through the cabs you're using.

Sounds like they're describing an intangible sense of expense justification! But I'm glad you got the appropriate end of my stick.

With the greatest of respect Mudpup, that sound like forum talk.

Before adding any drive or distortion, try pushing the lower mids on the amp to help give the bass a bigger presence in the mix. It might not sound too sexy when it's just the bass on its own but once the rest of the band fires up it will fill a hole in the mix. Distortion can suck the low end from the bass (depending on what pedal you are using and how much distortion you are adding) so in this case it could actually be counterproductive.

Should get mine tomorrow/Tuesday, hopefully I'll share your opinion of it being a genuine bargain once I've had a test run.

Does said guitarist by any chance have his low end cranked right up and his mids slightly scooped (cos it sounds great when he is playing at home) ???

I love the way the primary pic is of an empty case... I think I'd definitely break and/or lose that at the earliest opportunity. Or apply fire, and lots of it.

They'd really need to start off as a support band. 'Hole', maybe?

This. I've never actually thought much about it before, but it just seems logical.

I can relate to that totally, I'm not sure I could get up stage and play music I dnt actually like. Bit short sighted of me possibly and may exclude me from ever becoming a 'jobbing' bassist, but to be perfectly honest I'm not sure Id ever want to be. If I was a young thing just starting out then maybe, but I'm a grumpy old tw*t

I`ve always gone with the one with the wires going under the D & G, as they`re nearest to the electrics.

I'll be there, both days. Very much looking forward to it ???

God Bless david Bowie!!!

And for those feeling a bit 'socially un-adapted', shy, retiring: you're far from alone. Others feel that way too. Here's 'People's Parties'... Sublime, and so precisely exact..!

I still regard Jaco as innovative mainly because we still use him as a reference point even to this day. The fact we are even debating him today shows the influence he still has. Love or hate him we still talk about "that Jaco tone". Dave

How right you are; I'd be glad to rectify that. Three that I listen to very regularly, and which have absolutely no duff track..? Court And Spark The Hissing Of Summer Lawns Hejira There are others, but as we're only allowed three, I'll, with regret, let slide 'Taming The Tiger', 'Blue', Clouds', 'Songs To A Seagull', 'Don Juan's Reckless Daughter', 'Mingus', 'Ladies Of The Canyon', ...

Adding a shim does not require anything to be done to the nut, that's dictated by the height of the first fret and to a lesser extent the relief. An angled shim is usually preferred as it's more invisible and you can get away with much less material creating a (very small) angle, rather than just lifting the neck. But both work. Usually the amount of angle required is so small you can't see or feel any difference. I like veneer best also, card works, but it compresses and could possibly deteriorate over time. I've never noticed any sonic difference between a shimmed neck and one that hasn't been, but personally still prefer milling the pocket to the correct depth/angle. I wouldn't ever ship one of my instruments with a shim, it just seems kind of tacky on a new instrument. But it's a perfectly acceptable repair method. And before anyone mentions it....no shims do not cause ski jumps, or twists!

Without taking anything away from Jaco (I am a big fan and adore his Weather Report era) I actually do find it very annoying that nobody ever wants to mention the contribution that the Welshman Percy Jones made during the same era with his fretless bass playing. His playing on Brian Eno's "Another green world" from 1975 is astounding, groundbreaking and it is blatantly obvious that he had a big impact upon the subsequent work of Mick Karn. In many ways his playing was in many ways more expansive and exploratory than Jaco ever was. Jaco stumbled across Percy in person once in the states (what are the odds?) and overheard him practicing...and was apparently completely blown away by his playing I remember the affect Percy's astounding bass work on the Brand X LP "Masques" had on me as a young player. As a British bassist he is criminally underrated in my opinion.

Been mentioned already, but pretty much anything from Dark Side of the Moon. So much of is still very pertinent today over 40 years after it was written. Roger Waters was a lyrical genius back then.

This is such a stretch that it starts to resemble goalpost moving - deliberate or otherwise. I don't know whether joking is involved or whether this is to be taken seriously, and a any rate, I'm not gonna discuss this further. Sparked by this post, however, allow me to talk about some concepts. LONG POST WARNING: MOST PEOPLE SHOULD NOT NEED TO READ THIS. See, I already sense/understand that this post is gonna be way too long, and only part of that has to do with me struggling to be brief in a foreign language. My apologies. Also, I'm not writing anything that I do not assume is general knowledge. It's just that some posts in this thread make it seem necessary to remind some people of some things. Apologies, again. Anyway, Bassman7755, in his very own words, said: In other words: he is able to judge that I lack social calibration. He's possibly right, and me defending myself is not why I use his text here. The point however is: WHY can he judge this? Because he himself is socially calibrated on a higher level. In his choice of wording, one of the unspoken premises in the whole enthymeme-like construction is that people have social calibration on different levels. Bassman7755 happily is one of the people who can judge that people like me (or me only) operate on a lower level. Now, I'm fine with this. I'm just about resourceful enough to realise that I'm a far-from-perfect being, and my social calibration is mixed. I do not agree with his assessment entirely though, supported by my happy experiences in the area, but I do accept that at least I should've worded more carefully and empathetically. BTW, when I used McCartney as an example, I honestly was unaware that that name was even mentioned already, and mentioned even by Bassman7755 in the same post I quoted. I naively used the name in expectation of people mentioning McCartney later. I'm truly sorry about that aspect of my post that Bassman7755 reacted to, and would have worded more sensitively had I remembered that Bassman7755 has used the name. I only had noticed him mentioning Kate Bush. But at any rate, Bassman7755 himself seems to accept the very concept that is at play here: Some people are better equipped than others in different areas. Some are better equipped than others to judge aspects about others. My neighbour judged that I had no talent at football. He was right. But if I'd shown any talent, then we'd probably need someone else than my neighbour to judge exactly how far I could go in my football career. In most or all aspects of life there are certain statistical distributions, and a startling amount of those distributions roughly follow the Gauss curve (standard distribution). This would for example mean that only few people function on a bottom level and very few on a top level - the easiest example being that few people have an IQ below 50, and roughly equally few have one above 150. Most people are less than a standard deviation away from average. As to being musically talented, without going into theoretical debates about what it is and is not, but just going by the regular term as we tend to use it, those that are least talented musically, either just have no relationship to music, or they only like the least demanding forms of it, and more demanding forms of music are deemed to be noise or similar. That non-demanding music is still easy to judge by others who're higher up on the staircase. The rest gives itself. The more advanced the music, the fewer people are able to create it or appreciate it. Theoretically, only one person at the top is able to appreciate all existing music and to create that stuff. In real life of course it doesn't work exactly that way. Oh yes, I hear voices in my head, Bassman7755's voice amongst others, but bear with me: What music can become very popular, and what music can become popular classics that we hear on the radio decade after decade? By definition it's the music that large groups in society can appreciate (not too demanding) and at the same time: that will not bore them easily. That last part is essential as it is there some of the quality lies.The quality does not often lie in the three chord harmonic development. Are those popular classics written by highly talented people? Very often: yes. Sometimes: no. Burt Bacharach and The Beatles are certainly highly talented, but others exist as well who just are not. Are they written by the one, single most musically talented musician of all time? Not very likely. Why not? Because that person very likely showed talent at an early age, and got this talent developed. That person would experience popular music as demanding little, and also as giving little, and would turn his/her brain to other music - music that is not only food of love, but also food for brain. Mozart at an early age could write much more well-constructed, well-flowing and error-free music than most of us can ever dream of, and since he only developed upwards despite his life style and general lack of Bach-like driving forces. In all likeliness, the one single most musically talented person of all time, unlike the many highly talented people of more regular shape who write popular classics, is in the group of people who are somewhere in that ivory tower that many people hate, where new concepts are created, and the borders of what can be art are moved. Bach conservatively stayed within that old baroque music, but at the same time let it go on paths where no music had gone before. If you know your stuff, the gap between Bach and Vivaldi is enormous! (I may earlier have written about how Bach and Vivaldi react differently when a certain chord/voice sequence brings the music to steeper, narrower paths with higher danger level.) As an example of what I'm on about: In the eighties, I heard two interviews. One was with a highly respected Norwegian folk music player. The other was with B.B. King. Both in all essence said the very same thing: "People always ask me what music inspires me, and what rocks my boat. But at my level, what I love, and what inspires me, is not the same stuff that the people who love my music love, and when I answer, they always respond: "But that isn't even blues anymore" / "That isn't even folk music anymore!". But it is blues/folk music! It just is more demanding, and it's appreciated by the likes of me - not by the masses who love my music." There! B.B. King said it, so it must be true even though I said it too. I'm sure I wrote some unnecessary stuff and forgot some essential stuff, but I'm quitting now. Again, I apologise for the length and for the low speed in the thought development area. I know some people on BC could have said the same in one sentence. I can't. I've started and deleted an answer many times, and have also thought many times I'd delete the whole thing written above. But I didn't. I just hope it's of service to one or two people.

Haven't you got a gnome to go to ?

For a company that is supposed to be a serious luthier suppliers Stewmac sometimes write some real nonsense! Then again if they can sell someone an £8 (plus shipping etc from the US) part that whose function can be suitably duplicated with a a piece of card that can be obtained for free, then good luck to them. The values of the shims them sell: 0.25°, 0.5° and 1° may not sound a lot but a standard business card thickness filling half the neck pocket is usually more than enough to solve most neck angle problems, and is roughly the equivalent of the 0.25° shim. The argument for not leaving any bare wood "exposed" within the neck pocket makes little sense when one of the solutions they sell will still leave some wood exposed because 1) it is unlikely to be a completely snug fit in the pocket and 2) the holes for the screws are oversized. If you are really concerned about leaving bare wood open to the air within the pocket then seal any un-laquered surfaces on the pocket and neck heel before reassembling the neck joint.

I've use plastic cards, business cards, walnut veneer and cut down ice cream tub (basically whatever i could grab) all did a fine job. never heard the science of the acoustic resonance of ice cream tub though, maybe its the bets kept secret in shimming!

Most of them used to be mine but are no longer with me. I ordered the Limelight because I desperately wanted a Shoreline Gold 60's P. The Limelight is a really good bass - very well made and great sounding. But it had to go when a pre-CBS Lake Placid Blue Precision crossed my path: the one shown above. My vintage Fender rotation started about five years ago with a Black/Maple 1975 Precision (I put a black PG on it, Roger Waters style): Later I traded it in for a really cool 1968 Telecaster Bass (black refin): Parallel to the '75 P I had a '74 Jazz: Both the Tele and the Jazz had to go in favour of a 1965 Precision: That one feels and sounds fantastic - I probably should have kept it. But then the 1964 LPB came along, which I could not let pass, since a pre-CBS custom colour Precision has always been my dream bass. So I traded the Limelight and the 1965 P. 2015 was a very good year (job-wise), so I was able to invest in a beat-up 1964 Jazz that sounded huge: 2017 was another good year, so when I saw the 1956 Precision (another dream bass) at Andy Baxter's, I sold the '64 Jazz to finance it: I think with the Lake Placid Precision and the 1956 Single Coil I sort of reached the top of the ladder and the rotation might come to an end. At least on the Precision side. Now that I think about it, I don't have a decent Jazz Bass at the moment. And I also find the Competition series Mustangs really cool ...

BTW the switches represent 2 clipping stages in the circuit either silicone, Germanium or no clipping and you select what you want in conjunction with knob twiddling

Proper demo of the actual pedal, shame there was not more time spent at low drive, it’s oretty good and the bottom end stays

New rig used for the first time at rehearsal on Wednesday. 2 x BF One10 MB LM2 Sansamp BDDI Remarkably loud.