velvetkevorkian

Is that a solid flamed maple body, rather than just a top?

Between the ramp and the bridge? Or on the top "horn"? Looks bloody brilliant in any case!

Not sure about availability in Greece, but for £1000 you're most likely looking at brands like Zeller and Stentor if you're buying new. These are generally pretty solid (I've heard good things about the Stentors, although I haven't been able to try one). Your best bet, if possible, is to play as many as you can. Are there any shops near you that sell them? The main thing to look out for when buying is cracks in the body and the positioning of the bridge. edit- re: 3/4 vs 4/4, the vast majority of players use a 3/4, although the lines are pretty blurry so you get large 3/4s which are the same size as a smallish 4/4. If you can try before you buy, go with whatever's comfortable but if you're buying blind I'd get a 3/4, especially if you're a DB beginner.

For a ton or thereabouts on eBay, the VF1 is a great piece of kit IMO, especially when you consider they were £400 new. You can also use a standard one or two button footswitch if you don't want to go the MIDI route.

One day I will get a 7 string. I just want to see my guitarist's face when I turn up with more strings than him. And I want to cop Malmsteen licks on bass.

Will keep an eye on Cash Converters...

For value and rugged construction I would go with Peavey.

[quote name='chris_b' post='27992' date='Jul 6 2007, 05:04 PM']Sorry, but I don't get your point. It's obvious that everyone goes for "their" sound and uses "their" equipment to do that. The question I was asking is why is transparent such an important objective these days and why do so many people think transparent sounds "better"?[/quote] Er... because they can? As Ped said, personal preference.

[quote name='chris_b' post='27869' date='Jul 6 2007, 12:25 PM']....also, I think this transparent amp business is a bit of an "emperors new clothes"! What's so good about transparent? I'm sure my amp and cabs add all sorts of "gunk" to my sound, [b]but I think it sounds great like that.[/b][/quote] [b]You[/b] think it sounds great, but not everyone goes for the same sound. This is why we don't all use the same amp. Its not really that hard to get your head round...

[quote name='BassManKev' post='27806' date='Jul 6 2007, 10:48 AM']when the 506II is in a loop, some of its effects are decent such as the phaser, which i love though ye, it is mainly used as a tuner [/quote] I found the tuner on my original version to be a piece of useless poo. Whatever floats your boat, I guess...

I'm pretty comfortable with the definitions and use of polyrhythms/crossrhythms/whatever, I was just curious to see which terminology people used since everyone seems to think I have it the wrong way around. In fact, everyone else has it the wrong way round

[quote name='tayste_2000' post='27660' date='Jul 5 2007, 11:01 PM']Don't take this the wrong way but are you on crack?[/quote] +1 I can't stand the f**kers.

[quote name='The Burpster' post='27366' date='Jul 5 2007, 11:49 AM']Beauty is they say in the eye of the beholder.......! Looks like an old knacker to me, but then what do I know? [/quote] I'm inclined to agree. Other people's dents don't really do it for me.

Coooooooooool. I was hoping to see them with Gnarls Barkley last year but they pulled out of that one Glasgow show. Might try and make it through for this.

The basic principle is very simple but the execution and exploration can be as complicated as you like.

The most musically complete and inspiring band I know of who I keep coming back to are Opeth, with Martin Mendez on bass.

If the different parts are in different time sigs but the same tempo (ie 6/4 drums and 4/4 bass, two seperate parts that line up every 24 quarter notes) that is a polyrhythm. If the different parts are in the same time signature but with different rhythmic groupings (ie a bar of 4/4 with a guitar playing straight 8ths and bass playing triplet 8ths) that is a crossrhythm. That's how I've always worked it, but it seems a lot of people use these terms differently. Any comments? This was sparked off by [url="http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=343517"]this thread[/url] over on T*lkb*ss.

I use it all the time, even for slow things. For me there's no real disadvantage, but I get so much more agility from it. I play ring-middle-index all the time.

Once you go three fingered you'll never go back. Well, I won't anyway. Two just seems so inefficient.

IIRC the optimum volume for a 2x10 was around the size of an average 8x10.

I think he's suggesting that the bass will sit at a very high angle- the headstock will be much higher than the body. I'm not sure where he's getting this from though as the body and top horn are fairly normally situated, in comparison with a Fender or something similar.

My grippskillz aren't really suitable for discussion on a family friendly forum.

This sounds cool. I'd go with LEDs, no blocks and no pickguard if it were me. Look forward to seeing this one develop.

I use MIDI for programming drums in Cubase, and I also find Sibelius' "export as MIDI" function invaluable- I can write a score in Sibelius then just export it into Cubase and patch it into VST instruments for instant orchestral goodness. I'm also looking at getting a MIDI controlled rig at some point- I have a Boss VF1 and would like to add a Pod at some point, both of which can be controlled in quite a lot of detail via MIDI. Ultimately I would love a bass with a pitch to MIDI convertor and a synth rack of some description as well, but that's waaaaaaaaaaay away, and entirely theoretical.