skej21

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='924358' date='Aug 13 2010, 08:40 PM']He's calmed down over the years. He would be the first to say he overplayed on the earlier albums. Give the guy a break. [/quote] I agree. Flea is one of the most unique bassists I can think of, purely based on people's opinions of him. Beginners totally over-rate him and think his slap playing/technique is amazing. Then there are the more advanced bass players who (due to a short-sighted elitist attitude) under-estimate the quality of his more subtle, sensitive bass lines like 'Scar Tissue' or 'Under The Bridge'. I would regard him as more of a "hit-and-miss" bassist than an outright poor one. And in his defence, he learnt to play bass from a guitarist. He was doomed from the start and bound to crave the limelight sooner or later

[quote name='risingson' post='924166' date='Aug 13 2010, 05:24 PM']Precisely. I also appreciate that Michael Manring and an E-Bow might float some people's boat, just not mine. I vaguely remember Cliff Richard getting interviewed a while ago talking about how the Beatles sounded sloppy on record. As far as I'm concerned, that's what makes music timeless. Perfection is uninteresting to listen to, but it's the smallest of idiosyncrasies that make music brilliant. Lennon couldn't play piano that well, Keith Moon might not have been the greatest drummer, and Bowie DEFINITELY cannot play a saxophone to save his life, but that is what is brilliant about their music![/quote] It's the ying and yang of music. Without loose styles like Punk, slick styles like Hip Hop would not seem as opposing. Without bad bassists, the virtuosic players would just be average. It's the balance and range of styles that come as a result of varying standards of musicianship that makes the music industry such fun to be a part of!

[quote name='risingson' post='924143' date='Aug 13 2010, 05:03 PM']I don't think I've ever heard a really awful bass player who hasn't been right in a band situation. Sting springs to mind. Hugh Padgham who engineered a few of the Police's albums said that Sting was a really sloppy player (there was even a stage where he was recorded playing bass whilst jumping on a trampoline, much to the engineer's frustration). But still his bass lines were right for the stuff he played. Sloppy, yes. Awful? No way. And I know it's an age old argument, but I'd sooner listen to Sting playing whilst jumping up and down on a trampoline than listen to more than 10 seconds of Michael Manring and an E-Bow. Technical proficiency isn't synonymous with musicianship, so it's too hard for me to say if someone was truly awful or not.[/quote] +1 This is also true of Punk bassists. They (Punk acts) were employed and grouped together to enhance the D.I.Y, anyone-can-have-a-go mentality of Punk. This was a perfect way to rebel against the clean, technical, solo-orientated Rock that had come before Punk. Therefore, what some people may call "awful" playing (such as Sid Vicious' bass playing) is actually perfect in a certain context and can enhance the musicianship/quality of music within a specific genre. I would also prefer to listen to Sex Pistols or Buzzcocks or ANYTHING rather than listening to more than 10 seconds of Michael Manring and an E-Bow!

[quote name='LawrenceH' post='923630' date='Aug 13 2010, 11:19 AM']If you're not worried about resale, sonic blue with matching headstock is a country mile more awesome than boring old sunburst. And you can alway see how lovely the headstock wood is from the back if you're all that bothered [/quote] +1 Also, sunburst finish just make your bass look like it came from Argos... Totally standard and VERY boring!

[quote name='Doddy' post='833126' date='May 10 2010, 03:12 PM']Cover the tab up then [/quote] +1 Agreed. In response to the other comment, this book has tab AND notation in order for it to appeal to and aid beginners to learn and crossover from tab into notation. The only problem this would cause a reader is that you are being lazy and reading the tab instead of the notation. That's not the book's fault!!

The Bass Bible by Paul Westwood is fantastic. Includes 2 CDs that have a number of examples of his work. The book includes scales, arpeggios, chord sheets, notated phrases (including styles from African/Cuban/Latin through to Motown) and has a range of technical sections (looking at Fretless, Slap etc) and even a section with notated solos. Also accompanied by tab. This was recommended by my Bass tutor when I first took lessons and it really helped me to understand the context of bass within a range of ensembles and settings. Just look at the contents page and you can see how in depth and useful this book can be! Hope this helps! [url="http://www.amazon.com/dp/3927190675"]http://www.amazon.com/dp/3927190675[/url]

[quote name='Beedster' post='823021' date='Apr 29 2010, 01:55 PM']Build quality doesn't define a good bass. I've played plenty that were well built, but which either played or sounded crap. I've owned a couple that were not well built (e.g., poorly fitting heel/pocket, neck or bridge off line or wrongly positioned), and they've been good basses where it counts, how they played and how they sounded. In most respects however I agree with your answer though, that is, I think with upgrades Squiers can be as good, but that means that without those upgrades, they're not. A Squier might play brilliantly off the shelf, but may not stay in tune as well as a bass equipped with decent tuners, or may not have the out and out tone a bass equipped with decent PUPs. I guess the point I was making in my earlier post is that the cost of the required upgrades is rarely as much as the price difference between a new Squier and a new Fender. C[/quote] Completely agree. The best thing I would think is buy a nice bass in the shop and then just turn it into Trigger's broom. Upgrade the parts you think need changing, then you've spent a similar amount of money as a more expensive bass would be off-the-shelf but got exactly what you want.

Maybe a comparison between any two basses is a bit daft. Everyone is different and every will love a different bass. The best thing to do is to go in a shop, play it and you'll know straight away if it's right for you! (and if you end up loving a squier and REALLY want it to be a fender, sand the headstock and replace it with a Fender decal lol)

[quote name='Beedster' post='822990' date='Apr 29 2010, 01:25 PM']No, the question was pretty specific: are Squiers better? Value doesn't, and doesn't need to, come into it.[/quote] In which case, I personally think the answer is no. The build quality of most Squiers may be good on the scale of basses but is not as good as the hand built early Fender basses. I just feel that a machine-built bass cannot match the feel and quality of something hand-made.

[quote name='alanbass1' post='822975' date='Apr 29 2010, 01:09 PM']The question would be better based around is a Squier 'better value' than a Fender. Let's face it, you can get a Fender bass from £250 right up to £3k and more - I would have no expectation that a Squier would better a £3k bass - but I would think twice as to whether the £3k bass is worth the extra money[/quote] +1 The question is far too vague and doesn't take into account the additional value of the high-end Fenders. As far as sound and playing goes, it is likely that some people will argue that there is little difference. However, you cannot argue that vintage Fenders have added value through the immense history of the instrument. Vintage Fenders are an investment and a piece of history (although some Squiers appear to be following this trend) but in both cases, result in an increased desire/value.

[quote name='Johnston' post='822949' date='Apr 29 2010, 12:44 PM'] Compare the sounds I don't think the squires are too shabby compared to their counter parts.[/quote] Compare the sounds of any bass signal through a beautiful, expensive amp. Would it sound as good through a budget amp? Because lets face it, if you're buying a budget bass, you'll probably be buying a budget amp. I also agree that he doesn't look like he is enjoying playing those basses.

[quote name='MacDaddy' post='822925' date='Apr 29 2010, 12:21 PM']the topic is 'Is a Squier better than a Fender'. Valid topic for debate which will boil down to personal preference. The original Squiers - with a big Fender logo and a small Squier logo - are often considered far superior to the Fenders of the same era and are still highly sought today. As simon1964 said is there £600 + difference in sound/playability? Does anyone think the audience would notice the difference? Re the steak, what if you are vegetarian? [/quote] I agree with you about live sound, but to be fair most audiences care more about hearing a song they know than the quality of sound... they just expect things to sound good. However, I do think that the poorer quality of Squier basses is highlighted by the fact that hardly any session players rate, promote or recommend them. It is clear that there is just something special about hig-end/vintage Fenders when you record them (in the special same way that playing through a flat compressor can add warmth to your sound from apparently doing nothing).

This thread seems pointless. You're comparing a budget bass company (squier) with another budget bass company (vintage). It's like discussing which 6p tin of baked beans tastes better... the answer is neither, a STEAK tastes better!!

Don't forget Pino! Still grooving with anything that moves at the young age of 52!