skej21

Spend a tad more and get a Peavey Grind 6. It'll be worth it!

[quote name='Oscar South' timestamp='1352571291' post='1864794'] Anyone here had much experience with this? I did an all day session today that I really thought was quite incredible, allowed me to play complex passages with a presence and feel unlike I had before, and I saw and heard singers voices change dramatically with only a few minor posture adjustments. I need to know more!! Anyone else done any study of this method? Any experiences or insight to share? [/quote] Studied it as part of my secondary teacher training as it was suggested (a long time ago) it could improve problems musicians have (ie back pain, posture issues etc) if dealt with at a younger age with pupils. However, been proven to have very few applications for musicians as the alterations for posture are more 'common sense' and correcting bad habits. Outside of a few minor adjustments, it has been proven to be mostly ineffective in terms of long term practice (and in some cases) has actually made some issues worse for musicians, as the postures suggested conflict with correct instrument postures. It was even proven that the initial development (for respiratory and breathing issues) was not applicable to musicians who were dependant on breathing to produce a sound as they already had good breathing techniques, making the Alexander technique redundant. However, just because it has no scientific evidence to back it up, it has been noted that it has a psychological impact on some patients. So if it makes you play better (regardless of how) then it's worth a shot.

[quote name='clarket2' timestamp='1351719292' post='1854709'] Hello again, I’m currently preparing a piece of loop based music for a dissertation submission next year, however, I have come across a problem that I felt might be interesting to share and see what everyone else thinks. Here is the issue: after attending a fantastic masterclass with Steve Lawson, I was put on to the idea that really interesting and exciting things occur when you have loops that are out of time with each other and so interact and evolve as the piece progresses. Indeed what makes a lot of looped stuff go stale is the fact that it is inherently repetitive and so keeping a piece from getting boring can be a challenge. Therefore, what I’ve wound up producing is essentially soundscape backdrops that provide an (approximately) free time bed over which to play melodic or rhythmic ideas. It’s still a work in progress but I’m getting closer to something that is sounding interesting. My real issue is that as part of my dissertation submission I have to provide a score of the music. This is causing me a serious headache. A tutor suggested that I make considerable use of the fermata sign, which I see would help but it is still a bit vague really and doesn’t really communicate what is actually being heard. I was wondering if anyone knows of a better solution or maybe even different system entirely that would be suitable? Cheers, Tom [/quote] If it was me, I would score all of the loops as 'cells' (similar to 'In C' by Terry Riley) and then number them all. Have them on a couple of pages at the start of the music. Then score the part that you will play over the loops and have it run parallel with a time line. Then mark on the 'live' bass score the numbers of each cell at different points on the time scale showing when each one will be triggered/introduced into the piece. Just an idea, but you will be able to condense most of the 'cells' to one or two pages and it will make your score look less messy if it just has the addition of a few numbers and a time scale to signify the introduction of each loop/'cell'. Hope that helps a bit

[quote name='AndyTravis' timestamp='1351278712' post='1849724'] Never been a Fender dealer then eh. Clever Fender. [/quote] Sure have and still are. Maybe it's dependant on which fender discount bracket your company is in or we get better cost prices for being a multiple retailer and shifting large quantities of stock? I'll admit, comparitavely the margins are dreadful compared to Gibson etc, but for Fender, the margins on mex stuff is a lot better than CIJ and US!

Also, moving production to Mexico means cheaper cost prices so better profit margins for retailers! More profit with better supply equals more money in everyone's pocket (except the customer!). Clever Fender. On the plus side, my Geddy which is perfect condition and bought new for £550 in 2005 will hopefully be worth a bit more thanks to Fender's regular price hikes and the fact that its CIJ.

Fender. Pay over the odds for the vintage stuff which was pennies at the time, pay over the odds for the new stuff which costs Fender pennies to make, their designs are predictable (bordering on a bass cliche!) and the good stuff (Japanese) is difficult to get because they're rarely exported. But I bloody love playing them and love the sound/aesthetics. Damn you Fender!

Larry Graham had no formal tuition/teacher but ill bet money he had a tonne of other bass playing friends that he discussed ideas, concepts and bass stuff with and learnt a hell of a lot through that! Some people need to learn in a formal setting, some don't. Personally, I find exploring dots from other players lines (like Jamerson or Jaco) is similar to talking to them. I can see why they made certain decisions or played certain rhythms and its often an idea that I couldn't/wouldn't have thought of if left to my own devices. That allows me to expand my playing beyond my own thought and I believe I'm a better player because of that. Other players prefer to do this less formally and will discuss these things with friends who play their instrument and that's cool too. To say that ALL tuition is bad for all musicians (or equally ridiculous generalisations) is just moronic. If formal tuition isn't your thing then fair enough but why put it down and put off others who might thrive on it?

[quote name='Fuzzbass2000' timestamp='1350768835' post='1843393'] Gibson have raised their game significantly on the bass front. The Midtown's a good looking instrument as is the new EB (i think). First time in ages I've looked at new Gibson basses as a serious option. [/quote] Working in a music shop and encountering both brands on a daily basis I have to completely disagree. Gibson QC is appalling and we send AT LEAST 50% of all stock back due to faults. Dodgy electronics, poor finishing etc. Gretsch on the other hand, the QC is fantastic and the recent upgrades from the 51XX range to the 54XX range are incredible. The upgraded electronics kick arse and all the additional details like bound 'F' holes, block inlays etc make a huge difference aesthetically. It would be Gretsch all the way for me. Gretsch are also super efficient at fixing any problems that do occur whereas Gibson send companies and customers through middlemen in Amsterdam and it takes forever for problems to get resolved.

I think the point has been missed here. The idea is that you start spot sight reading after the aforementioned 'chunking' has been done. The reason we are so good at reading words is that we are subject to them everywhere. Signs, letters, web pages, texts, newspapers etc etc etc. we are so used to being presented with unseen, 'fresh' material that we HAVE to be able to just read it. The problem with reading dots is that we don't have this. We spend far too long dissecting the few bits of practice dots we encounter after the initial 'chunking' has expanded our reading vocabulary that we never develop at a comparative speed. It takes a much longer period of time to develop our reading to similar 'recognition on sight' standard. I think the point Bilbo and I were making is that exposure to lots of new material after 'chunking' may be a more natural (and familiar) way to quickly develop reading skills.

Agreed. But when you're learning to read as a child, you hardly ever read through the same thing more than a couple of times and its the same with dots. Once you've learnt to read common musical phrases (rhythms etc) and it becomes similar to reading words rather than the individual letters (dots), then move into the practicing technique Bilbo and I mentioned. If you make an error, fix it and then change piece.

The Mexican stuff is getting really good these days. We took delivery of an FSR strat today. £699 and it has a full hardcase, the same pickups as the 2011 USA standard Strats and a nitrocellulose finish! It's unreal that they can create an instrument with such high spec at such a low retail price and back it up with such good QC. Bravo Mexican fender workers, bravo.

[quote name='Doddy' timestamp='1350504379' post='1839885'] I'm working off the assumption that you are playing a four string. If you play within the first five frets,all of the notes fall between one ledger line below below the stave (E) and one ledger line above it (C). Start by learning the notes on the stave one string at a time starting with the E string. Then moving on by learning one more string at a time. Rhythmically,start simply with semibreves,minims and crotchets before moving onto to quavers,semiquavers,triplets etc. It's really not that hard.Just spend some of your practice time every day on reading and you'll pick it up pretty quickly. Like Faithless says,you need to know the notes on the 'board solidly first,but you should be able to do this anyway. With regards to reading in different keys,it helps if you know how keys work to begin with and what notes are in what key. This is where the circle of fifths will help. Start with Cmaj(no sharps/flats),then go to Gmaj (1 sharp) ,Dmaj (2 sharps) and so on.You can also go the other way...again start with Cmaj,then go Fmaj (1 flat), Bbmaj (2 flats) and so on. If you read exercises that go in this order you will be reading in other keys without overwhelming yourself. Edit...don't practice 'sight reading',just practice reading.The ability to read at sight will come naturally when you are comfortable and familiar with everything else. [/quote] Plus one. Also, once you've learnt enough to start reading lines of music, gather a good selection of reading material. Play through a piece until you start to make errors and then leave it and flip to another piece in your selection. Keep doing this and it'll ensure you're always looking at music and reading it and not relying on your memory as much. It won't take long before you start reading through full passages and then eventually full pieces without a second thought

[quote name='Doddy' timestamp='1350420332' post='1838714'] I don't buy this argument particularly....it's easy to play the same runs up and down the fingerboard on a 4 string. Sure,you can play in position,but if you know your way around the 'board it's not a big deal. The reason I play five strings nearly all the time is because you never know when you might need it.You might be playing modern stuff that was played on synth so you need the lower notes, or you may be reading charts and people are getting hip to writing for the lower range. I can do everything on a 5 that I can do on a 4,but there are things I do on a 5 that can't be played on a standard tuned 4. [/quote] Huge plus one! Never bought the bull about technical efficiency on a five. I use one because when I'm reading you know never know when those bottom notes will pop up and suprise you... Oh, and because I like sticking in position whilst reading because I'm lazy too (admit it, that's the real reason we all have 'em!)

[quote name='Pete Academy' timestamp='1349811940' post='1830956'] Decades ago, singers had to nail the songs, and musicians too. No autotune. I've done recordings for people where, despite me wanting to nail a track, they have insisted there is no point, as they can fix any timing issues later. Has technology turned musicians and singers into being lazy? If you are going into a studio to record, would you think it wasn't necessary to play your part proficiently, as they can fix it later? [/quote] It sure has... I remember when jazz records had alternate takes of tracks. That'll never happen again. Instead we'll just get a cut-and-paste of all the best bits, like a 'best of' within a track. YAAAAWWNNN IMO.

I don't see the problem with people playing for free as a hobby. The amount of gigs I've been paid a silly amount of money to play last minute because the 'free' band dropped out more than make up for the rare few we've not been booked for because another band offered to do it for free.