bassbiscuits

That was my worry - realising that all the really amazing greats, Hendrix, Lennon and McCartney, Jim Morrison, Jimmy Page, Janis Joplin, Rod Stewart, The Stones, Aerosmith, Clapton etc were famous as young people in their 20s or 30s. Adele is a rare really brilliant, significant young singer/musician, tho not a rock star. Alex Turner? Mark Ronson? Ed Sheeran? I dunno. I guess I'm hoping to prove to myself that great rock music isn't just made by old farts from the past - is it?

Let's be clear from the start that Kanye is not the world's greatest rockstar, despite his boasts. But the answer to "well who is then?" been troubling me all day, as my imaginary argument with Kanye finds me struggling with the fact that every possible contender seems to be over 50. Got me thinking that maybe he does have a point in as much as all the cocky young swagger is coming from hip hop and r'n'b artists. I'm struggling to think of a truly significant current rock/metal star aged under 30, or even 40. That's not right. Anyone?

Here's mine - it's a passive California TT4 from Bass Direct. My first non-Fender in ages! It's more of a creamy colour than it looks in the picture here, and is soft aged. It's exceptionally lightweight - about 3.8kilos which is very much less than my other main gigging bass, a 1995 USA Precision, and a relief on my shoulders now I'm the wrong side of 40. Sound wise it doesn't have that same huge bass thud of a precision, because, well, it isn't a precision. What it does have is a tighter, more focused, low end, with a good bit of grit, which after a couple of gigs is really beginning to grow on me. It also has enormously good articulation and note separation, so that everything is really clear and even sounding, with amazingly clear harmonics especially on the bridge pickup solo'd. It's a different sound to what I normally gig with and it's taken a couple of gigs to get used to. But my drummer said he can hear me much more clearly - I guess the slightly blurry thump of a cranked P bass is different to the shimmering articulation of a J-style bass. So far so good.

Welcome to the P bass side! I've been playi one for 20 years, more by chance than anything else as it's what I could afford. But over the last few years I've broadened to trying jazzes and various other basses too. It's made me realise just how 'right' Precisions are. They're not as versatile as jazz, or have the same clarity. But in terms of solid, low end thump and just sitting perfectly in any band setting, they're the best things there are.

Wow - thank you all for your very thorough answers!

I see some bass players on youtube and such like with what look like fuzzy hairbands tied around the nut area of their bass. what is it, and what is it there for? I'm assuming its not a hairband of course - i might be wrong. anyone?

[quote name='Phil Starr' timestamp='1435133589' post='2805694'] For me this is the essence of these frustrating instruments, and the reason the Epi's don't work for me. The ergonomics of T-birds are truly awful. They neck dive like crazy and twist away from your body. Playing them for a lengthy time makes muscles you didn't know about start aching like mad. Even with a wide strap the weight goes entirely on your left shoulder and the bass feels unstable. the only time I used it for a full gig (2hrs+) my left wrist ached for days after. I find my fretting hand is holding the bass as well as fretting it. The joy is that the Gibsons are really light and have a superslim/fast neck, there's a tendency to chuck them about a bit when you are playing and that adds to the energy of the performance and the fun factor. The Epi's are heavier so you lose that, I guess if you are built like an ox then it may be less of an issue. I actually think the Epi's sound great and the QC is probably better than Gibsons but the extra weight kills them for me. [/quote] I reckon things like the Mike Lull T4 are the way to go for really superior build quality and great ergonomics within a faithful T bird style. Shame they're about £2,500 tho...

[quote name='paul_5' timestamp='1435319397' post='2807619'] This. Awesome tune, but you have to [i]really[/i] work for it. [/quote] Ah now I'm ok with Sir Duke, but only recently realised its in A flat, not A, which racks up the difficultly level a smidgeon... Kick ass tune tho.

As a footnote to this, I did bite the bullet and strung up my old precision with 45-105 last night and it sounds lovely. No probs with the nut, and the intonation etc seems to be unaffected. I didn't particularly choose to play lighter gauge strings in the first place - I didn't even realise strings even came in different gauges when i started out, and just ended up using whatever gauge there was. 45-105 seem more versatile if they can handle various tunings a bit better than the 40s... i could learn to love them....

[quote name='anaxcrosswords' timestamp='1435259334' post='2807121'] If it's any consolation, bassbiscuits, it even goes wrong for Kingy: [url="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FA73eliAUU"]https://www.youtube....h?v=-FA73eliAUU[/url] A mistake caused by mishearing the sequencer on Hot Water. On the studio recordings of Lessons In Love I think a fair bit of the bass is sequenced anyway - not sure of the extent to which it's used live though. [/quote] Aha - he is human after all! Yeah that's the problem i find trying to figure his bass parts out - i can't actually figure out what's even going on a lot of the time. I saw him live a few months back and he was incredible (along with an awesome live drummer) - but still well beyond my grasp....

Rhythm stick and level 42 lessons in love - both for the reason that the timing has to be spot on or it all turns to sh*t. I reckon I'll get rhythm stick if I just keep at it and stay relaxed. But I'm beginning to realise Mark King is just on a different musical wavelength altogether to me. I've never thought I had a particular style, but I can safely say that Mark King is completely the opposite to me in his whole approach and technique - I think he's brilliant, but I just can't replicate any of his stuff. Like Bon Scott singing Nessun Dorma - it just isn't gonna work...

I'm the only person in my band who thinks to take any spares to gigs, or even any tools, fuses, duct tape etc. And sod's law, its always the other members who need it, cos my stuff all works. There's enough to be stressed about at gigs, so i make sure I've got the basics covered. But realistically i can't take two amps, multiple basses etc along. I play guitar in one version of my band, and although i take a spare guitar to gigs its never been out of the case. Better to be safe tho, if you can be arsed to carry it all round.

thats true Ras. Its only in recent years i've settled on 40-100, and i've had that bass for over 20 years, so it'll probably be fine. I'll get some 45-105s and I'm sure I can use them for something - playing with uber floppy tuned down strings just sounds and feels a bit crap

My Gibson t shirt is brillaint quality - hasn't faded or shrunk. Must be an original 1950s one then.

Only ever tried Epiphone and Tokai versions until quite recently, and found them pretty hard work - weighed a tonne, fairly uninspiring sound and cumbersome to play. Looked immense tho. Then I got a chance to try a real thunderbird at the Midlands Bass Bash, and it was fantastic - slim, responsive, and actually pretty lightweight in comparison to the boat anchors I'd played before. I need to spend more time getting my head round thunderbirds, as secretly I still think they're epic basses and by far the coolest looking instruments in the universe.

Cheers Norris Yeah your T Bird and Rick both felt comfortable to play with 45-105s from what I recall. I hadn't thought about the nut issue either. Bugger. Nothing's simple is it!

It's a shame tho innit? I always loved the look and mythology of Gibsons, even though at the end of the day I didn't get on with them as much as Fenders etc. I briefly had a Gibson with a terrible rough, dry fretboard with machining marks on it - didn't look like it had been finished properly at all. Shame as the guitar itself was quite nice and resonant, but fretboard did my head in. My regular guitar repairman, whose valuable opinion and experience I often seek if in doubt, said he'd seen plenty like it on recent Gibson models, which he thought was pretty dire considering their price and reputation. But I think the company has lost it's way a bit lately - the 2015 models, with robot tuners, strange neck profiles and lower frets etc are just a bit too odd for me. I guess they can't go on forever making 1958-1960 Les Pauls etc, but I think they've gone off the boil a bit.

[color=#000000][font=Calibri, sans-serif] [url="http://gawker.com/gibson-guitar-is-a-remarkably-unpopular-company-1713072808?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow"]http://gawker.com/gibson-guitar-is-a-remarkably-unpopular-company-1713072808?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow[/url][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Calibri, sans-serif] Story claiming things are terrible at Gibson, that the company is run terribly badly and that the products are suffering.[/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Calibri, sans-serif] I'm not entirely surprised by the build quality concerns - I've played some very good Gibsons, but also some with really bad finishing/fretwork etc, which isn't the end of the world, but not really on when you spend £1,500+ on a guitar which immediately needs a new nut or fret dress.[/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Calibri, sans-serif] Especially when bass manufacturers like Sandberg, who are neither massive nor boutique, can get such things very right on an instrument of the same price, if the makers care enough to do so.[/font][/color]