mcgraham

At least when we buy gear we're usually [i]changing [/i]it. I'd rather frequently change my gear than continuously accumulate it like most guitarists seem to.

[quote]The more knowledge you have, the more choices you have.[/quote] I agree. This debate has been spun a number of times, but I still like chipping in I for one am immensely glad I spent the time learning basic theory. I had no choice but to do so as I got chucked in at the deep end with a gospel choir with which I really got my ear together. Some of you have said that bilbo's previous post made no sense to you, and I can appreciate why that might be. I could explain it but I imagine bilbo or jake could do it more neatly than I could. Theory on its own can often seem impenetrable, and like bilbo says, its not really possible to learn everything in a few lessons. Whilst theory can at times seem impenetrable, I would say that equally, playing a song with a chord structure you can't predict or follow can also seem impossible to deal with if playing by ear alone. Theory isn't a binary 'you know it all or you know nothing at all'. There is always more you could learn, digest and apply, and loads you could piece together. IMO, there are some fundamental bits of theory that are relatively straightforward. These explain scales, melody, harmony, chord construction, etc. These are really useful for working your way round virtually any song and gives you a good mental framework for deconstructing a song, or even constructing your own. After that, there's loads of bits of theory you could learn as 'optional extras'. These help to explain oddity's in songs that are not immediately evident from the fundamentals (usually restricted to playing within one key). Equally so, they can be used to come up with imaginative ideas to add to songs. I would love to give examples, but I'll wait to see which direction the conversation moves in.

Before what?

Why yes, yes it is Thanks! I can't wait to get this monster... this is going to be one helluva challenge!

[quote]I am also now very sure that pure hifi completely modern amps are not for me....eg the Genz sound[/quote] [quote]There is nothing hi-fi about my Genz ShuttleMax6, lovely warm growl with my P Bass.[/quote] [quote]Have to agree.... when I heard the lovely warm growl my friend got from his Shuttle 6 I was blown away[/quote] I always find it amusing when people put pieces of gear in completely different tonal camps. It goes to show how difficult it is to try and explain sound purely using words, and how subjective our own perception of sound is anyway!

I think the beauty and sonic bliss of a simple valve/ceramic setup is most obvious from guitar amps, but the weight associated with equivalent bass amps is just plain unpleasant. This is the biggest factor that dissuades me from going down a more 'vintage' route.

[quote]I'm not sure that they are any "simpler" are they?[/quote] I was thinking more about the amps than the cabs. Arguably they all do the same thing 'speakers = sound' and 'amps = power', but I'm thinking more about the complexity of the inner workings and the number of components. Does the expression 'less is more' seem appropriate? or 'a chain is only as strong as its weakest link'. My understanding is that generally the fewer components the better for achieving a 'pure sound' and for avoiding distortion of the sound. Put it this way: years ago I was working with a professional sound engineer installing a PA system in a large church venue. He was telling me about a microphone that he'd heard about that used a beam of light that shines onto a singer (or other instrument, etc) and detects vibrations using that beam of light. I asked him 'that idea sounds amazing, why don't people use it then?' (assuming it wasn't too expensive). He said 'just because it's new, or complicated doesn't mean it sounds good... and even if it sounds good, it doesn't mean it sounds better than the stuff we currently use' and he made reference to classic microphones, classic bass amps, guitar amps, pickups, guitars, basses, etc. Whilst he wasn't dismissing new technology, I felt he was suggesting that maybe we listen more with our ears and spend less time reading the spec sheet and the price tag.

I know what you mean. I only started looking at amps and cabs properly just as neo speakers and class D power amps were really breaking onto the scene, and so somehow 'bypassed' the whole ceramic speakers and valve amp side of things. Now I'm discovering that these 'old school' simple setups are actually incredibly full of tone and worth investigating further.

Though these are more unquantifiable aims: 1. Continue to develop my improv (reaped massive gains over Christmas due to the free time). 2. Write more songs. 3. Learn to handle the new fretless (arriving soon!). 4. Generally get more creative.

[quote]I also have a couple of hair bands over the strings too, just past the nut (cheating I know )[/quote] *shocking* Just kidding. I was thinking about this the other day, as in 'cheating' using things like ramps, hairbands, low action, light strings, light touch, etc. I used to think stuff like that was 'cheating', but I really don't think that sort of thing is cheating when it comes to making music. For example, cars nowadays have traction control, satnav, switchable 2/4 wheel drive etc, but you wouldn't call Jensen Button or guys like that any less of a driver because they utilise the latest technology in their cars to improve/contribute towards their driving. Ultimately, these are just tools that are a means to an end. The car doesn't drive itself, nor does the instrument play itself - all the other things we add (like ramps, low action etc) is just to make it as easy as possible to play what we want to hear. How can that really be considered cheating?

Spoombung, alas, it is not in my hands yet I've not heard any clips either. It'll ship sometime in the New Year. Erik and Enrico never let a bass leave unless it's in perfect playing condition, so they're tweaking it to be [i]just[/i] so. As you can imagine they are very pleased with this particular bass, and want to make sure they send it off in the best form that they can.

Well indeed! I only changed because I started to encounter things I couldn't play due to the fundamental nature of my technique, so I modified my technique. If there's no problem, there's nothing to fix Mark

[quote]Low open strings shouldn't ring unless you hit them[/quote] I disagree. Sympathetic vibration can set off low notes, general movement of the bass can cause an undesired rumble from lower strings, not pulling off cleanly when moving from low to high can leave a ringing string in your wake, etc. Loads of ways a lower string can be sounded. [quote]A decent compromise to floating is to anchor as you go across/up the strings, but if just for ringing strings...then I'd work on left hand damping anyway[/quote] Whilst I once would have agreed with you about left hand damping being sufficient, I would take issue with this now. In essence, IMO, your left hand has enough worry about when fretting notes than to worry about also being the primary muting source for low strings (as well as high strings). To illustrate, I once played the 4 finger TIMR popularised by Matt Garrison exclusively for a year. No anchored thumb and no right hand thumb muting - I had to mute using only my left hand. I essentially used my index finger like a hairband style mute and dragged it across the strings lightly to mute all ringing, using certain parts of the finger to fret notes that I wanted. This was fine for a while, but as my left hand technique caught up to my right hand speed/technique, I realised that more complex lines were not compatible with leaving my index finger in this position. All this speed was for nought if I couldn't mute effectively. So I went back to two finger floating thumb, knowing full well that if I could play 4 finger at speed 'x', then two fingers must be able to move just as fast - it'd just be more tiring. In summary, if you can get over the idea that you 'need to anchor', then you have a spare digit that can be exclusively dedicated to muting low strings in an extremely low maintenance way. It literally just does the job without much work on your part, unlike having to move the thumb between strings as with the anchor/movable anchor technique.

Floating thumb is a great technique. Keeps everything quiet, releases tension in your hand, and makes moving about the strings a lot smoother as you're not 'anchored' on anything in the same way as locking your thumb on/behind a string. Some disadvantages? You may feel a little bit disconnected from the bass if you're used to anchoring lots. You may feel a bit underconfident about the relative position of your plucking hand as you won't have the absolute reference point you had before. You also need to learn different muscle memory for string skipping/jumping. Your arm also plays more of a role in stabilising your hand when plucking. You may feel you can't pluck as authoritatively as you're not 'plucking into your thumb' like the more usual pinching action. However, I feel that these are only initial bug-bears that soon wear off. I feel that the benefits you get with FT cannot be achieved through the anchoring technique (whether movable or immovable), and that the disadvantages soon disappear (particularly as it teaches you to play softer as you won't be quite as aggressive when first using FT). Check out these threads for some discussions of this technique: [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=44705&hl=floating"]This one...[/url] [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=11218&hl=floating"]And this one...[/url] [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=7772&hl=floating"]And another one...[/url]

Enrico has informed me they are going to try a slightly higher gauge of string on this bass (105s rather than 100s), tweak the pickup height together with the the internals of the preamp so as to optimise the setup. I'm also going to get them to make sure the bridge is at just the right height for my playing style, as the more acoustic type bridge will likely be much harder to adjust the height of than a standard metal adjustable bridge.

[quote]Wow. That looks awesome Mark next time im back in Notts i am going to have to come and try it out. Also cant wait to see the two W antd Ts together. That will be awesome.[/quote] Definitely! You're more than welcome to! I can't wait to have two basses as awesome as each other. Rounds out the herd so to speak. Mark

Thanks Eude! You're right about it being so understated. It is clearly an eye-catching bass, but for none of the more usual reasons (e.g. crazy paint job, mad laminates/woodwork, monkey grip, etc). Enrico has sent me pics of the back too. Bear in mind this is a chambered bass with a deeper body thickness, so carving the heel correctly for the 3 octave fingerboard presented a real challenge, but they've done an amazing job. Looks phenomenal. I will be spending a LOT more time playing bass in the months to come.

Flippin' stunning. I honestly cannot believe how amazingly well this has come out... I can't put it into words... so I'll let these pics do it instead. [attachment=38718:Zoid_33_...ess__11_.jpg] [attachment=38715:Zoid_33_...less__4_.jpg] [attachment=38716:Zoid_33_...less__6_.jpg] [attachment=38717:Zoid_33_...less__9_.jpg]

Guess who may have received pictures of his completed bass ...

[quote]What I don't like is when you are told you are wrong, or your bass is wrong, or your amp is wrong, (or the room is wrong!?) for not liking the cab by the maker. The science can be brought to the table, but if the prospective customer doesn't like it, you can't go telling them that they are wrong.[/quote] I would agree with this. To assert that the customer must be doing something wrong and that's why you don't like the cabs is NOT cool (IMO). These comments may be made hastily, or in a genuine desire to be helpful, but it's a fine line between putting forward constructive advice on how a more desirable sound might be achieved based on one's experience, and telling the client/customer that if they don't like the product then they must be doing something wrong. Such comments [i]could [/i]be right, but could also be wrong - the rest of us just don't know. Unfortunately, what we end up seeing is a manufacturer that can come across (IMO) as quite condescending and blinkered when it comes to their own products. FYI - I am genuinely interested in a 'Big One' and rate Alex's knowledge and desire to build something that he feels isn't met by the current market. I'm merely trying to convey what I've observed and feel about these things, given the comments already made... after all, this is a [i]discussion [/i]forum Mark

[quote]This is precisely why I've gone through shedloads of gear to arrive where I am today. You can't tell IME - some of the sweetest sounding stuff in the showroom has turned out to be a steaming pile of bat poo when gigged. I don't think one gig's enough either to form an opinion - you need to try gear in different rooms / on hollow stages etc.[/quote] +1. I can tell whether I like or dislike certain attributes about it, and I can usually tell when something REALLY won't work in a live mix... but I don't believe I can reliably pick out ones that will absolutely shine in a live mix just from a solo listen.

I had a similar experience with a music shop in Coventry. Took my (then) brand new Geddy to them for a set up. Got a call a few days later saying 'the truss rod's maxed out, you should send it back to where you got it from'. Roll on a few days and I take it to another guy (Noiseworks in Coventry) who I hand it to and says 'Ah, I see where they went wrong' He points out that this truss rod nut needs to be adjusted by a screwdriver, but that it is often hard to get enough torque into it using a normal screwdriver, and that this is what they probably tried to do. He then produced a T-bar handled screwdriver and instantly adjusted the neck with little difficulty. Lets make sure we continue to support the music stores who do look out for the best interests of the customers.

I'd been doing an almost bass only streak for several months, and I was starting to stagnate. This 'break' is helping me to break out of a rut, try some new approaches to the instrument(s). I've also finally been getting some really great picking tone on guitar. Not that it was bad before, but now it's really starting to come together.

Cardiff isn't on the tour this time around! We do have friends in Cardiff (other than your good self!) so we could try and squeeze in a trip sometime in 2010. MT, I've actually not been playing bass regularly for a few weeks now - mainly been playing guitar. I did a rendition of 'Wonderful Slippery Thing' (check it out if you've not heard it) for a music event recently, and so spent (and have been spending) most practice time working on guitar chops. Been quite inspired on electric guitar as of late! It's nice to get a break anyway, and I find improvement on one instrument yields gains in the other.