mcgraham

Wow that was quick! Awesome! Can't wait to see pics! If you don't mind, could you perhaps PM me with how much it set you back? Slightly curious! Mark

Don't suppose you'd be interested in lending one out? Mark

How much do second hand chapman sticks from Stick enterprises typically cost? They are an instrument I'd love to pick up at some point, just for the tonal options and fun they provide Mark

P.S. My answer is 4

*physics mode ON* if a bass was an ideal system, i.e. light strings strung up on a completely rigid body that has negligible resonant frequencies, and each string was oscillating independent from the others, and the method by which each strings movement was detected was identical for each string... then it shouldn't matter. However this is not the case. Therefore there will be a difference... *physics mode OFF* Can we reliably distinguish this? I think if the instruments were of similar level of construction it should be negligible to the average listener. But again, it is so subjective it's hardly worth arguing about. Mark

[quote]Any of the attached......[/quote] *sigh* I was hoping for a few more than that list Bilbo... (Thanks!) Isn't that awesome though? That one guy has featured on all of that material? Inspirational in itself... Mark

Jake, any suggestions on a Dave Holland album that I should assimilate into my brain? Mark

[quote]Most of Manrings stuff couldn't be played on anything other than his Hyperbass.[/quote] Mmmm.... Hyperbass.... *drool*

[quote]But many of the solo bass pieces I hear would sound better on the piano or classical guitar[/quote] Agreed. Many solo bass pieces are (or were) better off played on these instruments due to timbre, pitch, how that's recognised by people's ears etc. But should we see these as limitations? Or simply a challenge to write, create and perform music on the bass that suits the timbre of the bass? I like to think the latter. Mark

I used to use TB absolutely loads. There was so much information around. Basses to drool over, discussion on technique etc. Less so now; the majority of the stuff that was useful a while ago is now of little use to me. Also, the threads were less like the discussions we have on here. There were so many members that it was rarely a cohesive thread, but ended up (IMO and in general) being a free-for-all smattering of comments with rarely anyone responding to previously made comments, and if they did it was usually to agree 100% or to aggressively disagree. It's a great resource, and the lesser visited sections are easier to get answers and have discussions in. Mark

[quote]Agreed. I'd like to see more bass & drum duos but I think I'm the only one![/quote] +1! Once I get my new bass I'd like to do some work with a percussionist. Sort of coffee shop/acoustic stuff in the same vein as Matt Garrison with Arto Tunbuchian (sp?). Really tasteful chilled stuff. Something you can listen to intently for the sake of it, and also something that's relaxed enough to just have on in the background. Anyone know any decent percussionists in Nottingham? Mark

Gloss finish often looks cheap and plasticky, it also sticks more often. Some gloss finishes are absurdly adhesive. For instance on one of my guitars within minutes of playing my arm is securely anchored to the guitar by my natural skin secretions. I don't even seem to sweat noticeably when I play, just due to contact with the guitar body. I actually prefer somewhere between a gloss and satin finish. Satin is sometimes too dry, and gloss sometimes too sticky. When Jon made me my replacement neck I asked for somewhere between and it's perfect. Dry enough for non-stick playing, but enough gloss to feel pleasant when playing it. Mark

I don't know about solo bass, but I certainly enjoy trying to create interesting music using unaccompanied bass. I spent a year exclusively using the TIMR 4 finger technique that Matt Garrison uses, and this helped developing chordal playing immensely. At the same time I was also practicing the digital independence that Charlie Hunter employs in his music. So I often played the vocal melody line or interesting tensions in chords on top of the bass line to songs that I was playing throughout the year. I would read the piano and guitar music from the songs we were playing in that time and develop completely chordal bass parts for the song. This really helped me to develop my understanding of chords, tension release etc, as well as developing my ability to play the bass in the same fashion as someone would rhythm guitar. I don't enjoy the 'total' solo bass aspect that much though. I [i]do[/i] enjoy groups of bassists (e.g. DiPiazza, Carbonne, Manring's collaboration), ones where the bass is really at the forefront (e.g. Matt Garrison), those where it takes a lead role at times (e.g. Steve Jenkins, Janek Gwizdala) etc. I think there is future to the bass as a more expressive instrument in the forefront of a band, but it requires a bit more skill than just mere technique, and real compositional ability to bring it out as something more listenable than just muzaq you'd hear in a nature program about beavers. This is something that few bassists have, and something that other instruments are perhaps more suited towards, e.g. guitar or piano. Mark

[quote]Myself and Russ are fairly local to you if you fancy trying one out one day![/quote] Cheers Steve! I'd be well up for that sometime! Mark

[quote]Absolutely - no matter who makes your bass, each one should be made to the highest of standards to the best of your chosen luthier's ability. I've never played a bad GB, Roscoe or Sei - ranging from both the no frills models, to the more fully loaded examples. My Spitfire, although not as loaded as the Rumour, is still a fabulous instrument and remains one of my favourite basses of all time. It has the same quality of finish, build quality etc...[/quote] Indeed. It just wouldn't make sense for a custom builder to put out basses that were any less of a representation than their best basses. Unfortunately this is entirely subjective, obviously including sound but also down to feel and construction. For example, the review mentioned that the satin finish on the W&T made it feel cheaper and less exotic than the price suggested; however I'd rather have a bass with satin than gloss (most of the time) as there's other drawbacks I find with having gloss finish that satin completely sidesteps. Horses for courses I guess! Mark

Interesting! Thanks for the input Mike! When using the 4 finger technique I mute in a similar fashion, essentially dragging my index finger across the strings behind the movement of the other strings like the scrunchie that so many players use. that way it still mutes lower strings even when I move to high registers, as I used other portions of my index (where necessary) to fret different strings and therefore 'shift' the focus of my playing from one string to another. I love bass, so many interesting techniques you can use! Mark

[quote]There it is again... was this particular example of a GB Rumour too "super exotic" (whatever that means?) for that particular BGM shootout?[/quote] I'd like to think that above a certain price point with respectable luthiers, the extra cash doesn't provide a better constructed bass than the less expensive. That is to say, it doesn't mean that the cheaper basses they make are any less of a 'players bass' than the super spec'd up ones such as the one they reviewed. Alex, that's one of the reasons that I'd like to see a more objective review, i.e. one that tries to bring out/focus in on the strengths of each instrument. For example, I would say that yours is an attempt to have a more 'transparent' and acoustic instrument (albeit electric) with greater harmonic content and better tone from the increased scale length. Whilst a player may not [i]like[/i] your bass the advantages (or at least the features that are supposed to provide these advantages) should be made clear. Mark

That's pretty cool BF and Steve! I've always admired your jet black GB. And a great reason to get a custom. Did any other custom builder take your fancy? I wouldn't have said they criticised the customer specs, they just pointed out why they weren't what they'd pick, whilst still acknowledging that it's a nice option for some. I would've preferred a slightly more in depth performance review of each, as ultimately these basses are meant to be played and not hung on the wall or superfluous features discussed. Obviously these features warrant discussion, but I'd be interested to read a more in depth review of the performance, in the same way you'd want to read about the handling and overall performance/feel of a car than just discussion of the body work. Mark

Thanks for the detailed insight Russ. I'd love to try yours out at some point, as I've not tried a GB before. I have to admit, I've only tried the Nordy and the W&T, and I will concede that this particular W&T wasn't the most happening tonally. It was waaay too woody for my tastes, you'd need to dial in more low mids to get it to be useable in most band mixes (IMO), but then W&T are designed with the more solo player in mind. However, I'm surprised that the construction didn't get rated more highly as this aspect of the W&T turned me on to getting one of their basses for myself. I'd be interested to see what they would make of the one I'm getting in January. The Nordy to me, was just a well built jazz. The neck profile was OK, the sound was jazz-like, the preamp was useful (although I tried with one an Audere and I found it to be a tad 'edgy' in the tonality it imparted. In short, I wouldn't have paid that much for a Nordy as it isn't a super exotic to me, and although it plays well and oozes quality I believe you can get an equal level jazz with a little looking around. Just my opinion. The GMR and Mayones, I believe I have picked up a couple (they all look the same to me TBH) in stores and they felt solid, but didn't ooze quality and craftsmanship in the way that the W&T spoke to me. They felt a bit cheap in the way that Sandberg feel a bit cheap. Not exceedingly cheap, but I'm just explaining what I'd found. Personally, I don't totally agree with their opinions, and my slight disagreements would result in a re-ordering. Nevertheless, I can kind of see why they arrived at the outcome they did. Re: Roscoes - I'd always loved the look of Roscoe's, and from the tonal descriptions plastered all over TB I couldn't wait to try one. When I finally got the chance at BassDirect (thanks Mark), I was sad to say that it wasn't quite what I was looking for. A bit too aggressive, slightly too nasal, and a very raw edgey tone. Great quality, and they have fantastic top woods. the body size and sculpting is also great, feels very ergonomic, however I didn't rate their tone (personally). Re: GB basses - I read about people having them, but very few people have explained their choice in this regard, I'd be interested to hear why they picked GB and not someone else. Steve, what prompted you to get a GB?

Did anyone else read the shootout between the five 5 strings in January issue of Bass Guitar Magazine (I think it was this mag?) It was (IIRC) between a Nordy vJ5, GMR, GB Rumour, Wood&Tronics Spectrum and a Mayones. The GB was the outright winner, followed by the Nordy, joint 3rd for the GMR and Mayones, with the W&T coming last (shockingly!). What did everyone else think? Mark