fretmeister

£245. £50 over the B3K. Ouch!

I've got the full AO - I suspect that I would have bought the smaller one if it had been available at the time as I don't use the DI stuff either. No doubt I'll end up getting the small one as well for my small pedal board.

[url="https://www.darkglass.com/creations/alpha-omicron/"]https://www.darkglas.../alpha-omicron/[/url] Short vid for the moment, but no doubt more to come. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6LC1bXK1W0[/media] More detailed vids are below. Down there!

I got two 4x12 bass cabs, 3 basses, kit bag, pedal board, 16 channel powered desk, 2 PA cabs and 2 people in my old Focus estate. It managed about 40 mph then. The main issue was the weight, not the volume of kit.

[quote name='naxos10' timestamp='1504337048' post='3364140'] A very simplistic amp with instrument and pre-amp inputs only, no 'tone' controls, tuner, USB socket and speaker outputs. Then produce a range of pre-amp/foot pedals/plug-in modules for any other requirements. There could be a pre/power combination as an alternative. This gives the bassist the ability to add and change as required. [/quote] Mark Bass did that. It died on its arse.

Try the pedal into the FX return on the amp, thus bypassing the amp preamp section. You might like that too.

There are several compressor choices in there. From the basic Dynacomp type though to complex ones. I can make it match my Origin and DG pedal compressors. Also - I am in love with the GK amp model. To the point I am stupidly considering buying one!!

Official cases go in the loft. No name cases get sold or donated to the local music school. Basses live in a rack. They go in mono Vertigo bags if I'm taking them anywhere.

Just remembered the most important thing. NO BLOODY FAN! If AV guys can build 1u 2000W power amps without fans then so can bass amp makers.

There are several online serial number search sites already. But not even Fender can tell you the month that a bass was actually finished (I tried to find out for a strat I own)

Andy bought my Darkglass Duality. Quick payment - good all the way.

I love it when my callouses are like that! Means no pain in a long gig.

That would be "contributory negligence" But also - if they were hurt doing their own criminal act (such as taking your kit) then you'll be alright.

I think I know that drummer too! I never leave the gear unsupervised. It's just not worth it.

Errr... I saw Jason Newsted eating a well dodgy looking kebab at Donington in 1991. Clearly wanted something he couldn't get back stage. Like the raging shits or something. That's the best I've got.

There you go then! It could happen to anyone.

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1504108554' post='3362740'] I'm in the lucky position of having virtually no assets of marketable value; even to the point of owning duff kidneys and poor eyesight. Good luck squeezing pips out of this lemon..! Despite this vulnerability, my conscience prevents me from being wilfully negligent and causing harm to others, so claims for responsibility would not arise. An accident, on the other hand, is just that: an accident, and should not be the subject of a claim for anything. To paraphrase: 'stuff' happens. That's Life, and should not become fodder for leeches. I have the same outlook concerning 'stuff' that I suffer. If it's someone's fault, redress could be due. If it's not, then it's not. That's Life. [/quote] Wilfully negligence and not-wilfully negligent is still negligence. The common thought that all claimants and defendants in these situations have is identical: "It won't happen to me" And yet it does. To tens of thousands of people every year. And in 99% of those the person causing it was not "wilfully negligent" in the slightest. Just normally negligent. You are effectively claiming that those people were "wilfully" negligent and that is nonsense. The vast majority of them are just people getting on with their lives when they do something or fail to do something that results in injury and losses to someone else. It's not wilful, it's not criminal, it's not culpable (and all those things are different) it is just poor decisions by humans. Your position seems to suggest you believe yourself to be infallible. Perhaps you do have a greater ability than all other humans. Perhaps your ability to judge a situation is the greatest any human has ever managed. But would you claim that ability was fully functional 24 hour per day, every day. Irrespective of mood, illness, amount of sleep, simple distraction etc etc? Never made a bad decision about anything in your life? Everyone has.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1504105867' post='3362726'] If you're the insurance company and you win the claim, what's the point if the defendant has no insurance. You still have to pay the person you insured and you won't get your £1m back. [/quote] The insurance company does not make the claim. They defend claims from others. The claimant makes the claim. The defendant defends the claim. If there is an insurance company for the defendant then they will pay out on the claim. Or they will successfully defend it at their cost. The lay defendant (the poor bass player) doesn't have to dip into his pocket for anything more than an excess. Sometimes claims are made against defendants who don't have insurance because it is still worth it. Perhaps they have a house. Or a nice car. An asset search will be done to see if there is anything worth going for.. Sometimes even a heavily mortgaged house means it is still worth making a claim - because mortgage payments will still be made, the debt can be attached to the property. So when there is enough equity in the house, then the sale of the house can be forced. Mortgage company gets their bit first to pay that off. Then the attached debts get paid off. The balance goes to the house owner. Or sometimes there is nothing left for the house owner. Or maybe it is someone who rents but has a good job. Then you get a garnishee order and a payment plan. The damages will be deducted at source - it won't go to the defendant to then send a bit per month onwards - the employer will be ordered to remove the amount set by the court before the defendant ever gets it. Assets will be assessed next to the likely spend to win the action. If that looks do-able then the claim will continue.

I was amazed - it was instantly noticeable when I picked it up. It's a bit concerning really - I was going to get the routs in my Marleaux enlarged a little bit so I could fit a pair of EMG soapbars in. But I might weigh one of the existing Delanos first to see. I don't want that bass getting any heavier.

I knew a guy who found out he had been replaced in that sort of way in reverse He was told a gig had been cancelled. He happened to go to the pub for a drink and saw the posters were still up and discovered the gig was still on. He then looked at their facebook page and noted the photos were the same, but they had been cropped to remove him. In one instance he was in the middle, so someone had used MS Paint to draw a pillar where he was! I probably shouldn't have laughed!

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1504104478' post='3362713'] In a 4 piece band you're looking at another £120 a year. Not a great deal I suppose. The thing is, it does make you easier to sue and it give some the venue an opportunity to side step its responsibilities. No doubt the request that you have insurance is from the venues insurer who realise that a bunch of penniless musicians is going to be impossible to recover money from or even if they have money but no insurance will end up in a protracted legal battle where they can only recover £200k at most. [/quote] It does not make it easier to sue in the slightest. It might make recovery after suing easier but it does not make it easier to win the claim in the first place. When I see (sorry but I must) bollocks like that the person saying it has never heard of QOCS either. Qualified One Way Costs Shifting. In the good old days if you successfully DEFENDED a claim for injury then the claimant would be ordered to pay your costs back. They lost, they pay the costs. Sounds quite fair. For injury work that does not exist anymore So someone comes after you. You defend the claim. You don't have insurance so you get a local solicitor involved. He does a good job and you win. Since 2013 your opponent DOES NOT HAVE TO PAY YOUR COSTS BACK. So you've spent 3 years defending it and probably paid £20,000 in fees WINNING the action. Tough. you don't get it back. And there's no legal aid for injury work anymore. You've won and still £20,000 out of pocket. If you've got PL then they will pay the costs of defending it. Win or lose.

That's the way I look at it. It's also what I don't understand sometimes with attitudes to policies. None of us like buying insurance and we all bitch about the cost. But we can easily be on the other end of it - and the economic reality is a choice: do I want an insurance policy that is £10 cheaper? Or do I want policies that would properly compensate me if I happened to be the injured person?

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1504098832' post='3362670'] So when the drummer punches someone, you're all responsible? Where is the line? [/quote] Nope. That's not negligent. It's criminal, but not negligent.