Bilbo

Just to stir things up, I will offer some opinions (I have several) - I think Cottle is overated! What I hear is a man who has learned 1,000 licks off other people and who puts them together to create something, errr, the same. I was impressed with his technique at the early stages of hearing but, once I got past that, there was not a lot of him in there, just losts of other people. I would rather Steve Swallow (yes, I know he's not British) anyday, even though he has half the technique. I also think Gwizdala is a relative lightweight compared to some of the real greats. His playing is not yet fully formed and he could be a lot better before he is done. I love his work ethic and hope it pays dividends but, so far, IMO, he's a work in progress. His work is ok but not brilliant but I think the important word is 'yet' Back to the posts on why someone is 'one of the best': I think it has to do with the old 'can anyone do it or is it a fresh and original sound'? Chris Squire is an absolute gem in that his whole concept is uinique to him and noone else has ever really taken his concept and moved it on. Mike Rutherford, however, is a player who I consider to be completely replaceable in Genesis - his songwriting role is another matter but his playing? Could be anyone most of the time. I actually think his contribution to teh success of Genesis was his arranging skills and the fact that he could play guitar, bass, bass pedals and backing vocals. It was all of it, not just the bass playing. Never been an Entwhistle fan because I have never been a Who fan - I have always been someone who can't seperate the player from the songs they play. As Ox has only ever really been The Who's bass player, I was never really listening. I agree with Jake (again), Dave Holland has done so much with so many people as well as under his own name, he has to be up there with the best.

A colleague and I were talking about Marshall amps in work once (several years ago) and one of the admin. ladies, a quiet, sweet 50+ woman, dropped in the conversation that Jim 'used to hit on me all of the time'. We looked at her wide eyed as she explained that, as a teenager, she had hung around with The Who and used to see Jim quite often and he was always trying to ask her out but she refused his advances. Respect!

I'd love a 1986 Wal Custom Fretless 4. They sound and play brilliantly and I can really express myself on them... Oh - I've got one! Brillo pads ! Anyone wanna swap a Status Energy 5 for a Stagg EUB?

Can't wait

You can do a self assessment on additional income under £15K. Its relatively easy (takes me an hour ot two a year). The claim form comes with instructions and you really only need 4 figures: those that appear on your P60 every year, your gross income, your expenditure/overheads and your capital allowances. I have declared for years: its not worth me losing my day job for not declaring income when, after declaring it, I don't pay any or very minimal tax. That tax can also be collected through your tax code so its a breeze. But I have had more rebates that tax bills. I don't know how the services work but how would a conviction for tax evasion effect your prospects?

+1 for 'A Remark You Made'. There is actually nothing hard about it but it sounds like a fretless is supposed to and is playable by anyone who can hold a bass (unlike Portrait of Tracy' ). There are also charts available on the net. Also 'This Must Be Love' off Phil Collins' 'Face Value' cd. Alphonso Johnson at his coolest.

[quote name='4000' post='628945' date='Oct 17 2009, 07:05 PM']With all due respect, it seems to me that you've decided you're right based on your own particular needs and choices, and then have (as many people do) tried to judge the choices of others using this criteria. There's nothing wrong with making people think, but when you try to convince them that what they're thinking is wrong simply because it doesn't agree with what you think that's another thing entirely.[/quote] I never thought for an instant that I was right, I just had a position and put it forward. In case people hadn't noticed, I enjoy the debates not because they are resolved but because they are engaging. What I struggle with is the apparent dichotomy between the idea that Alembics (or whatever) have a distinct sound but that, if you play one, you won't sound like whoever. There is a subtle contradiction in there. We will, as always, have to agree to disagree and just enjoy the ride

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSwHtKCi0Kg"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSwHtKCi0Kg[/url] My YouTube debut! No histrionics but fun..... (seen elsewhere on here)

But if you have had 50 basses in 30 years, you have averaged seven months with each bass - I suspect its even less in many cases. That's the same as having a sofa with the plastic covers still on - you'll never get used to it. And I would assume that you have tried a zillion amps in combination with each bass so the number of variables is sky high. I have no problem believing that there are differences between basses and woods, different pick up combinations etc but it seems to me that some of us have out heads turned when a bass sounds different and lack any sense of which bass sounds great and which sounds just ok. Going down the custom route just seems like expensive hair-splitting. My point is this: my Wal has served me well in rock, funk, shows, jazz, small groups, big bands, function bands etc. I can accept that a different bass in each case would be different but I see it as hair splitting as well and I know that noone but me would notice. I think its like the LPs vs cds vs MP3s discussion. Everyone says that LPs sound better but, if you are listening to music in the car, who will be able to tell? I believe producers are capable of asking for a specific sound but if someone wants me to sound like Stanley Clarke, they have booked the wrong bloke! Put an Alembic in my hands and I won't sound like SC, I guarantee it. I just struggle with the idea that, with 50 basses to choose from, you can't find one that works

[quote name='4000' post='627386' date='Oct 15 2009, 09:56 PM']Actually one question I'd like to ask Bilbo (not specifically relating to custom basses but potentially pertinent to some of the issues that have arisen) is does he play the same way on every instrument he picks up, therefore imposing his style, sound and note choices on the instrument in question, or does he adapt his playing to suit the individual instruments strengths? Steve Howe has been quoted as saying every instrument makes him think a little differently, and I tend to feel the same. Many lines that work sonically on my Seis just don't work on my Ricks, and vice versa, and the feel and response of the instrument is also something that affects what I am likely to play on it.[/quote] I suspect it is a bit of both. I approach different instruments the same but am likely to have to make miniscule adjustments to accommodate stuff like string spacing, neck profile, body shape. WIther way, the adjustment would take minutes for most playing and hours for more sophisticated techniques. IN reality, I play another bass about once a year for 10 minutes. I actually think that the quality of your amp is for more central to the sound than the wood your bass is made of. This applies to all sound reinforcement. Guitars and keyboards through cheap amps are just as bad a basses.

[quote name='The Funk' post='626929' date='Oct 15 2009, 02:05 PM']1. Double basses cost a huge amount of money - you normally check you have the right one for you and then stick to it. It's also a quiet, muffled and indistinct instrument (even though I love it).[/quote] Isn't that the point? They spend a lot of money on a professional standard instrument and then mould themselves to its individual personality and find the instruments own voice. DB players don't buy and sell with the frequency of electric players. And its not always true that they spend a lot. I have come across many DB players whose instruments were not that expensive and they stick with it. Classical bassists spend 10s of thousands on their instruments but jazzers can spend relatively small change (£45 in one case, £0 in another!!). Jazz instruments are chosen for their idiosyncracies and not their purity. DId you also know that Ron Carter uses hired instruments when he gigs out of the US? Different one every night. [quote name='The Funk' post='626929' date='Oct 15 2009, 02:05 PM']2. A piano is a piano - a lot of pianists complain about the keys on unweighted and semi-weighted keyboard instruments. They also don't have to carry theirs from gig to gig on their back[/quote] I doubt many piano specialists would agree - there are good pianos and bad pianos but the pianst just gets on with it. [quote name='The Funk' post='626929' date='Oct 15 2009, 02:05 PM']3. Sax players are some of the fussiest I've ever seen when it comes to particular reeds/mouthpieces etc - an old bandmate of mine GASed for a Selmer Mark VI and a Michael Brecker mouthpiece.[/quote] That's no different than someone agonising over string guages. Reeds are funny things. Unlike a box of, say plectrums, many sax players go through a new box of reeds and throw half of them away as unusable. Mouthpieces are again a specific interface with the instrument. The instrument itself remains 'off the peg'. Either way, most sax players I know are nowhere near as fickle as bassists or guitarists about their gear. [quote name='The Funk' post='626929' date='Oct 15 2009, 02:05 PM']There are three reasons I'd go custom: 1. aesthetics - I can't find a walnut Jazz with bullet truss rod, rosewood 'board, white blocks/binding 2. tone - I want to take advantage of Delano's Hybrid pick-up system, which combines a J and MM pick-up in the same unit 3. scale length/tuning - for the Doom side project, the band would like me to tune down to a low A (ie. a tone below low B ), but I'd still like to be able to play a traditional looking 4 string, so a 35" or 36" custom bass seems like the best option.[/quote] The first two are dubious, IUAM, but the third is entirely defensible. If the music requires a modification, it requires a modification. Horses for courses. Most music doesn't.

[quote name='Sibob' post='626811' date='Oct 15 2009, 12:02 PM']I'm still waiting for you to take up my Bronco challenge . The thing is, even once you get down to the details, it's still immensly subjective. If you take the whole want/craving thing to it's conclusion, we'd be living as Buddhist monks. The meditation on, and realisation of the roots of 'craving' is the first chapter in many Buddhist texts. Similarly this means that your 'craving' to be a better musician, comes from the same place as GAS. So like I said, nothing actually matters (the line between Buddhism and Nihilism is a often debated), and the only way of differentiating what is more important is subjective opinion.[/quote] You are, of course, completely correct. Which is why I ask that all of this is taken in the spirit in which it is intended - as part of a journey and not as a destination.

[quote name='Doctor J' post='626816' date='Oct 15 2009, 12:06 PM']Didn't they try that whole thing where everyone just makes do with what's there and no-one aspires to anything different? What was it called again? Oh yeah, Communism.[/quote] That's an interesting definition of Communism. You wouldn't favour capitalism, would you? Maybe?

[quote name='Stylon Pilson' post='626761' date='Oct 15 2009, 10:56 AM']Okay, so what you're trying to say is: "If I, Bilbo, were to buy a custom bass, it would be for predominantly aesthetic reasons. I refuse to accept that other people may feel differently."[/quote] Actually, if you want the truth, I think that most people (myself included) operate on a multitude of levels and do many of the things they do for reasons that are different from what they THINK they do them for. Its called 'justification' - not a literal meaning of the word but a psychological phenomenon that allows people to apparently rationally talk themselves into doing things they want to do or into not doing things they don't want to do. At its most extreme, it allows people to kill each other but it also allows people to, for instance, talk themselves out of doing things that have value (e.g. 'I don't have to learn to read music', 'I can get by without learning any theory' - all the arguments are rational but what are the motivations? That's another debate, obviously). My approach to things is to keep questioning them over and over again in an effort to find out what motivates but also what hinders my progress as a musician and as a human being - i.e. recognising my own justifications and deviant behaviours. Like most people, I get GAS. I look at the magazines and the pictures here and see all these lovely instruments and covet them, same as others do. I can justify anything, even £16K on an Alembic but, when I keep asking myself why do I want this? why do I want that? and when I keep digging and digging into what motivates that desire, I eventually realise that what I really want is nothing more than to be a better musician not to have a better bass/amp. So, instead of spending money and time on the tools, I spend it on acquiring the skills, knoiwledge and experience I need to excel. My mischievious thread is not, therefore, an attempt to be critical of those that do what they do to get these fantastic instruments built but to give others the opportunity to process the thoughts, feelings and emotions that drive people to want them. If someone has a genuinely objective reason for doing some of these things (ergonomics is one), who am I to censure them? But I genuinely believe that at least some of the people who go down this route are trying to buy themselves out of problems that are only solved by long term study and investment in their PLAYING not their gear. The fact that as many of these bespoke instruments get resold as get commisssioned has to be confirmation of the fact. PS Anthony Jackson rocks, whatever bass he plays.

And different necks and different string spacing. All of which make a minimal difference to the final product - the music. All I am saying (and some of you are taking all of this far too seriously) is that the main motivation, from where I am sitting, is aestheic - i.e. having a lovely bespoke thing that you can point at and say 'mine'. If that is the case, fine (I studied Art at Diploma level too so pretty things matter to me to). I just think its a bit superficial and has little to do with the thing that matters to me, the music. And, with very few exceptiosn, I like the look of most basses so it matters not a lot

Andy's argument is credible but, in resposne, I would have to say that the difference between solidbody/hollowbody/steel strung/nylon strung/12-string guitars is quite marked. They are, to all intents and purposes, as different as, say, a piano and a harpsichord or a trumpet and flugelhorn. The difference between a fretted and fretless bass is also quite marked. But I struggle to hear any discernable difference between, say, a Fender Jazz and A Fender Precision THAT CANNOT BE RADICALLY CHANGED BY TWEAKING A KNOB OR TWO ON THE AMP. Now I can accept that there is a difference between Jaco's Jazz and Steve Harris' Precision sound bit, if they swapped basses, they would still sound like Jaco and Harris not Harris and Jaco. People like Jimmy Haslip change bass every six months but, bearing in mind I don't follow Haslip's career, his bass sound on cds is not massively altered by the change. Same with Chris Squire and his choices over the years. Yes there are subtle differences but nothing that really impacts significantly on the finsihed product i.e. the music. Its a bit like having Keith Jarrett insisting on having a Steinway replaced by a Bosendorfer before he can play. There may be a subtle difference that 2 people in the world can hear but, fundamentally, they both sound like pianos and the bits that are differenct are inconsequential to 99% of their audience.

[quote name='GreeneKing' post='626110' date='Oct 14 2009, 03:36 PM']Maybe this is not the case and it's entirely my distorted grasp of this thread but I believe the provocation has been quite deliberate and is coming from a slightly 'better than' stance. Many bass players have offered a valid alternative position that seems to me to be discounted.[/quote] Of course its deliberate, why would I start it accidently As for it coming from a 'better than' stance, trust me, its really not that important

Its all in his fingers. I have heard him on Warwicks and Wals and he always sounds like Percy Jones. Marvellous player. I heard that he did use an effect that increased the flange effect as you increased the pitch of a note. He built it himself I believe and it is not commercially available. What do I know.

[quote name='Sibob' post='625838' date='Oct 14 2009, 11:25 AM']I'd actually be very interested to know, and obviously I don't want this to happen, if your Wal suddenly became unavailable forever, what you would end up playing? . If you couldn't find another Wal, you wouldn't have a bass made to the same spec?![/quote] I'd go to somewhere like The Gallery, knob about for 2 or 3 hours and make a decision. My only 'must have' would be the fretless thing. But, yes, I would look for a Wal as a default position and start there. But, equally, if someone said here is another bass that sounds good, I would be cool with that. I would not go for a custom build because I couldn't be bothered with the wait and, to be blunt, wouldn't know what to ask for. If I lost my bass and had no money I would play whatever I could beg or borrow (I wouldn't steal one). I spoke to Martin 'Sei' Peterson at The Gallery once and he made reference to the 'old' technology used in the Wal pick-ups as opposed to the 'new' technology used in Sei's. Like I give a rat's... If it sounds good, it is (I would play a Sei if it sounded good). The technology is unimportant; its the sound that matters. Even the feel of the neck only matters to me for about 10 minutes

There's nothing wrong with any of this. I am just trying to save people a lot of hassle chasing things thay probably already have. 'The main problem with finding your own path is in recognising that you are already on it' - Mick Goodrick

[quote name='Sibob' post='625783' date='Oct 14 2009, 10:20 AM']My intellectual beef is till that you play a hand-built, (comparatively) fancy wood fretless, and you're asking why people bother with custom basses!? . You ordered a Wal surely for one of these reasons: 1) You couldn't find a bass that had the fit/feel from a production-line instrument 2) The Wal offered parts/features and a sound that wasn't available anywhere else.[/quote] I bought it because it was a professional standard instrument with a good reputation and I tried a couple of stock instruments and liked them. At that time I hadn't tried Alembics or Fenders or Gibsons or any other professional ranges. I had only played the local basses you find in local shops. Hondo, Aria Pro II etc. The Wals were probably the first proper grown up basses I had ever played. The points you list above had absolutely no part to play in my decision whatsoever. Remember, this was 1986 and I lived in Cwmbran in Gwent. There wasn't even a train to Cardiff then! The range of choices available to a 20 year old that couldn't drive at that time was very limited. [quote name='Sibob' post='625783' date='Oct 14 2009, 10:20 AM']And I'm still asking you what you believe to be 'Custom', because seeing as Wal and Alembic aren't, I'm assuming it also rules out Sei, ACG etc etc because they offer standard models!? [/quote] Absolutely. If someone goes into The Gallery and buys a Sei off the wall, even if the bass was originally put together as a complete custom job, the 'new' owner is buying 'off the peg' i.e. taking a credible professional instrument 'as is' and making it work for him/her. If its handbuilt, fine. If its machine built, fine. Its all academic. The aspect of all of this that I am 'challenging' is the practice of individuals specifying the minutiae of a new build to their own exacting standards vs just getting a great instrument and spending some quality time with it in order to make it sing. My Wal could have been built by magic gnomes from fairyland for all I care but the bass I bought in 1986 is the one I play today. The only changes are strings and batteries and one set up 8 years ago (the intonation had slipped). Its the practising that makes its play good, not the mahogany.

In spite of the various suggestions about my motives, my point has always been that the bass you buy off the shelf may feel or sound a little 'better' than another instrument, but, if you spend more than an quarter of an hour with any professional standard model, you will begin to learn how to get teh best out of it. In my simple universe, any one of the 8 tone controls on my Eden amp has the power to influence my sound far more than the wood that my bass is made of. And that is before you get into high ceilings, concrete floors, tiles vs carpets and crap cymbals. I am a great believer in working with the tools you have to make your sound as good as it can be and not in acquiring more tools in an effort to 'buy' the sound you want (unless, of course, its a specific effect like a chorus or delay etc). The 'why not buy a Squier' argument is as provocative as my original post. There is a bottom line here and the quality of a bass is bound to be affected by universally poor quality materials but, IMO, if the core of the instrument is of a certain standard, you should be able to make it work. There are hundreds of examples of great musicians making marvellous music with relatively cheap gear. And a small point to note. If an issue has been debated before, it doesn't mean it shouldn't be revisited. I have never discussed this issue before, as far as I can recall, so I reserve the right to raise it here and to engage in an identical debate to the ones which have already been rehearsed. If you have exhausted the debate in your own mind, then go start another thread on something you are currently mulling over and leave those that want to discuss this particular issue to do so in peace.

[quote name='BassBod' post='625190' date='Oct 13 2009, 04:38 PM']I never regarded Wals as custom basses -[/quote] I agree - nothing custom about them.

[quote name='OutToPlayJazz' post='625189' date='Oct 13 2009, 04:38 PM']Add to that the fact that my basses are my hobby as well as my living. (Yes, I am a very boring man!) And yes, I do know what they're all made from. And it may not matter to Joe Public, but it does matter to me.[/quote] But all of your basses are stock, right? So there is no contradiction here?

[quote name='Sibob' post='625167' date='Oct 13 2009, 04:24 PM']Why did you order a Wal? [/quote] I played 3, liked them all because they were consistent and they had a good rep. Paid £740 (+£20 for a second-hand hard case). Now worth 4x that but not for sale.