Linus27

[quote name='largo' post='492195' date='May 19 2009, 10:50 AM']My maths must be wrong. £4K - £2K resale = £2K it's cost. £10 week * 52 weeks * 4 years = £2080[/quote] Ah, you see I went by your end comment of "Wow! Maybe I have £4K to spend on a new bass too :0)" which would be 7.6 years. Now if your going to be a tight arse and only spend £2k then yes 4 years it is but why spend £2k when you can spend £4

[quote name='largo' post='492182' date='May 19 2009, 10:30 AM']Why are most of you obsessed with getting maximum reasle value on a bass? It might seem like a lot of money, but £4K isn't that much these days. I guess it's all relative but I know a lot of people who will spend £10K on a car and loose half the value in 2-3 years. Let's say he loses £2K over 4 years on the bass, i.e. he buys at £4K and resells at £2K then the bass has cost him £10 a week. Wow! Maybe I have £4K to spend on a new bass too :0)[/quote] In about 7.6 years time roughly at £10 a week

[quote name='chris_b' post='492147' date='May 19 2009, 09:52 AM']I know I've not seen many contracts like this but the ones I have seen have never been "written off". In my experience no one makes a present of 150K, especially in the Music Business! The signed guy (the rest of us weren't signed) in one of my bands was still playing off the advance, in instalments, 5 years later! That’s why my advice is to get this contract checked out by YOUR own lawyer before you take the money.[/quote] Have to agree with this 100%. We spent about £6000 on lawyers fees looking over our contracts. Took 3 months going back and forth ironing out all the issues. Funny thing is, we knew the contacts so well by then that 5 years down the line, we sued the record company for breach of contract and walked away scott free whilst retaining everything including £15k worth of musical equipment which was part of the advance. So it really does pay to get it checked out and know what your getting into.

[quote name='OldGit' post='491494' date='May 18 2009, 03:55 PM']Not changed at all. Used to be Opportunity Knocks, now it's X factor and Britain' got some talent, really. These are lrgely different markets to bands that get signed through building a following and proving they can do it on a stage in a pub rather than on telly. It's just different ways to get noticed and for someone to reckon they can make money out of you. Today it's Simon Cowell, back then it was Paul McCartney or Micky Most or Stock, Aitkinson and Waterman, or Chas Chandler or Brian Epstein Bobby Crush and Mary Hopkin both converted Op Knocks winnings into one hit wonders and pretty good pensions .. millions of others auditioned and got nowhere. Ever since the Rock Island Line and the skiffle groups in the 50's showed that it was easy to make a song that topped the charts, and you no longer had to play as well as the jazz bands, kids have been strapping on guitars and thinking that will make them Elvis, or Lonnie or whomever.. The problem I can see here is that people are still thinking that signing to a big label is the only way to be a success. That's clearly rubbish and the alternative ways are much better now.[/quote] I was of the understanding that Indie labels all pretty much died out some years ago and all thats left is the Major's who are struggling. Is this not the case. Is the indie label scene pretty strong still?

Blimey, £4K on a bass. I can't imagine spending that on a bass. You aleady own my dream bass which is your Fender American 1975 re-issue. I would not want anything else after that.

[quote name='maxrossell' post='491429' date='May 18 2009, 02:53 PM']Yeah, all the smart-arses who started stealing music ten years ago and swearing blind that it wouldn't have any effect can go shove it. Labels won't sign bands on a standard recording contract anymore because the minute a record is released it gets pirated and everyone has access to it for free. Record labels are now trying out other tacks to keep the cashflow happening, like with their existing roster drawing up new contracts where in exchange for more royalties and marketing support, the label gets to take percentage on things they normally wouldn't get, like merchandising and endorsements. But because they're having to put more work into bigger acts, they're putting far less into smaller acts. We all understood a few years ago that labels would drop anyone who didn't score a direct hit with their first record. Now it's plausible that labels will only sign people in the first place if they've already proven they can actually shift numbers. Anyone who picks up a guitar today better understand that he has a better chance of winning the lottery than making it big as a recording artist.[/quote] Surely, if an artist uses his noodle, works hard and comes up with a good business model and shows its a success by showing sales, packed gigs, website hits etc, then they have a good chance of getting backing from a label?? Is it like cutting out the old fashioned A & R man where instead of them trying to work with you and convince the label to sign you, your basically doign it yourself or via a manager.

[quote name='OldGit' post='491424' date='May 18 2009, 02:51 PM']All of those points assume that signing to a major is the way to go. The fact that the charts and concert halls and festivals are full of bands suggests that being signed by a major isn't the way to be "successful" these days - of course it depends on what you call success.[/quote] How true is that? How many bands playing at festivals and in the charts are actually not signed to a major and are making a living or success at what they are doing? Would be interesting to see.

[quote name='Stylon Pilson' post='491416' date='May 18 2009, 02:46 PM']If what your friend says is true, then the music industry is in even worse condition that I thought. Once upon a time they would put a lot of effort into promoting bands, and take all the profit for themselves. But what your friend has described suggests that they still want the profit, but they want the band to do all the hard work themselves. I don't know why anyone would even want to be signed to a major any more. S.P.[/quote] The impression I get is there are lots of different business models, ranging from the artist being more like a product with their name on foods, cars, phones, bikes etc right down to the band doing everything apart from manufacture, distribution and some marketing. Lots of different models inbetween though.

Been talking to a few friends recently who are in the music industry about the current state of play and what seems to be going on at the moment with signing bands etc. In my day, back in the 90's when we signed, we basically gigged everywhere up and down the country, recorded a CD, promoted it, got some interest from record companies, did another 101 gigs and finally got a deal. It was hard work but the main objective was to gig like hell and build a fan base. It all seems to be very different these days. One friend told me that a few years ago, the majors signed 200 bands, the following year 100 and last year only 8. They seem to be more interested in your business model and if it can work rather than, is this band good, have a following, good song etc. I've been told that labels won't touch bands unless they have proved their product works. So they are looking for artists who are doing it for themselves and they will then act as business development managers rather than labels. I was also told that nobody listens to CD's sent on from bands anymore. The route in is via showing that your business model works or if really lucky you have a label approved artist manager on board who can convince the label to take them on early (very rare at the moment) So, with bands having to do everything for themselves, I have been told that they need to spend at least £15k on their business model. This is the minimum to get on the radar. This breaks down to around to 7K minimum on an album (13 tracks), a Video 4K (and needs to be good for that), Photoshoot £500 (needs full makeup and clothing and location - you can see when things are done cheap and it doesn't work) plus PR £1500 a month for three months. Now to me, this is pretty shocking as where do unsigned bands find that sort of money. As said to me though, you need to invest in this business model and show you are serious or accept you are just doing it for fun. With regards to the album, You need to have a half decent studio and engineer/producer on board to get anyone interested. There are currently only about ten people with genuine inroads into labels at the moment, 7 are producers and 3 are managers. I then questioned about these home studios and the increase in modern technology but I was told that home recording is a complete load of crap. Fine if you are a DJ but no artist is actually signed on the fact they did the album in their bedroom or garage. That material never gets released to the point where it can achieve anything. It's hype pure and simple and it's been used twice so it will no longer get anybody a deal or a inch of press space. Now I am sure that some bands will be able to have a percetage of success by doing stuff themselves, home recording, promoting, gigging etc but to what level I don't know. I'm sure some very clever people will be able to put the time and effort in to really promoting themselves but taking it to the next level might involve bigger investment. However, if they can show that their business model works, then they may be onto a winner. I then asked about is gigging still as important. I was told yes and no. You have a better chance at getting seen at events if you are there but in reality to get to the ones where the people that matter are you need to have been on the circuit for a year slogging away until you have a two to three thousand strong following. Then the right people will turn up. You'll meet lots of 'industry' people along the way at gigs but they are the bottom feeders who actually can't do alot for you and work in the admin dept looking for a band that might get them noticed internally. Labels don't really have A & R guys travelling the country looking for bands these days. So, not really sure what to make of it all. In some ways, it does make lots of sense. The band has a proven business model, then why not invest in it as both artist and label should come out good. However, there must be so much missed opportunities and spending a minimum of £15k must be impossible for most artists/bands. Anyone have any experience of this or found things to be different??

I have a Lakland Duck Dunn Precision and all I can say is its amazing.

If I make my current jazz into a fretless, then I would like to get a new fretted Jazz. I love the Fender American 75 re-issue in natural with maple neck and black block inlays. However, I prefer rosewood on a jazz so I may have to go with a Lakland Darryl Jones as I think the natural fender looks yuck with rosewood neck Shame as I don't have a Fender in my collection and quite fancy one at some point.

[quote name='Dr.Dave' post='486809' date='May 13 2009, 12:14 PM']Confession time. I must admit that any expensive bass guitar makes me think 'This guy is serious'. I'm embarrassed about it because that's totaly wrong on many levels and my better self doffs my cap to all of you with cheaper basses who are both hugely dedicated and bright enough not to think like me. I'm afraid too that if a guy picks up any bass - hangs it chest high , tucks his arm round the end and extends his thumb parallel to the strings I think 'here we f**king go' and do a runner to the bar. That's wrong too. I'm a dinosaur. Don't know why half of you put up with me.[/quote] I really do not think you are alone on those thoughts.

I think what I would like to do is convert my ESP Jazz to fretless.

[quote name='Alun' post='486410' date='May 12 2009, 09:38 PM']I had my Washburn MB6 defretted by Cranes in Cardiff and they did a great job. Only thing I would say is be specific about how clear you want the lines to be - I didn't and the lines on mine are barely visible which is good and bad Maybe have a chat with the Gallery in London? They seem to do a lot of conversions. Cheers Alun PS I may finally have time to start your transcription soon!! Apologies for the delay, things have been a bit loopy.[/quote] Hi Alun, Thanks for the info. Thanks for the update on the transcriptions. Really looking forward to it and no worries about the delay. Thanks for letting me know.

[quote name='BigRedX' post='486234' date='May 12 2009, 06:35 PM']Can you handle a 5-string? If so have a look at the [url="http://www.ibanez.co.jp/products/eb_page09.php?area_id=3&data_id=146&color=CL01&year=2009&cat_id=2&series_id=211"]Ibanez GWB5[/url][/quote] Thanks but really want a four. How hard is it to get a proper job done on de-fretting an existing bass and then getting it lined? I have the ideal bass but I don't want to get it done if its a bit hit or miss or risky.

[quote name='Musky' post='485923' date='May 12 2009, 01:57 PM']Unless you're using a lot of open strings the patterns will remain the same.[/quote] Thats what I was thinking.

Might be playing more fretless bass in a new project and fancy looking into getting something to replace the Squire VMJ which, to be honest is great but I just fancy something a bit nicer and not sunburst What are my options for a lined fretless rosewood neck. Maybe around £300 - £500. Anyone got any cool suggestions? I do fancy a nice jazz but open to other suggestions.

[quote name='thunderbird13' post='485829' date='May 12 2009, 12:38 PM']I'm going for an audtion tomorrow night ,I was sent 4 songs on MP3 last week and told to write some basslines to jam with. So I've dutifully written some lines only to be told this morning that as they have a new singer they've changed all the keys ! ( looks like they've all gone up a third ) I dont have time to write new lines and I dont feel comfortable transposing in an audition situation ( which I hate anyway). TBH I'm a bit disspointed but I suppose it happens .So I suppose I'll have to play it safe and learn the new root notes and just stick with them. Any other ideas ???[/quote] Why can't you transpose? Not enough time or do the bass lines not transpose well?

Musicman Stingray. Beautiful basses. Very playable. Just lacking a bit in the perfect tone for me but still my favourite bass. Lakland. Only tried the Skyline signature models and own the Duck Dunn but they do seem very good basses. Been pretty impressed so far. ESP. I have only played and own a 400 Series Jazz from the 80's but no Jazz I have tried has sounded or played as good as the ESP.

Thanks guys, thats a really great help. Really appreciate it.

OK, before I start, I don't really know what I am talking about and just using words that our singer has said We have some recordings done on our singers home studio which is basically a PC, small desk and something he calls Logic. The mixes are very rough and we would like to take the recordings to a studio and get a really good mix. Now he mentioned something about Protools being compatiable with Logic. So, can anyone recommend any good Protools studio around the south, thats fairly cheap that we can use to do some mixing as our singer is struggling to get a decent mix out of his setup and admits to not knowing enough about it. Sorry, if everything I just mentioned makes no sense but I know nothing about Protools, Logic etc either.

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='483690' date='May 9 2009, 01:46 PM']Odd that 2 people have commented on the weight of Warwick basses and yet with my latest obsession in bass weight loss I've only found ONE bass that is lighter than either my SSI or SSII (yes the 2nd one is Afzelia which can be heavy)! I'm not here to stand up and defend all Warwick basses (regardless of the fact that I have 3 for sale ) and I've no idea what model the references were aimed at but I do know that the OP stated Warwick = heavy but would love to try a Spector; I've owned 2 Spector Euros and recently have tried 2 USA Spectors... ALL of the Spectors weighed more than EITHER of my Streamers! Not entirely different basses Warwick/Spector but it is amusing to see how prejudices can be formed Hmmm [/quote] Not prejudices, just perception. I think, I originally said why does it not look heavy but is. Again, perception. They look yummy, sleek and stylish but when you pick one up, my thought everytime is bloody hell, its heavy and feels solid. It's just that they don't look heavy. They look thin and light to me. The Spector, again, looks yummy, just like a Streamer but I have never seen one in the flesh so I can't comment on them. Its all just perception and certainly not prejudices.