Wolverinebass

Sod that. I was in a band with a guitarist whose guitar just would not stay in tune and seemingly never owned a tuner. I bought him one as I got so sick of it. I then had to tell him to buy a new guitar that had decent intonation. The brilliant thing in that band was that we never did "set arrangements" and every night we played the songs would maybe be slightly longer or shorter. I don't mean just going over 3 chords jamming here, I mean very tangental. That sort of stuff is the sort of musical chance taking I live for. However, it becomes nerve shredding when you realise you're playing a song that with a bit of jamming there isn't a chance in hell that you're guitarist's axe will stay in tune for the duration of it. Nightmare. I think that Tim R's comments are right on. I actually get disappointed when artists play songs exactly as they are recorded. What's the point?!! As John Entwistle famously said "set arrangements are only fun the first 5000 times...."

[quote name='blamelouis' timestamp='1317839781' post='1395313'] Dont jack it in until you have another gig . Advice i got and it was GOLD when i looked at how many players were "resting" for a LONG time. [/quote] Oh, now this is so true. I've been between bands for the last 2 years. It's horrible. Don't leave until you have something else to go to unless it's doing your head in so much you feel your head might explode. Granted I've helped out mates and done various dep gigs in between but nothing beats regular activity. When it stops, it's sometimes very hard to get back into unless of course you're not picky.

How about the Peavey IPR 1600? That weighs nothing and if you only run one side is 600W at 4 ohms. Or if you run both sides it's 530W at 4 ohms.

As a few people have said, it depends what is meant by the phrase "making it." About 5 years ago, the originals band I was in came close to signing with Parlophone. For various reasons, it didn't happen. However, I was only 27 at the time. Ironically, I considered myself "too old" even then. It's not sad people thinking that they're going to be successful in their 40's. Only if they're totally talentless does it become so. The thing I've found as I've grown older (not necessarily wiser, I hasten to add) is that the sort of stuff I'm into (grunge, funk and progressive stuff) just nobody wants to do it well. It's so odd. Does everyone hate King's X?!! Really?!! I've also found I'm probably much less tolerant of people who are mediocre as I've been fortunate enough to play with some amazingly talented musicians who I've learned so much from. So if someone is say 27 and fairly average I look at it that they haven't put the time in. So the next blurb about "we have contacts" usually gets the short shrift. Like what JTUK says, I've met some very delusional people who think that the massive success is just round the corner with absolutely no justification for saying so. My own aims are somewhat more humble. I want to play gigs and music I enjoy (and hopefully just the once play a gig which I've written every song). Just basically for people to acknowledge that aside from being good at creatively swearing, I'm not a completely talentless idiot after all. A modest aim really, and not one that I'd think isn't acheivable.

Hi all, I recently moved house and one of the things that was on the agenda was that it had to have a garden big enough to do a studio in the garden. Okay, so I need some advice on various aspects of it as I'm drowning in stuff I don't quite understand. The building will of course be brick built and will be at least 50 feet from any house nearby. It's going to have a full drumkit in it so sound reduction will be the order of the day. This is one of the problems. Mrs Wolverine thinks that as it's going to have a workdesk in it, it'll affect the resale value of the house if the building doesn't have patio doors on it otherwise it'll have no natural light and you couldn't potentially say it was a home office. I think that's going to be a bit of a problem in terms of sound leakage. Would it be possible to do something like what Happy Jack did with a big sound dampening board which can be wheeled over the doors? Would this work? It'll be air conditioned and alarmed and all that jazz. It'll mostly be for rehearsing with say drums and guitar (aside from myself) but I'll be doing some recording in there for myself. The sort of size I'm talking about will be about 22 feet by 15 feet. It might have say a second area with a seperate storage bit for lawn mower and various gardencrap which might be say 5 feet square. So, suggestions and opinions would be gratefully received on how to go about this and get the noise down to something tolerable. Please when you're talking about materials, be gentle, I'm not the most building minded person on here....

Yeah, the ACS ER15's are what I use. I used to use foam plugs with the exception of about the first 5 gigs/rehearsals I did and frankly that was awful. I've been on at my guitarist to get some for years, but he's not interested/can't afford it. After a decade of foam usage so to speak, the ACS stuff was a revelation. Everything was just taken down to the level of a mildly loud stereo. The only slight drawback (and I use the word SLIGHT) is that the 1.5kHz area is somewhat attenuated more than everything else. So, you can lose some of your percieved sound as it were. I didn't care. It's worth keeping my hearing as I'll be damned if I'm going to play quietly. A friend of mine plays keys and the hearing loss there is really, really extreme. Basically, everything in a band context that is approaching even moderate jazz band levels causes a total breakdown and it all becomes mush due to the tinnnitus, so as a result unless we rehearsed at less than bedroom volume it proved impossible. I'd hate to have that happen to any talented musician. What price our hearing?

I dunno. I can see both sides of this. I generally find that I gravitate towards active basses as a sound I like though I'd still sound like me no matter what I played. But, if I got told I could only play a P bass for the rest of my life, I'd go and order the tombstone and hearse right away.

[quote name='Muzz' post='1347738' date='Aug 22 2011, 08:10 AM']I've just been reading that page, when one of the stupidest things I've seen in a while jumped out at me: "The bass was so loud on stage The Who and their road crew used to vacate my side of the stage whenever I played it." A. It's the amp, not the bass, John. B. Turn it down a bit, John. If that had come from a guitarist, I know what I'd be calling him... [/quote] That quote is referring to the 8 string Alembic Explorer, not the pink explorer by Peter Cook. Just for the records.

3 or 4. I just refuse to do twin guitar bands as frankly I've never been in or auditioned for a band with 2 that knew how to use them properly. Plus the fact that I tend to play in a fairly "busy" way, it generally leads to the 2nd guitarist telling me to shutup. The trio I did a few years ago, laughably it was myself and the drummer that got to show off somewhat as we were carrying the singer/guitarist. I enjoyed it for a time and I certainly got better for it, but in the end it wasn't equal so we both left. Keyboard players I've found, tend to just suck all the bass frequencies so you're left with nowhere to go. I did a duo with a mate a few years ago and despite all the space I just sat back. Wished I could do more relaxed stuff like that really.

I wouldn't get it. The thing is of course what sort of sound you want. I like loads of treble and cut. That piezo tweeter is in my opinion impossible to manage. Turn it up more than about 2/3rds and it's just brutal. Really sounds crap and "brittle" would be a good way to describe it. If you try and turn it down you can really only turn it between 4 and 5 to get something vaguely usable. Turn it off and I would say it'd be a bit muddy. It's not all bad news though. They are very light and have some of the most aggressive upper mid range that I've ever heard. So if the whole Justin Chancellor sound is your thing, these wouldn't be too bad for it. Just for reference. I have played a few gigs with the Traveller pair and they were fine. I just felt that for what they were, the damn tweeter should have been better implemented. Frankly, I've never really been quite satisfied with them because of that one thing. I am tempted with the whole Barefaced but when I got these cabs I think it was only the compact that was about. I think were I buying again I'd get a Super 15 with a tweeter or a Super 12. Pity I'm not working at the moment.

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' post='1321201' date='Jul 30 2011, 11:53 AM']I feel the same way when people want more for a bass thats had a setup to be honest, £30 on a setup for you means nothing to me and if the bass was in such an unplayable state that only a pro could get it back to where I could adjust it to my taste then whats been going on with it in the first place?[/quote] Now that is so true. "It's been set up professionally" screams the ad or advertiser. Yeah, but I bet you don't like the action as low as I do, so I'll still have to spend £30 to get it lowered down to nothing anyway. How is that a negotiating point? The advertiser might as well say, "It's been set up in a way that will make it very different from what you ideally would want. Hope that's okay for you to pay for this privelige then pay for it again to get the bass set up as you would like." Good luck mate and dare I say it, jog on.

Truth be told, I'm not sure if I really like this or utterly hate it. Bits of it are great, bits of it, less so. This is so far removed from what I do I don't know what to say about it. Do I like it because it's unlike me or hate it for the same reason? This is the Marmite reaction which I'm sure lots of folk who have watched it have thought in some way or other. It certainly can't be said that he's talentless or can't play "properly" whatever that means....

[quote name='waynepunkdude' post='897215' date='Jul 17 2010, 12:26 PM']IME shortscales ( 30" ) are easier to manoeuvre but the sound is less defined.[/quote] Depends on what price bracket you're talking about though I would agree on passive shortscales being a bit, well, wooly as I learned on one. I wouldn't say my Alembic Stanley Clarke has a "less defined" sound than say a 34" Jazz bass for example. It can literally rip your face off it's got so much upper mids and treble. Just my opinion though.

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1317867' date='Jul 27 2011, 01:16 AM']No, look for straight grain and lack of cracks & defects for necks. Anything will work for bodies. Here's a bass I made from a local wood store's supplies. The maple was less than $3 a board foot. [/quote] Would you accept a fiver for this bass if the wood was so cheap?!! Just kidding. That is a seriously nice looking bass. Top gear mate!!

As someone who's got one, I'm probably going to come across as trying to justify my purchase, but here goes. Naturally, I'm biased, but I'll try and be reasonably objective. Is that bass worth $55K? Er, no. It's got no providence and frankly hasn't been well maintained. The fact that the pickup screws and bridge are all rusted up to hell and back bears this out. Is it ugly? Depends on taste. Fair enough if you think so. I find single cut basses look a bit silly, but I've never played one and they probably sound great. Is it a design disaster? No. The upper wing (if you wear it at the right height) provides a nice ledge for putting your elbow on which relaxes your wrist. Secondly, it weighs nothing. Silddx, I invite you to pop round to mine to try it if you want, you might change your mind. Now for the bad points. Well, the points actually at the bottom. Hockey stick headstock can be a bit dangerous to say the least. It's quite difficult to get a passive type tone out of it, but hey, that's not why you'd buy this is it? It's really ludicrously long what with the headstock. That's probably the main downside. I paid £4K for mine new in 2005 and I was skint for a year. I don't and will never regret it. I would say that a reasonable price would be £8K - £17K depending on circumstances and if it's in good nick. Before you all shout at me, consider this. There is only 38 that exist and 6 of them are probably owned by Hard Rock Cafe's. The instrument is associated with (arguably) one of the most iconic bass players who ever lived. But, for those of you who think it's going to sound like crap because of it's aesthetic appearance, believe me, it doesn't. It's brilliant. If you like Status instruments (and I do appreciate that even this is an acquired taste) it's just the best. For those of you who think it's over priced but have £5k kicking about, they sold all Entwistle's basses at Sotheby's and if I recall correctly, all the touring buzzards were sold for £20K. In other words, LESS THAN THEY COST NEW. Now of course prices have somewhat inflated. I shudder to think how much Gareth paid for his (as his is one of John's), but it's fair to say, insurance companies are making a killing on the pair of us now.... As for the Warwick buzzard. Pfft. Weighs a ton, ludicrously wide neck and rubbish circuit. Neck dives like a whale. I wouldn't pay more than £800 for one. Ultimately, it's only worth what people are prepared to pay for it. Were it to be for sale, mine is naturally worth the £35K!! If anyone knows of any billionaire bass players that are in the market...

[quote name='bartelby' post='1307487' date='Jul 18 2011, 09:50 AM']Off the top of my head, just to be a pedant: U-Retro gold - £215 Nordstrand NJ5S pair - £210 Hipshot A style Bridge gold - £110 Hipshot Ultralites - (£27 each) - £135 total - £670 [/quote] Exactly. He's not sparing any expense when doing this bass up as he's not intending to sell it. That's not actually that far off what he's planning actually. I just wondered if the whole concept of it was like putting a jet engine in a small hatchback.

A mate of mine recently bought a 5 string bass. I won't name brands or anything, but I think it was about £500 second hand. I think for the money it's a good bass. However, I was round at his the other night and he said that he was going to mod it a bit. I asked how much was "a bit" and he said he was going to change the circuit, pickups, tuners, bridge and nut. Now, whilst it's not a bass I would have bought, would people argue that there is a point where doing this sort of stuff is just insane? I pointed out that for what he was about to spend on hardware, he might as well get a custom bass made for him. Now before you ask, I think that the bass body was maybe ash or basswood, so it wasn't like it was something ludicrously expensive. I suppose the question is would you spend £500 on a bass then another £600 modding it? Or am I just totally wrong and that this is a viable move?

I've just got a semi after looking at that bass. If I was working at the moment, I would be ordering a 12 string version of that a la Doug Pinnick. Top gear squire!!

[quote name='stef030' post='1296527' date='Jul 7 2011, 10:05 PM']well got meself some boss multi effects, now its been a few years but jeez nobody told me you need a applied degree in nuclear physics to understand this lot,this parameter,that one given me a bloody headache,so it would seem persistance is key on this one or is it just me getting senile, does everyone think its too complicated cheers stef[/quote] Depends. I happen to think multi fx stuff is infinitely better than stomps. Especially for delays. Good luck trying to do a tap tempo with an analogue stompbox. Just my opinion. The tone is subjective. Take your pick to what you like best. However, if the programming isn't for you, then don't do it. I used to quite like having stuff on tap that was simple. Now I prefer to having to work something out and have become a bit of a tech head for multi fx stuff. For example all my rack stuff is midi controlled by one unit. So basically, I press one button on the floor and the whole lot changes. Say from clean to dirty with flanging and delay. Just like that. You might think that doesn't allow stuff to be flexible as stompboxes as the settings are seriously programmed, but you'd be surprised. I happen to enjoy programming stuff. I did my guitarist's rack rig for him a while back as he wanted to do something like what I did but like yourself when he saw the word "parameter" in the manual just asked me to go over to his house and sort it for him as he couldn't figure it out!! He doesn't really know how it works, but the fact that it does is enough for him. Made me laugh.

My own personal favourite branches of design insanity are: Heel adjust truss rods that you have to take the neck off to sort. Who thought that was a good idea?!! Try that with an 8 string bass when you have to re-string the damn thing to adjust the action and take the neck off twice just to be sure it's right. Grrrr. Most things about Rickenbackers. Though I think Mr Foxen has already said everything!! Rack gear that doesn't have inputs on the back. Then you have to run it through to the front via a gap to use it. See my Digitech for that joy with only a front input. Idiots!! Why didn't they figure that out?!!! 3 point bridges. [i]You[/i] know it's wrong Gibson. [i]We[/i] know it's wrong. Basses not having standardisable scale lengths. Sure, 35, 34, 33, 32, 30 or whatever. That's fine. Don't do 30.75 like my Alembic or some other ludicrous fraction of an inch. Because then you're never quite sure what scale of strings to get as it's kind of in the middle. You'll probably always get the wrong ones or if you can get ones that'll fit they'll be the wrong gauge so you'll feel like you're playing a bass with melted cheese strings on it as the tension will be too low. Rackmounted amps having the tuner output socket on the front. Why?!! Just so we can have more wires in the way of our stuff?