BigRedX

Very nice. Not very new-fangled though. I bought one second-hand back in 2007 when it was already on the the 2nd or 3rd iteration. Still, a great bass for fretless. I'd consider a 5-string version if I ever joined another band that required fretless bass.

Apologies for the blank post above. I was going to write something yesterday, but my reply was getting too complex for me to type on my phone and after deleting what little I had written I then hit "reply" instead of cancel. Anyway... I would have thought you would have used noise reduction. IME all cassette recorders generated far too much tape hiss especially when bouncing tracks for NR not to be an essential option. Dolby B was fairly useless, but Dolby C was pretty good. On the 4-track cassette player I had, using Dolby C, we could go two bounces and still have a stereo master that we could make copies from without the results being too terrible. Also, unlike DBX, Dolby C didn't mess up the sync track, if you were using one.

I haven't bothered with the "new" version of the Squier Bass VI because from what I have discovered by trying the Revelation and owning the Burns Barracuda, the slight increase in nut width (if that's actually right) won't be enough for me. Also the Burns sounds (for what I need) are much better than the Squier. I've now had the Eastwood for just over a week and although I've not had the time to play it as much as would have liked, and not at all amplified, from a string spacing PoV this is the bass VI for me. The strings are far enough apart for me to not be tripping over them when I change strings and picking style (which is what was happening with the Squier and to a lesser extent the Burns) but the neck is not so stupidly wide as a 6-string bass. IMO It's been designed with bass players rather than guitarists in mind, and is a workable compromise between the tight guitar spacing of the most bass VIs and the full bass guitar spacing of your typical 6-string bass. Of course what feels comfortable will very much what you are used to with your other basses and guitars (id applicable) and what sort of music you intend to play on it. I'm very much in the Post-Punk/Goth camp for my usage - think Joy Division and The Cure - rather than 60s style with flat-wound strings where maybe the Squier would be more suitable.

Exactly this happened on my Starbass, just before a Terrortones gig. I managed to keep the bass on the strap by cutting down how much I moved about on stage which got me through the gig. The following day I ordered a set of Schaller Straplocks as replacements.

What noise reduction system does the Fostex use?

If you are going to buy a replacement machine ideally you need to get one of the same model. At the very least make sure that it plays at the same speed and has the EXACTLY the same noise reduction system.

AFAICS only three Rumblefish is semi-hollow, the newer models are all solid.

There are some members with text only signatures that I have had to hide because they took up the whole of the screen when viewing Basschat on my laptop. Also it appears that if you change you signature it becomes visible again to those who have hidden it, because now Bobthedog has replaced his massive photograph with 3 lines of text I can see it again.

I think part of the problem is caused by the fact that if you are viewing the forum on your phone, which I suspect a lot of users are, then signatures are never visible.

So it would still be possible to have a massive signature simply by typing it as a single line in large size font...

Are these solid bodies or semi-hollow like the original Rumblefish Basses?

Looks like it might only be retrospective, otherwise it would affect the "ChangesTwo Bowie" image which exceeds the image size limits. How is "three lines of text" defined? Because the number of lines is partially a function of how wide the browser window is set.

Personally I think the latest way of applying BBCode when composing a post has been very poorly implemented in the current version of the forum software. It's all very well making things easier for less technical users, but when it also prevents those of us who know what we are doing with BBCode from making simple changes to post with code in it because there is no actual facility to show the code anymore, then that is very much a backwards step. I could understand if the code view was removed from the mobile version of the forum. It's hard enough to type a simply text reply on a phone or tablet let alone trying to get all the tags properly formatted, but it should still be available to those of us who prefer to use proper computing devices.

If there is a signal at the Bus Output sockets and your interface has 4 separate line level inputs then you will be fine. As others has said you need to record all 4 tracks simultaneously to individual tracks on your computer so that they all line up and stay in sync for the duration of the tape.

That's what you need to do. By copying and pasting text which already has code attributes attached to it you are going to run into problems with the current version of the forum software which has been designed to make it easier to apply simple coding attributes without needing to know any actual BBCode. However as soon as you want to do anything a bit more complex, or you want to edit anything that has BBCode already applied to it, then it becomes a problem especially since there is no longer a facility to show the actual code being produced by the forum software on your post. A bit of a backwards step IMO.

To get the best transfer you really need to know which 4-track cassette machine they were recorded on as you will need to use the correct tape speed and noise reduction when playing them back. Almost every manufacturer of recording equipment had their own 4-track device all with different specs. Some work at double speed, others use normal 1 7/8 ips cassette speed. Noise reduction could be DBX, Dolby B, Dolby C or maybe Dolby S on later models. With the wrong noise reduction your recordings will sound strange. Once you've tracked down a suitable machine getting the tracks transferred over is easy. You just need an audio interface with at least 4 line-level analogue inputs and software that supports recording 4 tracks simultaneously. Press play on the cassette machine and record on your computer.

I've found that because there is no longer the facility to actually show the code you are producing when using the post text entry field, things can get very complicated if you are trying to correct a mistake or edit something that already has code attributes attached to it. Often I have found it is simpler to delete everything and start again from scratch.

There are plenty of companies offering video transfer from Betamax. It might be harder to find someone with the correct front end device to do the AD/DA conversion. Edit: The company listed above offer PCM F1 conversion, which is probably what you need.

No. From I found out while trying to recall the system used you are spot on. Only the video part of the record and playback mechanism had the required bandwidth to transfer the digital audio to and from the tape. However I also found out that depending on the exact model of AD/DA converters used the recording may only be 14bit.

Just had a quick look on-line to see if anything jogged my memory further, and I think what you are looking for is the Sony PCM-F1 system. It's in two parts - the AD/DA convertor which is used in conjunction with a Sony Betamax tape recorder with the appropriate inputs. Ideally the technical spec of the recording should be written on the tape casing or box labels so that it can be played back properly on another system in the same way that stereo analogue reel-to-reel tapes would have the playback speed and test tone information on them. HTH

Before DAT Sony had a proprietary stereo digital tape recording system that used Betamax tapes. I suspect it will have been recorded using one of these. I have some recordings that were mixed onto this format from a session done in 1986. Unless you have all the technical details written on the tape or box, when you get them transferred makes sure that you get copies with the pre-empaphis both on and off so you can use the version that sounds the best.

I have found that playing music that I absolutely love is more than enough compensation for any perceived shortcomings (loss of "vibe") caused by not running a conventional rig on stage.

TBH since I don't have any of my Kramer aluminium-necked basses anymore I can't comment. To the OP any chance you can post some good photos of this instrument?

All the Kramer aluminium bass guitar necks start off the same. They simply slotted the finger board differently for the different scale-lengths - 20 frets for 34" scale and 24 frets for 30" scale, and removed the "tuning fork" head for The Duke.