BigRedX

Obviously we play our Bass VIs in completely different ways, since IME the LaBella set with it's 95 to 26 gauges is only just heavy enough for my needs. I have a set fitted to my Squier Bass VI, but if I decide to keep this instrument (unlikely as the neck is too thin even by guitar standards for me) they would be replaced with the Newtone Axion strings - 100 to 24 which suit my playing style far better with bass-style strings for the bass and more guitar like strings for the G/B/E. However having said that I am very much liking the feel of the GHS strings on my recently purchased Hooky Bass 6 - 105 to 30, and I haven't noticed that the strings (particularly the higher ones) are quite a bit heavier than the Axions. What I have noticed is that very rarely do one set of strings suit every bass guitar of a given scale length and string number. Hopefully the OP will find something that they like from the various suggestions. I would recommend that they try the Newtones because they are less than half the price of the next cheapest Bass VI set, and therefore well worth a punt, especially as The LaBella's aren't working out for the OP. I do take your point about the heavier strings being too thick for the typical Bass VI neck - one of the reasons why I'm probably going to ditch the Squier, and in my quest to find the most comfortable Bass VI for me I've ended up with the two with the widest necks, the Burns Baracuda (38mm E-E) and the Eastwood Hooky Bass 6 (43mm E-E), where the extra neck, and overall string spacing, width allows these heavier string to really come to life.

The clue as to why these might not be the right strings is in the name. Baritone. Baritone is not the same the same as Bass VI. They are two separate instruments with which are tuned differently and have different tonal characteristics. From personal experience with both baritone guitars and a variety of Bass VIs from different manufacturers I would be very reluctant to go with anything lighter than a 95 for the low E, and experience with both the Netwone Axions and the GHS Hooky 6 strings shows that 100 and 105 respectively give a much tighter sound, with a better defined note, which if you are playing goth/post-punk music is what you want.

The Newtone Axions should be fine. I have them fitted to a Burns Barracuda which has a Strat-style bridge and therefore not as much excess string length after the saddles. Alternatively you could get a set of GHS Hooky Bass 6 strings. The Hooky Bass 6 is a replica of the Shergold Marathon 6-string bass and has a BBOT style bridge so there shouldn't be any excess length. I wouldn't bother with the D'Addarios, the E and A are way too light for a good bass sound. Given the prices, I'd try the Newtones first. Edit: I couldn't find the Ernie Ball Bass VI strings on their web site, so maybe they have been discontinued, and the only sets left are those in the retail chain? Besides at 90 and 74 respectively, IMO the E and A are still too light.

No that's it's been added to the top of the forum, can all the other usual suspects be included too?

Unfortunately if you consider the physics behind it, you realise that high mass bridges don't work because they are high mass (the additional weight they add to the body is pretty much negligible when compared with the total body weight of the bass), but because they are better engineered than the standard BBOT bridge in reducing lateral movement of the saddles.

Flat-wound or round-wound? - i.e. are you going for a vintage 60s sound (flats) or a more post-punk/goth sound (rounds)? For flat-wound have a look at offerings from LaBella and Picato. For round-wound you really can't go wrong with Newtone Axion Bass VI strings. LaBella also do a round-wound bass VI set but the Newtones are better IMO and a fraction of the price.

Interesting, especially #1 as my all-time favourite chorus effect is the MXR Pitch Transposer, on it's "0" setting which gave a massive thickening of the sound without loosing any of the power or definition to the bass sound. Unfortunately it was horrendously expensive, not particularly reliable and all but unusable without the separate and equally expensive display module. My second favourite was the far more affordable Amdek Chorus which was basically a Boss CE2 in semi-kit form, and which was an essential part of my bass/guitar/synth rigs during the 80s until I was able to afford a Roland GP8 multi-effects unit.

"Stereo" by Pavement name checks Geddy Lee. (But as a vocalist rather than a bass player)

Do the pre-amps on the interface have any controls other than input gain? If not then you shouldn't be adding any extra "colour" to the input signal by running it through two sets of pre-amps. Pre-amps for recording devices should be doing anything to your input signal other than setting the optimum signal level, unless they specifically have controls for the features.

The strings change angle after the nut anyway. If you think in 3D it's not a problem (as long as the nut has been cut properly).

The point of using duvets is that they are easily repositioned when you are experimenting with the room acoustics. Once you have found the best place for them they should be replaced with proper acoustic treatment panels.

As a user of tapered B strings (and investigating the possibility of also having tapered E) I would agree about positioning of the end of the taper in relation to the bridge saddle. I'm currently using Warwick Black Labels, but I suspect my next sets will be custom wound by Newtone.

I think we've all become complacent about the power of modern technology. In the mid 90s I was doing quite a bit of (static) 3D work. It was not uncommon for render times for a single image that was suitable to be printed on an A3 poster to be measured in days - and that's if the computer didn't crash mid-way through the process.

And which is why I dismantled my "home studio" and sold all my very expensive recording equipment. A couple of outings to decent recording studios with The Terrortones proved to me that weak link in my own recordings was not the room or the equipment, but the fact that I had reached the limit of my abilities as an engineer, and it wasn't a sufficiently good standard for me to be happy with my recordings. It's a pity because, since my very first band in the mid 70s I've always been an enthusiastic home-recordist, but on reviewing the various recordings I have made over the years the ones I enjoy the most are the ones recorded and mixed by someone who wasn't me.

Interesting. From personal experience I've only ever done tracking in a "proper" studio if I either wanted to capture a live performance from the whole band or if I was recording something that made proper use of the space it is being recorded in like acoustic drums. Most instruments these days are either DI'd or close-mic'd (I'm including vocals here) so the space they are recorded in has minimal effect on their sound. I take your point about the poor acoustic treatment of a lot of budget studios, but again from personal experience, the engineer at the studio is generally the most important part of the mixing process, and the ones still working are the ones with a good set of ears and know the characteristics of the space they are mixing in, which is far more important than the equipment they are using. The vast majority of "classic" recordings were done with considerably less, and less capable, equipment than is available to the typical home-recordist. What makes them great are the performance(s) and the skill of the engineers and producers at capturing and manipulating these performance.

Ultimately it might be easier for you to transcribe his part of the conversation and then get him to re-record it on his own computer afterwards, and send you that for editing back in.

I was most disappointed to discover it wasn't a cover of this:

You'll pick up the jargon pretty quickly. Take particular note of anything Studio Support Gnome posts. He does (or used to do) this stuff for a living.

1 or 2 for me, I don't mind which. 3 had too much audible pitch wobble, 4 would have been OK if I was looking for a subtle flanger, and 5 was just too bland. The big test for chorus though is how it sits (or disappears) in the mix, which you can't tell from a solo'd instrument.

Only 16GB RAM?

I'd ask this question over at the Sound on Sound forums.

I've also had problems with parcels not delivered by Amazon, with weird tracking info saying that they had been delivered or attempted delivery when they had not. Or just not delivered at all. Unless it's something that is unavailable by any other method, I won't be ordering anything else from Amazon unless it is supplied and delivered by them. Also the real-time tracking is weird since it only appears to work for Amazon deliveries and only on the app, not on the website...

No. My sister is totally tone-deaf and has crap taste in music.

If you'd selected the "paste as plain text option" after pasting your copied text into the post window you could have got rid of the black background. BTW I used to own the Manne Mandobass.

Not entirely right depending on the mixer in question. In fact using an external mixer along with a separate interface, to record and monitor with, is the most effective way of avoiding having to deal with latency. All my home recording has been done this way. However you will need one with more routing options than just stereo outputs, and maybe a bit of lateral thinking. To the OP do you already have the mixer? If so what is it? Also how many separate non-mixed sources do you need to record at any one time?