BigRedX

The Pretty Things. Still one of my favourite bands, even if their post 1980 output has been mostly dull. However the most recent album released last year and recorded with the current live line-up is a welcome return to form.

Being dyslexic I had to read the ad very carefully several times before I got the joke.

Depends on the frets and the strings used and playing style of the previous owner(s) and what they played on it. I've never had to get a bass re-fretted, but when I was playing guitar, 3 years of playing the same songs every day (usually each several times) - either at band rehearsal or for my own practice, or while I was writing them, and what and how I was playing meant that I had worn significant grooves into about 5 frets on at least one string. This was beyond what could be reused by a fret dress and therefore I opted for a complete re-fret.

[quote name='dood' timestamp='1471607924' post='3114401'] I know that the ports are connected to a USB hub and know that traffic will be shared between devices, that's not unusual at all - but going to the effort of having a USB3 host on board, but still throttling it back to USB2? Then in theory, data transfer tests should deliver similar results on USB2 and USB3 ports. I'm just not sure that I buy that for *all* hardware. Maybe some architecture that bridged the gap between USB2 and USB3. I'd love to see that in some detail. It just seems totally counter-intuitive and no business sense for up to date hardware. [/quote] I'm just reporting what I see in the System Profiler on my MacBook Pro which AFAICS is the same model as the OPs. The exact bus structure is quite tricky to see without actually plugging devices in and refreshing the page in SP. If you want I'll investigate further over the weekend when I have a chance and then hopefully I can produce a more accurate picture of the bus structure. It's not at all straight forward though. For instance, on my old-style MacPro with 3 USB ports on the back and 2 on the front, there a 5 USB buses, but least two of the rear mounted ports are on the same bus and one appears to be internal only...

[quote name='PaulWarning' timestamp='1471551916' post='3113991'] I'm surprised how many E strings get broken, I would have thought that one would be the least likely to break, given how thick it is [/quote] I've managed to break every string on a 5-string bass at some point including the 130 low B. The low B was back in the 90s when I was struggling to find a string manufacturer capable of making a 36" scale one consistently good, consequently it used to stay on the bass longer than the others while the latest one went back to Rotosound to be replaced by one that didn't sound completely dead straight out of the packet.

[quote name='the boy' timestamp='1471562516' post='3114108'] You can pick up an Old apogee duet on eBay for about £100 or less. The grey first edition FireWire version. Great buy. Highly recommend it. [/quote] Apogee have already said that they will no longer be supporting their FireWire interfaces, in light of the protocol being depreciated by Apple. Therefor an Apogee interface is fine so long as it works with you current system and you have no desire to upgrade your OS until you are ready to buy an new audio interface. It's a pity because in all other respects Apogee are very good.

[quote name='bubinga5' timestamp='1471443107' post='3113092'] I'm thinking of this. Or maybe something cheaper. [url="http://www.gear4music.com/Recording-and-Computers/Focusrite-Saffire-Pro-24-Firewire-and-Thunderbolt-Audio-Interface/B6Q"]http://www.gear4musi...o-Interface/B6Q[/url] [/quote] I have that interface and for most normal uses I can't really fault it. I had a couple of specialised issues which Focusrite weren't able to resolve but so long as you're not running OS X Server on your Mac you'll be fine. HOWEVER, it's not a true Thunderbolt interface. If you read the small print in the description, it's only Thunderbolt compatible with a suitable adaptor cable which is sold separately. For your current Mac if you do decide to get that interface, you be best off connecting it by FireWire although you will still probably need a FW400 (on the interface) to FW800 (on your Mac) adaptor cable.

A quick Google shows that it's affecting lots of other forums, so almost definitely something that YouTube have changed that has broken the current way of embedding videos in forum posts. The one workaround I've seen posted (using the "youtube2" tag) doesn't work here as I guess it requires some back-end tinkering of the forum software.

I couldn't really recommend a FireWire interface anymore. This is because FireWire has been depreciated by Apple from El Capitan onwards. That means they are no longer developing the built-in drivers for FireWire and while FireWire interfaces may continue to work at the moment, there is a distinct possibility that then next major OS upgrade will render them useless. If you can find a cheap second hand FW interface that is supported under your current version of Mac OS X (what are you out of interest?) and you don't intend to update your OS any time in the next couple of years then it could b e worthwhile Also if the manufacturer provides a custom driver for their FireWire interface then there is a chance it will continue to be supported for longer. However Thunderbolt is currently the best way to go as far as reliability and future-proofing is concerned.

[quote name='darkandrew' timestamp='1471392289' post='3112807'] Anything from the "Top of the Pops" range of albums from the 1970s. [url="Http://www.udiscovermusic.com/the-curious-case-of-the-top-of-the-pops-albums"]Http://www.udiscover...the-pops-albums[/url] The dodgy covers also being given added creepiness by what we now know was going on behind the scenes of the programme during that time. [/quote] Except that the TV show and the albums had nothing to do with each other, and the albums only had the same name because the BBC had not trade marked the name "Top Of The Pops" something that would be completely unthinkable nowadays.

[quote name='lowdown' timestamp='1471370769' post='3112602'] What does RME do differently with their USB Interfaces ? Curious really. Because their units are very reliable on Macs. [/quote] IIRC RME write their own custom drivers for all their devices, which is why their USB interfaces are generally more reliable, and their FireWire interfaces are still supported despite the fact that the FW drivers built in to OS X are depreciated under El Capitan and beyond. Also USB has never been as well supported in Macs (even though it has improved considerably since the early days of USB1.1) because Apple would rather you use FireWire and now Thunderbolt which are protocols they have a vested interest in.

[quote name='bubinga5' timestamp='1471376573' post='3112678'] Ok BRX i know about music theory and bass guitar but that just went totally over my head. [/quote] OK to simplify... USB is a "dumb" protocol. Firstly every device on the USB bus has theoretically equal priority and it doesn't matter whether it's something which requires accurate timing of data like an audio interface or something which can wait a millisecond or two like the computer keyboard they all have the same status on the USB bus when it comes to sending and receiving their data. Secondly there are already lots of devices on your Mac's USB buses even if you don't have anything plugged in to the USB ports on the side and these are all fighting for an equal slice of the data stream as they require it. FireWire and Thunderbolt don't have "hidden" devices on their buses. That means the only FireWire and Thunderbolt devices that you have on your Mac are the ones plugged into the ports on the side (or back).

The problem with USB on the Mac is that the bus structure is quite convoluted, so that your USB interface may be sharing the bus with other devices without you knowing it. And just because you have multiple USB ports doesn't mean that they are separate buses. From the photo it looks as though you have the same MacBook Pro as me - (13" Mid 2012). Looking at the bus structure in the System Profile there are 2 separate USB buses - but one already has the keyboard, trackpad, IR receiver and Bluetooth controller attached to it, and the other has the built-in FaceTime camera. Also despite the fact that the Mac supports USB3 on one of the buses, this is ultimately connected via an internal USB hub to one of the main USB2 buses, so despite supporting the USB3 protocol the speed will be throttled back to USB2. And every other USB peripheral that you add will be competing for USB2 bandwidth. That's why FireWire and Thunderbolt are always better options on the Mac.

[quote name='goingdownslow' timestamp='1471355783' post='3112419'] I'm having the same problem with IE11, just get this... [attachment=225641:Youtube.JPG] (above is a .jpg not a video) [/quote] I'm getting the same on both my Macs - Safari under El Capitan. Only started happening in the last few days. I wonder if YouTube have changed something?

Something that doesn't connect via USB.

[quote name='TheRev' timestamp='1471347328' post='3112305'] What always surprises me about cover are of this calibre is that some people sat together in an office and said 'yep, that's it - that's definitely the cover we want for our new album' [/quote] I think it's more likely the fact that they have spent all the budget for the artwork on it, and the only affordable alternative is the name of the artist and the album set in Arial black on a white background.

TBH in a musical setting it's always known as "Gaffer Tape" tape to me irrespective of who actually made it.

[quote name='hubrad' timestamp='1471337057' post='3112172'] Schaller 2000 is even better than the 3D. I have this on a couple of basses. You can get the spacing down to just over 15mm, and the ballend moves with the saddle so no sideways pulling. 5 screw fitting. [/quote] The Schaller 2000 might get you a narrower string spacing than the 3D but IME it's a complete bastard to get set up. I'd think twice about ever owning another bass which had one fitted.

I don't have, and have never had a party piece. If people really want to know what I can do I'd far rather put on a couple of tracks from what ever I've most recently recorded. At the moment that would be something off [url="http://terrortones.bandcamp.com"]this album[/url]. I consider my song writing to be far more important than my bass playing abilities.

[quote name='Grangur' timestamp='1471295737' post='3111978'] Duck tape. [/quote] Isn't it "Duct" tape?

I can't remember ever having a problem getting used to the extra string when I bought my first 5-string in 1990. I did have 2 things in my favour. Firstly I had plenty of experience of other stringed instruments with different numbers of strings - guitar, bass, mandolin, balalaika; so for me the 5-string bass was just another stringed instrument with yet again a different number of strings. Secondly I had spent most of the 80s playing synths and only really using my 4-string bass as a writing tool. As my new 5-string bass was a far superior instrument to the 4-string bass that I'd been playing previously, that was the one I played all the time from then on. Even when I went through a period playing fretless and originally couldn't find a 5-string fretless that I liked - I simply played the songs that required fretless bass on the 4-string and those that needed a fretted bass on the 5-string swapping between the two with ease.

[quote name='chriswareham' timestamp='1471210351' post='3111338'] My Jupiter 4 is capable of an extraordinary range of sounds despite being only a single oscillator synth. The Wasp had a great filter, but based on the one I tinkered with it was almost unplayable thanks to the "keyboard" and the oscillators were really under featured waveform wise. [/quote] Everyone has different ideas about what constitutes a good sounding synth, but it's hardly fair to compare the monophonic Wasp with a poly synth costing 10 times as much. The Jupiter 4 despite having only a single oscillator per voice was never going to sound thin due to the fact that it was polyphonic, and it's voice assignment meant that a lot of the time if you are not playing chords, you actually have 2 oscillators (or even all 4) per note. That combined with separate EGs for the VCF and VCA and the classic Roland chorus is what made it sound so good. A fair comparison for the Wasp would be the Roland SH09 which despite being quite a bit more expensive and having a proper keyboard and more useful performance controls wasn't even remotely capable of the same depth of sound. I know because I own both in the early 80s.

[quote name='BassTractor' timestamp='1471193087' post='3111141'] Now this is starting to look awesome for a bread 'n' butter synth. Loopable EGs triggered by an LFO that goes up and into audio range, and the different ADSR curvings work very well indeed: [/quote] Loopable EGs are a great idea if you to play live without sequencers (although you still have to find some way of synchronising the other performances with them), however so long as there is a good MIDI CC implementation you can duplicate the effect far more easily on a DAW or sequencer.

[quote name='project_c' timestamp='1471046001' post='3110265'] Software: Setup, registration and installation is easy, the Focusrite Control is straightforward, but for some reason a couple of times the Clock Source set itself back to ADAT, even though I had it set to Internal, which I think was the reason I was getting no audio last night. Not sure if this is due to something I'm doing wrong or if it's a bug in the software, but it's not difficult to fix. I'll see what happens over the next few days, maybe I'll figure it out. [/quote] The unwanted clock switching bug is something that has been present in the Focusrite software for some time now. I had it when I bought my Saffire Pro 24 interface 6 years ago. IIRC it arises from a conflict between the Focusrite control panel with either your DAW settings and/or those in the Audio MIDI setup application. Make sure that you have selected the same clock setting in all 3 locations and it should remain stable in the Focusrite Control.

Personally unless the music and people are fantastic or the gig is so well paid that you'll have covered costs of any new gear you buy fairly quickly I'd pass. With one or two rare exceptions nothing other than a double bass is going to compete volume-wise with even the quietest of "acoustic" bands without amplification. Also IME you need to spend a lot more money to get an acoustic bass guitar to plays and sounds as good as your favourite electric bass.