rushbo

Yep. The only use of the term "Fender Bass" on an album credit I can remember is on "Kick Out the Jams" by the MC5 where Michael Davis is credited as "Fender Bass." In the early days of the electric bass, the term was used to delineate an "electric" bassist from someone who played the acoustic/upright bass. There's an interesting thread about it on T*lkB*ss: https://www.talkbass.com/threads/fender-bass-as-a-generic-term-for-bass-guitar.894227/ Oh - and WD40 is great.

If that bass could only talk, eh? It looks amazing. And my favourite volume/tone configuration too. Scrub it up, set it up and play it.

That's lovely, that is.

Very true. When you first start using it, be prepared to spend a lot of time getting your head around it. I'm still using Cubase LE4, which I think came bundled with a Zoom recorder. It's absolutely perfect for my (fairly basic) needs.

PM'd

#relatable I have an irrational distrust of those angled amp stands, so I looked for ages to find something suitable for my combo. I almost went for one of those workmen's platforms/stepladders things, but their footprint was too big. This Thomann stand folders up into a T shape and is way lighter (if less impressive) than carting around the extension cab to seat it on.

Gaffa tape. Always gaffa tape. Another vote for a Behringer BDI 21. While not exactly a pocket money purchase, at £35, this has been a real boon. It raises my Genz Benz combo off the floor and into a position where I can actually hear it. Solid as a rock and very portable. If you use a tablet for cheat sheets, I can recommend one of these: I've got one (branded Cuvave) and it's had 2-3 years of regular use with no issues. Currently a mere £9.64 on AliExpress

Geddy Leg of Rusk?

A Zoom B9.1ut. They tend to go for £200 second-hand. I had one for a couple of years and I loved it, only switching to a Zoom B3 as it had a smaller footprint. You've then got £100 to spend on a round of stiff drinks (to calm your tattered nerves) and a chippy tea on the way home.

I saw the Stones at the Ricoh Arena in Coventry a few years back. A friend of mine had scored super-cheap tickets so I went along to sneer at the old geezers deluding themselves. They were superb. Jagger was on top form - vocally and physically. it was a two and a half hour show and apart from two numbers where he went offstage and let Keef do the heavy lifting, he was faultless. The band were great and the setlist was a well thought out combination of hits and fan favourites. My preconceptions were completely eviscerated. The point is, they can still do it. Others (all the usual suspects who have been named and shamed in this thread already) can't do it like they used to do it. And yet they're still playing to enormous crowds. Punters go to shows for a variety of reasons - one of which is to share an experience with a bunch of like-minded people and be transported to a time in their life where they didn't have to deal with negative equity or sciatica. Musical excellence isn't at the top of their wish list. They want to be present at an event. About 15 years ago, I saw three gigs in succession: Neil Young, Motorhead and The Searchers. Sadly, Young and Motorhead sounded tired and lacklustre and I swore I'd never go and see them again. The Searchers were fantastic – great singing and playing and a healthy dose of good-natured banter and self-deprecation. Around the same time, I went to see Brian Wilson. He basically sat at an electric piano and did the occasional, semi-audible backing vocal. The band and the songs were brilliant of course and I thoroughly enjoyed the gig. And I can say that I've been in a room at the same time as one of my heroes. Sometimes, that's enough. Attendance isn't mandatory at these events. You can either hang on to your memories of young men and women in their prime, or you can dive into nostalgia, suspend your critical faculties and enjoy the moment.

I'd love to see the sales assistant's face if you went in to a guitar shop and after trying out a bass you said, "That's OK, but have you got something a bit more faint, dull, and lacklustre." ...to be honest, every time I've ever seen the term "dark" being used to describe bass tone, I've scratched my head. And yet I know what a bright tone is. Hey ho.

That's pretty much a sampler platter of everything I dislike about bass guitar styling. But... It does look beautifully made and although they are super-cheesy, I love the fret markers. If you're in a super-upscale Goth band, that's got to be the Gold Standard of bass luthiery.

That was outstanding - I wasn't familiar with the band or the tune, but going on this example, I think I'll dig them. Kudos, sir.

That's all lovely, but make sure you don't overbalance and fall over. That's a level of multitasking I can only aspire to. I'm just delighted that someone got the reference...

Today's Winner of the Internet is upside downer. Some of these are genius, especially "Paxman."

I didn't think I did, but now... that's the only one I want. Well, maybe "What’s the New Mary Jane" as well.

Are all the Beatles songs available in split format on Rock Band? I thought Giles Martin separated about 45?

In an attempt to drag the thread back on the right track... Although it would have been great to have the facility to listen to isolated bass tracks back when we first picked up our basses, we were forced to use our ears to try and work lines out. We may have got it wrong more times than we got it right (I certainly did) but we spent a lot of time doing accidental ear training. And that's not a bad thing.

I have to admit, I used to get really annoyed when people would have a go at The Beatles. Now, I just roll my eyes and get on with my day. Regarding the tone on the YouTube video that has prompted this thread, I'm guessing that the original uploader used one of those clever AI things to isolate the tracks. While they're good, they're far from perfect and they tend to make the "isolated" copies sound a little warbly, to say the least. I'd imagine if you dug out the mastertape, the original bass sound would be a lot richer and fuller. As for the intonation... yep, it's not perfect. But in the context of the completed song, it's decent. And if it got past the scrutiny of George Martin, it'll do for me. The early-mid era Beatles records are generally snapshots of four blokes playing together in a studio. If one guy fluffed something, if the rest of the track was good, that was the take they kept. When the band ceased live performances and practically moved into Abbey Road, performances got a lot more polished. And Macca was playing a Rickenbacker by then so his playing became less "approximate" beyond the seventh fret. It's OK to not like The Beatles. It's OK to pick faults at their deficiencies. But in spite of dubious intonation and questionable tone, they did OK, didn't they?

It looks like perfectly normal wear to me. ...or maybe someone passed a sander over the top bout once, got bored and then dropped the bass on a concrete floor a few times.

Blimey! I thought I was a Zoom fanboy, but you win! I loved my B9.1ut.

My #1 - A Squier bitsa with a three way toggle switch and Entwistle pups. The nicest neck I've ever played.

I've had a number of nice 5 string basses which I intended to use in my R&B band. When you're playing quite a few 12 bar progressions in 'E.' its very useful to be able to play them without having to shift your hand position to use the open note. Sadly, due to lack of aptitude and lack of patience, they've all since been moved on, although I have recently put a 5 string Bitsa together which I'm messing about on.