jonsmith

Tommy Tucker was born Robert Higginbotham, so this looks like a relative is involved. If the activity is in the UK, isn't it governed by UK law?

I would take things said by a rival tribute band with a pinch of salt. In my experience, some rival bands will spout all sorts of lies & misinformation. Sad, as I've always tried to be nice!

Apart from the fact that the 'we play' section doesn't seem to be working right now (at least not for me), I was really impressed with your website. Very informative for prospective 'clients'. When I lived in Acton & Ealing, I'd have probably tried out for you myself. Good luck with finding the right person for bass duties!

[quote name='ironside1966' post='1155314' date='Mar 9 2011, 01:46 PM']... Lastly why is it amateurish? Professional and well gigged bands are used to working with good engineers so they trust them and know for the reasons stated earlier that they are better of onstage playing as they would in a performance concentrating on a workable stage sound because it is easier to fix FOH in a performance then the stage sound. When you do a sound check and in my world a long sound check is a sign of incompetence, people expect you to get things right quickly so it is never more than one song unless there are problems.[/quote] Thanks for the response. I wonder if you think that we are interfering a lot, which is not the case. If you think we shouldn't ever interfere, then I guess we must be amateurish because unfortunately we don't always encounter engineers with as good an ear and an intuitive sense of balance as you. Some have no sympathy/understanding of the music and how it should sound. Although the good ones have tended to ask questions, one or two have made their own erroneous assumptions. On a couple of occasions, we've had engineers who just weren't very good at all, in one case seemingly due to laziness & the other due excessive alcohol consumption. I think we were correct to intervene in those instances, as I don't think it was us that were being amateurish. Funnily enough, the ones where we had the quickest soundchecks seem to have been the ones where the engineer has got it pretty much spot on, so I see where you are coming from there. I've had instances where everything just worked straight away & I wouldn't have changed a thing. This isn't the case everywhere though, so perhaps amateur engineers sometimes need amateur intervention, in the interests of getting a professional sound. PS - With DF, we never get away with one song in a soundcheck, thanks to the resonator guitar that almost always poses problems. PPS - As we have our own PA (for venues without), we often travel with our own engineer. We also do live sound for other people. Once I was most annoyed to see a hand coming in from behind to adjust a fader slightly. It was [url="http://www.linkedin.com/in/benfenner"]this guy's[/url] hand & his son was on stage, so I decided to let him.

[quote name='ironside1966' post='1153286' date='Mar 8 2011, 01:39 AM']When you work with a band regularly you can get a relationship and work can with them on the sound but if it’s a quick hello and sound check then coming out front giving directions is just a waste of time and very amateurish. If you have any special requirements type them out and hand them to the engineer at the desk. What is the best use of an engineer’s time getting you instruments sound has you want them for it all to change when the band strikes up and the venues full? Or getting the monitors right making sure you have enough headroom for vocals. A great sound starts with great arrangements and instruments tone that leave enough sonic space for the all the band to cut through. The problem starts when every musician wants a larger than life sound that eats all the sonic space so they are fighting each other for space and that’s where you have to EQ them to death to get a mix and it is the bands that come out front barking orders that have the latter sound in my experience. Good engineers with good bands just make the band louder and project better. A good band can more or less mix themselves you don’t need anybody to say turn so and so up because the band does it for you so you just provide help when needed. I was a pro engineer working many nights a week for over 15 years but on the odd occasion when I gig has a player I never go out front I never tell the engineer what to do even though a lot of the time the engineers a quite you and inexperienced, it’s like a vote of no confidence[/quote] I don't see how it's amateurish wanting to present my band to the audience correctly, quite the reverse in fact. Should people care about how they sound to their audience? Would you let someone mix your album and not even listen to the mix before it was pressed? I don't particularly give a whole load of directions - most engineers get pretty close - but I might explain how we fit together as a bit of guidance if they are a bit off the mark. This tends to be at the end of the soundcheck and normally it's just some slight level tweaks that are requested - if anything is required at all. I'll ask again of those who think I shouldn't bother, how will a sound engineer know that most of the keyboards in one of my bands need to be pretty up front, while in another of my bands they take more of a background role? Unless someone tells them, he/she won't know and therefore the audience will not be hearing the band the way it is supposed to sound. Yet that to me is the most important thing, that we sound correct to the people who have paid to hear us. I should add that no engineer has ever given the impression that they felt undermined by this, or appeared annoyed. All, without exception, have been happy to engage in dialogue about FOH sound. Perhaps if we were giving a huge list of unreasonable demands it would be different, but really we're asking for their help to get the correct sound across. I don't know the equipment, the room or how it alters with bodies in it - they do and that's the skill and knowledge that makes them invaluable. If they do a great job - and most do - we certainly let them know!

Must admit, it seems I take a rather different view to the majority here. The sound engineer needn't neccessarily know that in such & such a band, the keyboards are mainly beefing up the sound rather than being really prominent, or that the backing vocals are meant to to be just that and not totally 'in your face'. I think it's only fair to provide some sort of idea as to how the band should sound and then allow him to tweak to suit his gear and the venue. In these sort of instances, then I will suggest some tweaks if it's not sounding correct FOH (I will normally wander into the audience during soundcheck to get some idea of how it's sounding, then he/she can adjust for a venue full of bodies). If a particular song needs a lot of reverb on the vocals (because that's how it's meant to sound), I'll ask for it. Perhaps it depends how you deliver the request, but it's never been an issue yet.

[quote name='Cairobill' post='1108601' date='Jan 30 2011, 08:16 PM']That a double neck? Impossibly cool...[/quote] One of two Rickenbacker doublenecks I bought when I had more money than sense - not that I have any more sense now, just less money (probably because of the doublenecks).

Now that's tail-lift! Binding looks a bit odd on it too. Is it a faker?

[quote name='Starless' post='1108658' date='Jan 30 2011, 08:57 PM']They've all moved on to other things when the novelty wears off.[/quote] Apart from Chris Squire of course, who seems to have managed to cope with it as his main instrument for the past 45 years.

I definitely wouldn't wouldn't worry about being able to get a sheet of paper under the bridge. That's not real tail lift as far as I'm concerned. Tail lift that actually causes problems, while obviously not unheard of, is not totally widespread. Not great if you do get it, but if it does occur it's easily rectified with a new bridge. The closest I've come to having this problem is in the photograph below. This '75 was strung with horrible extremely high tension roundwounds when I got it. I swapped them for Tomastik Jazz Roundwounds, but took them off after a few weeks as they were just too floppy for my liking. It's had Rotosound Roundwounds on it for the past five years and hasn't moved at all in that time.

I have six Rickenbackers in various guises, built between 1975 and 2007. All are different, all have their idiosyncracies, but I like them all in some way. Two of them (my 4003FG and 4001CS) truly are an absolute joy to play and I suspect the DCM would be great too, but it just doesn't get out the house very often as I'm worried about damaging it. I love the fact that the strings are parallel - in fact it irritates me that they're not on many other basses. I'd agree with what other posters have said though: make sure you can try before you buy, especially as - despite it being your dream bass - your sole experience with one wasn't a great one. If the neck of one puts you off, try another. With so many variations in neck widths & shapes over the years, there is a chance that there is one out there somewhere that would suit you. If you don't like the binding on the body (some find it uncomfortable), get an 's' model. If you don't like the pickup cover, take it off.

Hehe, my turntable came from Russ Andrews in Edinburgh well over 20 years ago & is still going strong. No extortionate exotic cables on that. Notches on plugs? I remember all that Peter Belt weirdness in the 80s - including lining up the screw heads in your mains plugs!

Ashdown have always been helpful to me if I've needed parts or assistance.

I've been in two bands I wouldn't have been in without Forming Bands, so it's worked OK for me.

[quote name='BurritoBass' post='1050265' date='Dec 7 2010, 10:18 AM']Personally I have it through my gear insurance but if I didn't this is what I would use[/quote] Does this cover your whole band though, or just you? A lot of public liability insurance bundled with musical instrument insurance only covers accidents/injuries caused by that specific band member. This for instance, from Musicguard: [i]We can confirm that if you are insuring the equipment, the policy for administrative purposes would have to be in one band members name and this person would automatically get £1,000,000 public liability cover, [b]however this would only cover any accidents or injuries caused by this band member[/b]. The other band members could be added to this policy for an additional £54.00 per person for £1,000,000 cover. Should you only wish to have public liability and not cover the equipment, this can be provided by our standalone liability policy called Liabilityguard, which is charged on a policy per person basis and starts at £99.00 each for £1,000,000. [/i]

[quote name='mart' post='1048421' date='Dec 5 2010, 05:06 PM']According to "The Complete History of Rickenbacker Guitars" by Richard R. Smith, the difference between deluxe and standard (S) models is: As for set-neck instruments, the book does describe many Rickenbacker guitars as having glued-in necks, but for basses it says: I don't think anybody would claim a set-neck to be "removable", so this supports the claim that Rickenbacker have never made a set-neck bass - just neck-through or bolt-on.[/quote] The Smith book has some errors/omissions and this is one of them. Here are the words of John Hall, Rickenbacker CEO on the subject of set necks on 4000 and 4001s basses, taken from the Rickenbacker Forum: [i]"No. Very few did. I would guess that less than 5% wre made as set necks, the rest being neck-through."[/i] I'll go for his word over the Smith book, besides there are people that have examples. I don't think you'll find a 4000 series bass with a bolt on neck either (2000 and 3000 is another story).

[quote name='cd_david' post='1048034' date='Dec 5 2010, 10:17 AM']The "s" indicates no binding and dot inlays but the lack of stereo was an option available on all Ric basses and not just a budget thing so it may or may not have it? PS Niether the 4003 or the 4001 or their respective "s" versions had set necks, all had Thru neck construction. Cheers Dave[/quote] An 's' would not normally have Rick-o-Sound, it would have been a departure from a standard 's' for it have Rick-o-Sound. Trust me, there are some 's' basses that have set necks (not many perhaps, but I've heard of a few).

[quote name='munkonthehill' post='1047916' date='Dec 5 2010, 12:37 AM']I know of a thru neck and bolt on neck. but whats a set neck?[/quote] Basically it's a glued in neck. This page here tells you a bit about different neck types. [url="http://www.jamorama.com/blog/tag/necks/"]Neck Types[/url] Probably not the best page, but I was trying to find a photograph of a Rickenbacker set neck. Not easy to find, but some 4001s and 4003s basses have set necks (and some 4000 basses too). The set neck in the photograph on that page is a Rickenbacker set neck, but not from a 4001 or 4003. Most Rickenbacker basses are neck through. The necks on the 4080 doublenecks look like they are bolt on, but although both have neck plates, the bass neck is actually set.

Looks like an S to me too, but that doesn't necessarily mean it has a set neck. Hard to tell from the photos but I don't think this one has a set neck. As for the stereo output, at one time Geddy Lee certainly made use of it, running the pickups into separate amps. Chris Squire also had his (originally mono) rewired for stereo for the same purpose (but not a Rick-o-Sound socket). I never use the stereo socket, except sometimes by accident.

No, you're not. I thought it might have been about one of his basses. I'm pretty sure the gentleman who put that together is now building Wals.

[quote name='munkonthehill' post='1047887' date='Dec 5 2010, 12:02 AM']so except for the looks did it have any other difference????[/quote] Mono output only.

[quote name='Happy Jack' post='1036879' date='Nov 25 2010, 08:23 PM']I do like the Pervey Classic 50 ...[/quote] Central heating needs to go up a notch by the looks of things...

Costs us about £200 for £5million covering band and entourage. You need to watch with ones that come with instrument insurance as they tend to cover you only, rather than the whole band.

Well, although I enjoy his playing in many other things, I wasn't too impressed with Jeff Berlin in that role. I believe he actually asked if he could change some of Chris's parts because he didn't like them. He wasn't allowed though, so we'll never know I guess. Tony Levin had a much better approach, but actually the ABWH thing demonstrates how key an element Chris Squire is within Yes. As for the original question, I find it quite hard to imagine more appropriate basslines than the ones that were recorded. Theory gives you an understanding and knowledge that can broaden your palette, but I think some players have a natural sense of what to play that is almost instinctive. It can be independent of theory.

It should be easy to get the action very low. Bear in mind that according to Rickenbacker the neck is designed to have almost no relief (although individual playing style may influence your preference here). The newer ones tend to have rather shallow slots in the nut, meaning that a deeper cut is required if you want to go extremely low. I've read about people struggling with action because of the pick up cover, which I find puzzling. It's true that the design of the pickup surround has changed over the years, but it has never had any affect on the action on any of my Rickenbackers (and I have a few).