P-T-P

Certainly a 5 string is more than simply 5 additional low notes for you to use. Reworking existing basslines wouldn't be my preferred method of incorporating the new possibilities open to you, but there's nothing wrong about it either. I would look for some 5 string scale/mode/arpeggio exercises - mainly just to get used to the way the extra string feels in your hands - then, as you learn new lines or refine older ones, using the extra string will be a more natural step.

For me, when playing standing up, my bass can end up in any number of positions - to the side, at a cocked angle, pulled in close to my (ample) belly - because that's part of performing for me, and alos because I don't like to be that rigid. Playing seated, it's very easy to keep the bass in one fixed place for consistent playing which can enable you to nail some difficult techniques consistently, which is great for recording but not so great if you hope to be jumping around the stage! The more you play, the more you'll find a kinda sweet spot of comfort for your bass. The best advice I can give is to practice as close to how you intend to perform as possible so if you're going to be playing mostly standing, you either need to practice while standing or find a sitting position (on a stool perhaps, on the edge of the seat) which replicates the position of the bass on you when in a standing position. Play around with the lenght of your strap too as this may make a huge difference to finding the right way for you to play. Just be careful not to settle on a playing position where your arms/wrists are too extremely bent as this may lead to long-term injury.

I think it was James Jamerson used an analogy of thinking about the beat as being like the butt cheeks of an well protportioned lady as she walks down the street. In essence, her feet might set the precise points of the beat but her cheeks bounce along to a far more interesting rhythm. The other analogy I've heard is to think of the beat as a horse jumping a fence. It happens very quickly, but broken down there's three major points - as his back legs leave the ground (ahead of the beat); as he's halfway over (on the beat) and as he touches down on the other side (behind the beat). For what it's worth, neither of these helped me understand the concept anything like as much as just listening a lot and knowing the song you're playing as intimately as is possible so that when you play, you aren't playing the bass notes, or the rhythm or the feel or the groove so much as just playing the song.If you're having to think a lot about the mechanics of the playing as you're doing it, it will be a barrier to interpreting the feel.

Interesting how much the sound seems to have varied. I was at the back of 102, which was the lower tier of seats Alex's side, about half way along the arena. Sound was great except there was no definition on Geddy's bass at all. Fine when he was playing solo but as soon as the band cut in, there was just bottom end of the bass as an unintelligible rumble and then guitars, synths, drums and vocals as clear as you could wish for. Knew what was coming with the set before I went and although happy to hear many of those songs, felt the first set in particular was crying out for a couple of rabble-rousing numbers.

My 2p worth of experience/advice. I play in a 4 piece covers band - weddings, clubs, parties, weekend warrior kinda thing. We started out using wedges but it's not really practical to carry all that gear so some of us have adopted IEMs. I agree with the idea that the biggest contributor to the sound quality is going to be the buds, but I disagree that you need custom fit, triple driver system to get a consistently usable solution. First, the IEM systems... The t-bones are great for the price. Our singer uses one of these and I've used them too in the past and they're fine. They are a little shy on bottom end bass response however - not catastrophically so, but depending on your preference, maybe not acceptable either. The Shure PSM-400 and Sennheiser G2 systems I have used both provide a much richer low end and given the choice between these or t-bone I would try to stretch for a second hand set of either ahead of the t-bone but I'd weight my budget towards the phones moreso than the system. The monitors/phones/buds... If you can afford the custom fit jobs, absolutely go for it. If not, I've quite happily used a set of Shure E3c and when they got nicked a set of Shure SCL3s. I wear them with the yellow foam tops which provide a decent seal in your ear canal, which is one of the secrets to good low end reproduction with IEM use. These (and I believe most of the Shure phones) are intended to be worn with the the cable running over the ear to help them stay in place and maintain that seal. These foam tips also cut outside noise by about 40dB so provide excellent hearing protection. That being said, I have a set of iBeats which I use on my phone and I tried them on my IEM system once and the difference was astonishing. The bass response was massive. Unfortunately they don't stay in place very well so not ideal for stage use, but if they could, I'd be wearing them. It'd be interesting to know how much the difference in bass response is down to the specific design of the iBeats and how much is simply a product of the advances in technology since the Shures were designed (6+ years ago).

I don't think you're playing out of time. What I think is happening is that when you're playing a fill or moving away from the core groove you're just not always getting yourself back into the groove again in a smooth fashion. In particular, sometimes you are trying to squeeze an extra note or two into a fill and the groove becomes secondary. There's a good example of you doing this at 0.16 to 0.18. You play a nice little lick but as you get to the downbeat it feels rushed and awkward because there's only just time to start the groove again without any lead into it. It feels sudden, which is not the same as out of time. I'm guilty of this on occasions. In my covers band I can be playing a song I've played 100s of times before and for some reason, the jazz fairy srpinkles some magic dust and I'll wander off piste. If I happen to catch myself thinking about it at the wrong time, I'll end up a long way from the correct note and beat. You can get away with it as an occasional fluff, but if it's regular habit then you need to start planning how you get back to the groove earlier in your improvisation.

[quote name='geoffbyrne' timestamp='1362601393' post='2002048'] Who new? Actually, there's a lot of love for BBs on this forum - try a search. G. [/quote] I'm guessing that the "partly rhetorical, partly self-depricating" I was hoping to get across with my "who knew" comment didn't quite come over as well as I'd have liked. Apologies if I've offended in some way. I've had a few Yamaha's over the years, mostly TRBs, which while exceptionally well constructed, never quite hit the mark for me. It never made me think any less of the company. Nonetheless I am genuinely impressed at how good a bass the BB414, even with Yamaha's excellent reputation.

Thanks for the info. Still can't believe that a bass as relatively cheap as this is proving far more satisfactory than many, many far more expensive and/or exotic beasts that I've owned.

Recently swapped a FleaBass for a Yamaha BB414. Wasn't expecting too much, just something different for the occasional noodle at home. As I often do with a new bass, I took it gigging just to see how it would cope in the real world. Like many basses before it, I fully expected to stick with it for a couple of numbers before reverting to my main bass (Lakland DJ5 with Bartolini pre-amp). To my amazement, the Lakland hasn't had a look in. Haven't picked it up in weeks and done about 6 hours of gig-time with the Yamaha now. It's extremely well made, very comfortable and sounds loud and clear - warm without being wooly and punchy without being twangy. First gig the E string was a little flabby, but pick-up just was too close and the D/G strings are maybe a smidge thinner sounding than the E/A strings, but I'm sure that's just a set-up issue. Long story short I'm astonished at how good this bass is, especially considering the price point. Which leads me to wonder, how much better might the 424, 424-X and 1024-X be. Yamaha's website isn't too clear on making a big deal of the differences too much, aside from the obvious cosmetic ones. Anyone care to shed some light?

All gone to a new home

Pics of the gear here... https://www.icloud.com/photostream/#A65qXGF1HqVWM

Having had some new computers and a tidy up in my offices, there's a large pile of computer gear in various states of repair which we'd like to get rid of asap. There's a number of computers and a server - all hard drives removed - some of which worked (before hard drives removed), some of which needed attention (PSU gone in some). There are printers, monitors, keyboards, mice, UPS, network switches. All told, there's probably a couple of hundred quid to be made by someone with the means to break it down into parts. I would do it myself but don't have the time (or home with space/wife with patience). It's free to anyone who will collect from Chepstow, S. Wales. The only condition is that you take the lot - no cherry picking - and either recycle or responsibly dispose of anything you can't use yourself. PM me or call/txt me on 07515 929935. Cheers, Pete

A slap of bassists A fingering of bassists