Jump to content
Why become a member? ×
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

cloudburst

Member
  • Posts

    613
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by cloudburst

  1. I'm looking at a Wal just now and need some advice.

    This got me thinking that it might be a good idea (if not already done) to catalogue our resident experts for future reference.

    I've had some really good Steinberger advice in the past - but just because some decent soul chanced to notice my post and PM'd me rather than by me knowing who to ask.

    Anyways...for now: who is our Wal expert?

    CB

  2. [quote name='sbrag' timestamp='1376000016' post='2168567']
    Really happy with my vox amplug as long as you don't have really hot active pickups. My zoom b2 sounds great with headphones too and can be picked up quite cheap 2nd hand but don't have the aux in but do have more tones than you shake a stick at and a builds in drum box.
    [/quote]

    This is why I probably hate my Amplug.
    The Steinberger XL2 and MM Bongo are probably blowing it to pieces :-)

    CB

  3. Depends how particular you are to get a very specific sound.

    Some folk get really anal about it.

    2eq (some say original and best) has controls for Treble and Bass. 3eq has mid as well. I would not let that influence my choice.

    If you particularly want the original Stingray tone - then H is the way to go. Multi pickup Stingrays have the bridge pickup relocated slightly closer to the bridge which messes with the tone. (EDIT: I'm talking crap here -apparently, it's the Bongo where this happens)

    Neck wise, Stingrays are closer to a P. but you can get a SLO Special which has a neck that is narrower like a J.

    A MM Sterling is a smaller bodied bass with different electronics. I love them. Very playable and I reckon you can get close to a SR tone.

    Sterling by Musicman is a cheaper series of Stingrays etc. Well thought of too.
    Subs are well thought of as well - prob a good starting point if cash is an issue.

    My recommendation is to go to a shop and try them.

    MM Bongo will also do the SR sound. My favourite basses. Awesome piece of kit.

    There are a lot more knowledgable folk than me on the forum who will comment on the serial parallel nuances etc.

    CB

  4. I'm not one for criticising anything that other folk like. Whatever floats your boat.

    But I was agreeing with an earlier poster's sentiment - if you're in the market specifically for a Steinberger type bass - you really should try one of the originals.

    Do I think your bass is crap? No. I don't.
    Do I think the original Steinbergers are better? Very much so, in every single way apart from financial cost and weight.
    But hey, that's just my opinion.

    CB

  5. I think the OP is referring to a metaphorical seal rather than a physical one.

    Anyways, there are 3 reasons this won't be an issue for my 74 jazz:
    1) I've had it since new, so I know its providence
    2) I'll never be selling it
    3) It's Mocha - who the hell is likely to copy that if they were making a faker :-)

    I don't even unscrew the ashtrays. The last time the strings were removed was to adjust the truss rod. In 1974. :-)

    CB

  6. [quote name='bagsieblue' timestamp='1374907638' post='2154602']
    ........seeing pictures of basses disassembled in For Sale adverts.
    [/quote]

    I know what you mean.
    Whilst I appreciate the necessity to expose the various proof points, what goes though my mind are burred screw heads, wrongly torqued screws and stripped screw holes in the wood.
    Even when done carefully, the more that the same screw is unscrewed and rescrewed in an old instrument, the more worn and widened that the thread in the wood will become.

    CB

  7. It's not often I'm lost for words, but this video is way beyond good.
    Playing is top notch.
    Angle shots whilst playing are great and well timed.
    Costumes are great.
    Video production - including the setup/soundcheck timer - is very professional.
    VW looks great and adds an extra dimension (even though, due to being an ex splittie owner, I now hate the things with a passion).

    Well done. You deserve a lot of success.

    CB

  8. [quote name='Mickb1773' timestamp='1374429050' post='2148626']
    In [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_mechanics"]fluid mechanics[/url], [b]Mach number[/b] ([b]M[/b] or [b]Ma[/b]) [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English"]/[/url][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key"]ˈ[/url][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key"]m[/url][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key"]ɑː[/url][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key"]x[/url][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English"]/[/url] is a [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimensionless_quantity"]dimensionless quantity[/url] representing the ratio of speed of an object moving through a [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid"]fluid[/url] and the local [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_sound"]speed of sound[/url].[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_number#cite_note-Young_et_al-1"][size=2][1][/size][/url][/sup][sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_number#cite_note-Graebel-2"][size=2][2][/size][/url][/sup] [size=2][/size]
    where M is the Mach number, [i]v[/i] is the velocity of the source relative to the medium, and [i]v[/i][sub][size=2]sound[/size][/sub] is the speed of sound in the medium.
    Mach number varies by the composition of the surrounding medium and also by local conditions, especially temperature and pressure. The Mach number can be used to determine if a flow can be treated as an [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incompressible_flow"]incompressible flow[/url]. If M < 0.2–0.3 and the flow is [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steady_flow"](quasi) steady[/url] and [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isothermal_flow"]isothermal[/url], compressibility effects will be small and a simplified incompressible flow model can be used.[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_number#cite_note-Young_et_al-1"][size=2][1][/size][/url][/sup][sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_number#cite_note-Graebel-2"][size=2][2][/size][/url][/sup]
    The Mach number is named after [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria"]Austrian[/url] physicist and philosopher [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Mach"]Ernst Mach[/url], a designation proposed by aeronautical engineer [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakob_Ackeret"]Jakob Ackeret[/url].

    OH MY HEAD HERTZ ...PUN INTENDED
    [/quote]

    Yep - exactly this.
    Mach 1 is always equal to the local speed of sound, regardless of whether it's at the bottom of the sea, or the top of Mt. Everest inside the case of a Wal Mark 1 bass.
    :-)

    CB

  9. [quote name='ThePapabull' timestamp='1374415316' post='2148451']
    Man o man at Mach 1 that has to be the fastest bass on the planet.... ( speed of sound at sea level)

    Looks pretty cool too!!
    [/quote]

    <pedantic bump>
    The Mach number is the speed of the object divided by the LOCAL speed of sound.
    Whilst the speed of sound varies with temperature (and therefore altitude), Mach 1 is always simply the local speed of sound, so to qualify it with an absolute altitude as you have is inaccurate.
    </pedantic bump>

    :-)

    CB

×
×
  • Create New...