thisnameistaken

That's an extremely cool-looking bass. Any idea what they go for?

[quote name='dave_bass5' post='216379' date='Jun 10 2008, 07:25 PM']I completly understand your views on this sort of music but as we are sooooo far aprt it seems its pointless trying to convince each other who's right IMO. We are both coming from different directions, that why i said i wouldnt take notice of your arguments but im sure your not bothered and dont agree with mine (or even believe me that i do like most things i play)[/quote] I'm still listening to you. We don't have to conclude anything - philosophers have argued this stuff into oblivion and got nowhere. It seems we are coming from very different positions. I assume that all musicians I meet got involved in music because they were inspired by some other musician. I find it difficult to grasp that Take That might've actually influenced a real musician somewhere. And I find it horrifying, frankly. [quote name='dave_bass5' post='216379' date='Jun 10 2008, 07:25 PM']I hope i didnt come across too rude.[/quote] Not at all. To be honest it was the sniping "self-righteous" remarks earlier in the thread that made me decide that I might as well play the devil's advocate for pomposity if I was going to be slated for it anyway. Regardless, I really do mean most of what I'm saying, although I would settle for a lesser punishment than death for Take That if it avoided a lengthy legal battle which might involve their records being played.

[quote name='dave_bass5' post='216369' date='Jun 10 2008, 07:01 PM']Now you see, your not being objective by assuming only 11 year old girls like that sort of thing so that puts your views in to perspective to me. I'll not argue them but ill not take any notice of them either.[/quote] I lost patience with objectivity when manufactured teen bands came into the discussion. I will not position myself as a Take That apologist even for the purposes of objectivity, they suck in the worst possible way and they should all be put to death. It seems you're content to say nothing for fear of upsetting a few people. I like to think of myself as a musician, and so if I don't loudly and proudly object to mediocre dross like Take That then nobody will. [quote name='queenofthedepths' post='216374' date='Jun 10 2008, 07:10 PM']Isn't that a bit rude? You're going to ignore his argument without even telling him where he went wrong?![/quote] He's told me exactly what his issue with my argument is, so that's fine.

[quote name='dave_bass5' post='216313' date='Jun 10 2008, 05:10 PM']so your saying the Kim or mike dont like 'N sync's music then?[/quote] Neither of them are 11-year-old girls, so I'd say it's pretty unlikely. What's to like about their music? Either it's completely soulless by-the-numbers chart-fodder garbage or I've somehow missed all the critically-acclaimed work that you're referring to. [quote name='john_the_bass' post='216324' date='Jun 10 2008, 05:23 PM']I'd go and play for fecking Boyzone[/quote] I wouldn't.

I think your earlier respondents already covered everything else: [quote name='Jobiebass' post='216293' date='Jun 10 2008, 04:34 PM']an EQ pedal.. to me EQ is the Bass Mid Trebble. but I have that on my amp and bass so id guess that its just for mid song changes to eq?[/quote] Or for changing EQ between songs, maybe dependant on which pedals you've got enabled (perhaps more of a bassy tone when you switch on your octave effect, or more treble with your fuzz to get a raspier sound, etc.). I don't have one on my board but I can imagine they come in handy if you use more than one bass sound in your set.

[quote name='tauzero' post='216276' date='Jun 10 2008, 04:04 PM']If originals musicians had the sort of artistic integrity that you are defining, I'd have been subjected to far less sh*t music over the years and 90% of local bands would cease to be.[/quote] So that would be a bad thing? Sod it, I've set myself up as the villain of this thread, I might as well play it with as much moustache-twirling as I can muster. When someone brought up Take That and Boyzone earlier, all I could think about was how much they shouldn't be allowed to exist. So one of this bloke's favourite bassists toured with them - that does not make them acceptable! And as for Paul Turner, I can only assume he'll play anything if the money's right. To me that says nothing positive about his artistic integrity. Would you expect someone like Kim Deal or Mike Watt to turn up touring with 'N Sync? Not likely, because they aren't pathetic sell-out chumps.

[quote name='jakesbass' post='215862' date='Jun 10 2008, 12:30 AM']Purely out of interest thisnameistaken, do you consider yourself to have artistic integrity? If so why? Do you accept the art/craft point?[/quote] I do accept your art/craft point. I understand that some people here have invested thousands of hours in their instrumental skills and they may well have a very keen interest in performing, but playing Lady In Red for money or going on tour with Take That are not artistic endeavours, they are purely commercial. As for my own integrity: I'm no Orwell, but I haven't played in a cover band, or in any band I didn't believe had any musical merit. I do other creative things outside of music (more often than music, these days) which I am even more precious about, and I think that's maybe why I'm more argumentative than most in this thread. I also have a belief - not especially well-researched to be honest but it is long-held! - that very little decent art is produced by happy, contented people. And I think that any band which has considerable commercial success should pack it in once they're loaded, because the rest of their output is almost guaranteed to be garbage. Maybe that makes me seem elitist, but I'm really not. I mean I sure as hell wouldn't play Mustang Sally for anyone, but that's just having standards.

[quote name='crez5150' post='215828' date='Jun 9 2008, 11:20 PM']Sorry but I completely disagree with that. What your saying is that as a Pro Bassist he has no integrity...... As an artist you cannot judge his integrity as you have nothing to judge apart from his work on Tours as an MD. Thats absurd.[/quote] Well, if you believe that the musical output of Take That and Boyzone have artistic merit, we are unlikely to ever reach a concensus. The fact that Paul Turner is now playing for Jamiroquai is of no consequence whatsoever, regardless of what a good gig that probably was 15 years ago.

[quote name='crez5150' post='215813' date='Jun 9 2008, 10:52 PM']You think he's a bad example because he toured with Take That?[/quote] [b][size=4]YES![/size][/b] [quote name='poptart' post='215815' date='Jun 9 2008, 10:58 PM']Ermm - Paul was MD (Musis Director) with Take that and also Boyzone - I know not exactly super cool, but as a pro musician that is not bad![/quote] Exactly. As a professional, he's doing very well. As an artist, he's played with Take That and Boyzone. I feel a bit like I'm banging my head against a wall here. Bands like Take That and Boyzone - bands specifically and cynically assembled for the purpose of exploiting the music industry - do not belong in a discussion of integrity, except to serve as the worst possible example of a lack of it.

[quote name='poptart' post='215802' date='Jun 9 2008, 10:44 PM']Hey I am not disagreeing with you, but I bet Paul can pay his mortgage and then some from these 'Super Function band gigs" eg Eurythmics (sp) etc.[/quote] Yeah I bet he can. Is it in any way related to a discussion of artistic integrity though? Regardless of how creative he gets to be with Jamiroquai (if at all), he apparently toured with Take That. He's a pretty bad example.

Are we talking about the Hysteria intro or the rest of it? The intro you can cop with any half-decent fuzz (the MXR Blowtorch nails it), the rest of it is doubled with a synth so you'd need either some insane string of pedals that degrades your signal (octave downs into octave ups, etc.) and eventually approximates a synth sound, or a square wave generator like the Robot Factory Pulse Synth, and then blend that with your fuzzed bass signal with a Boss LS-2 or similar. It's a lot of money to spend covering one tune, though. I would just buy a Blowtorch.

[quote name='poptart' post='215785' date='Jun 9 2008, 10:15 PM']During a chat with Paul Turner (yes The Paul Turner) it turns out that he got his first big break playing with Take That in the 90's because the management saw him playing with a function band at an event and offered him the gig. Not a bad move, after all where us Paul now - well I guess you know the answer to that........[/quote] I suppose playing with Jamiroquai these days isn't too much different to playing with Take That. Banging out the old Zender tunes is probably fun for a while, but I bet that's more than off-set by having to put up with a tosser like Jay Kay on a daily basis.

No you don't.

[quote name='jakesbass' post='215685' date='Jun 9 2008, 08:31 PM']I think definition should come into the fray here as the tone suggests that the artist with integrity somehow has more dignity and worth than all the others. It's difficult to see that you mean anything other than to gently condescend to the people with whom you are holding this discussion and that is where it arrives at a problem for me.[/quote] It's difficult to discuss things like this - especially arguing for the side I chose - without coming off a little high-brow or aloof or condescending. I agree though my tone was a bit off in that post and it was unintentional. I don't want to patronise anybody here, intentionally or otherwise. [quote name='jakesbass' post='215685' date='Jun 9 2008, 08:31 PM']I find it hard to accept you as the sole arbiter of human integrity which sucks a little of the value out of your assertions. I agree with many of the principals that you raise for discussion but I find it hard to get beyond your slightly high minded tone. If you are talking straight principals with no value judgement then my error, if not I think you should possibly widen the possibilities of your defined terms.[/quote] I think I am satisfied with my earlier assertion that we are indeed discussing two different characteristics: Professional integrity and artistic integrity. Both are admirable qualities, but they are quite distinct. Perhaps the dividing line is blurry when discussing professional musicians. For example: Are concert musicians who are not soloists performing as artists, given that they are not required to be creative? Is a symphony orchestra reciting Mussorgsky any different to a function band playing Mustang Sally? Is there any distinction between a band that writes a setlist of covers that they think will please the audience and a band that does requests? Professional integrity is synonymous with honesty in commercial endeavours, and has its own merits. For me, the term "artistic integrity" is again a type of honesty but more of a self-honesty - it describes a quality which explains why an artist would not compromise their own beliefs in return for money, fame or any other benefit. True artists use their considerable skills to outline their own beliefs, to persuade, to further their own cause or those of others that they believe in. I consider people like George Orwell or Stanislavski or Arthur Miller to be the embodiment of artistic integrity. I don't expect anyone else to live up to those standards, but those are the standards to strive for. Given the nature of the original post in this thread I think my assumption that we are discussing artistic integrity was pretty much on the money. We've got a bassist who's hitting forty, he wants to be out there and performing, he sees an opportunity to do a cover band but there's that pang of guilt about it. This is someone struggling with his integrity as an artist. And whichever way he goes I think it's good that he's concerned about it. We can't all change the world, but anyone who ever recognised an artistic talent and the persuasive power of it no doubt hoped to be able to do exactly that in some way. In summary: I think anyone who can play Lady In Red without retching shouldn't be allowed to own musical instruments but maybe that's just me. Imagine a world in which Chris de Burgh isn't allowed to own musical instruments. That would be a better world.

Once when I had a precision I moved the thumb rest to where a jazz pickup would normally be, and used that, but that's the only time I've ever used one. I don't pick that far back any more anyway because I'm old. Actually I tend to rest more on the strings now than I used to, and retire to the front pup when playing the E.

[quote name='BassBod' post='215623' date='Jun 9 2008, 06:54 PM']I've had this a lot - he was just trying to get a clean sound, and take an unknown variable out of the equation. It may seem unreasonable from a players' perspective, but does also make sense. Some players use extreme amounts of eq that can be hard to control front of house or for recording.[/quote] More often than not - in my experience - it's down to ego and nothing else. The guy who gets to stand behind the desk assumes he knows what's best for anybody who sets foot inside his venue, and will try to lay down the law from the moment you arrive. Those sorts of people are never going to give you what you want, even if you win the battle over the mix. Some of the more established venues have more amenable staff, but some (especially those sorts of money-pit venues where the management changes twice a year) will invariably hire the type described above. They are either lazy or they don't like you/your band or they just plain don't know what they're doing. Usually a mix of all three.

I bought a Yamaha RBX model when I was first learning to play. I remember it being a nice bass, I had no problems with it, and it was easy to sell on when I was done with it. That was 15+ years ago though, and I haven't played one recently. I think Yamaha are generally a safe bet to be honest. I haven't played a doggy Yamaha.

[quote name='Rich' post='215366' date='Jun 9 2008, 12:40 PM']I've just looked up 'integrity' in my thesaurus... one of the synonyms given is 'righteousness'. Judging by some of the posts here, it looks like it might be missing a 'self-'... [/quote] I was just thinking this discussion could use a few insults to stop it getting too intellectual. This is the internet after all. Thanks.

Thing is... If Joan Miro had turned to his Parisien buddies one evening and said "Y'know I'm still going to do the Dada-esque thing in my spare time, but I think I'm going to do some flattering portraits of wealthy industrialists too - the pay is great", I doubt his contemporaries would've had much respect for his new direction. And they almost certainly wouldn't have come to the conclusion that his integrity as an artist was not compromised by it.

[quote name='dave_bass5' post='215296' date='Jun 9 2008, 11:14 AM']You could but i get the feeling a lot of people dont. you can play covers and not loose integrity. I guess its how you see integrity.[/quote] It seems we're discussing two different aspects of personal integrity here. I think that's the root of the argument. You're talking about professional integrity: Playing your bass properly even when asked to play something bloody awful - because you see it as your job and you take pride in doing your job well. I'm talking about artistic integrity: Refusing to play something bloody awful because it's bloody awful and you would be ashamed to take part in it. They are two very different characteristics.

[quote name='endorka' post='215280' date='Jun 9 2008, 10:51 AM']Integrity aside, one must eat.[/quote] Fine. But if you put your artistic integrity aside in order to eat, you concede any claim to it. So I find it odd that a cover band musician would maintain any illusion of artistic integrity.

It's the best bass synth you can get? Certainly sound like it to me, but I've never had a chance to try one myself.