Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

4000

Member
  • Posts

    5,890
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by 4000

  1. 44 minutes ago, NikNik said:

    Given that I owned 7 of them (4001/4003), I'd have to disagree. The only one the came close to this (or vice versa) was the 4001CS I had.

    I’ve owned well over 20 Rics. I’ve certainly had at least 4 or 5 that were better. My 2 x CSs were way down the pile for me, other than the wonderful looks (and the neck on the ‘91) I didn’t really rate them.
     

    FWIW I was actually just trying to provide a balanced view for anyone considering both. It’s all subjective anyway. 

     

    Its certainly a lovely looking bass though and given that my ‘72s would now be in excess of £5k each it’s an absolute no-brainer if you want a vintage style Ric. 

    • Like 1
  2. On 07/01/2023 at 20:10, Bassassin said:

    Even better than the real thing. B|

    Not entirely true. I had one built; it’s great, but I still prefer my 2 x ‘72 4001 basses. It’s certainly better than many of the Rics I’ve owned, but it’s certainly not better than all of them. 

  3. 2 hours ago, Muzz said:

     

    Nige Clutterbuck is a friend of mine, and has suffered much abuse for his grandstand stuff (if you've never seen it, his speciality is 1000mph slappity-hoohah*) from some musos, but he plays it for a specific reason; to further other aims, like pulling a crowd round at a trade show. He's also a great bassist and yeah, he plays in bands, too...

     

     

     

     

    Used to see quite a bit of Nigel when he worked at A1 Music back in the day. Lovely bloke. In fact it was him & Drew sold me my main bass. And yes, he is a great player.

    • Like 1
  4. 3 hours ago, Bass Wielder said:

    No probs. You’ll know what’s best for you.

    Saying that……

    I have always preferred solid feeling  (heavy in some guy’s opinion) basses as they seem to sound ‘tighter/crisper/snappier’ etc… in my experience. Even for Fretless.
    I guess one possible compromise is weight..,but I’ve compensated throughout the years by better (wider/thicker) straps and if the bass itself does not balance well (again in my opinion…approx 45 degree hang), I’m always prepared to move strap pins!

    Very subjective topic I know🙄
    40 years plus playing has hardened my spine on many levels (🤣🤣)

     

    I’ve played and owned a wide variety (not all sadly) of ‘factory’ made to ‘custom’ made from vintage to modern basses…and my view hasn’t changed. 
    Stubborn? Set in my ways?🤷🏽‍♂️

     

    My problem is that I have several prolapsed discs, both cervical and lumbar. Having had 10lb basses that cripple me and that were sold for that very reason (Alembic and Wal), 11.5lbs is way over my limit. 😉

     

     

    • Sad 1
  5. 7 hours ago, FinnDave said:

    Most blues bands, about 75% of the Grateful Dead's output, anything well played that has warmth and passion behind it. My introduction to music that wasn't on the radio was back in about 1973/4 when Virgin released Gong's Camembert Electrique album for about 50p. I have loved Gong and their offshoots ever since, though stopped buying anything after Daevid Allen left though I still see them when they are on tour. I have a ticket tp see them with the Ozrics in Oxford in November.

    Ah, right. Yes, certainly wired differently to me then. I don’t really like most blues (there are some exceptions, like Peter Green) and although I’ve tried many times - since the ‘80s in fact - on the recommendations of others, I just can’t seem to enjoy any of the GD’s output.
     

    Strangely enough - which I guess shows how differently we perceive these things - it’s the warmth and passion of Yes that I love! 

    • Like 1
  6. 1 hour ago, Woodinblack said:

     

    But they don't though - they can't. They play with a lot of 50 year old equipment that would have worn over the 50 years. When genesis played with that, it was new equipment that would have sounded different. Unless they play with newly made reproductions of the old equipment it wouldn't be anything like the same

     

     

    Not what I heard when I saw them, but then to be fair, I didn't actually see genesis in the 70s, but if they sounded as lifeless as that they wouldn't be one of my favourite bands!

    It wouldn’t have sounded that different. And it would still sound far more like the original than completely different equipment. 
     

    Maybe they had a bad night when you saw them?  I’ve seen them 4 times and ‘lifeless’ certainly doesn’t apply!  

    • Like 1
  7. 2 hours ago, Woodinblack said:

     

    I agree with the concept rather than the terms - I don't think I am ever going to particularly like tributes, its a bit of a copy of the original - as you say, faithful to one gig at one point in time, like an acted video or a play.  I find that Hacketts stuff is more original, I wouldn't say cover band as they are his songs so more like an original band doing their songs, never quite the same as these things evolve over 50 years, so I find them more interesting. 

    I think the bit that doesn’t work for me is the rest of the band, as I mentioned earlier. So it’s only 1 element of the band - Steve - being reasonably faithful to the feel/mood/playing of the original band. The rest aren’t really anything like, and IMO don’t sound like Genesis. As we’ve discussed before, when I’m listening to Genesis I personally want to hear something that sounds exactly like Genesis. Not a different-sounding band playing Genesis songs. That doesn’t interest me at all, unless they’re doing something really original with them, and Steve’s band aren’t. They sound exactly like a cover band to me. 

    • Like 1
  8. 7 minutes ago, FinnDave said:

    I haven't 'tried' listening to Yes since the mid-70s. I'd like to be able to say that the music doesn't move me, but it does. I move rapidly to get as far away as possible from it.

     

    Too clever by more than half, I just don't derive any pleasure from listening to them. 

     

    To save time retyping this in the parallel Genesis thread, the same applies there.

     

    Obviously, they have many followers, but I suspect I am wired differently to them and do not respond well to their music. 'Orses for courses.

    Genuinely interested, what does float your boat? 

  9. 13 minutes ago, Woodinblack said:

    I saw the musical box and hacket in the same year. I thought Hacket was great (even with Nad, of whom I am not a fan!), and the Musical box, I don't think I would bother going to see them again. They did what they did fine, effectively a theatrical performance of an old genesis show, but it didn't have life and I didn't enjoy them. 

    In an effort to describe the difference between the two bands, MB are quite obviously a tribute and try and play everything as faithfully as possible, in terms of feel and sound. Hackett’s band play the songs more like a cover band than a tribute band, playing the songs but not particularly faithfully, which I personally am never going to like as much.  As we’ve discussed before, YMMV, obviously. 

    • Like 1
  10. Just now, hiram.k.hackenbacker said:


    As good as Hackett is, and he still smashes that sound you want to hear, it’s the rest of the band that usually lets it down for me. I’m not saying this just ‘cos they’re not Genesis, but the feel is wrong for me. The best performance I saw was the Selling England Tour he did. Even then, I didn’t enjoy the vocals that much.

     

    Controversial I know, but I enjoyed The Musical Box more. That reminds me, I have tickets to see TMB again for a gig that has been postponed more times than any other I’ve had tickets for during the COVID years. I think it’s now early 2023.

    It’s the band that lets it down for me too. I agree that they just don’t have the right feel. 
     

    I’ve seen MB four times and much preferred them to the Hackett gig, as has been discussed in previous threads. They capture the Genesis sound & feel far better, IMO. 

    • Like 1
  11. 1 minute ago, wateroftyne said:


    I saw SH’s last tour - Seconds Out - and I thought it was rotten. The band completely missed the point.

    We had tickets for that but it was the same night as Genesis and we (obviously) chose Genesis. I didn’t regret it; the Genesis gig, even with Phil’s issues and the dearth of older material, was far, far better than the Hackett one that I saw. 

  12. 1 hour ago, merello said:

    Pretty close to my journey but must say they really lost something when Hackett left. His shows these days are magical.

    Like PG, because Hackett wasn’t in them when I first started listening to them, I didn’t really miss him (not that he isn’t great). I’ve seen Hackett live - probably about 4 or 5 years ago? - but I’m not totally enamoured of his band, at least when I saw them. I’m a bit anal about how the Genesis stuff is played and to me - at that time anyway - it was too much of an approximation.

  13. Genesis are one of my 3 or 4 favourite bands. I love both the Phil and PG eras. I discovered Genesis via Follow You and ATTWT in ‘78, then bought Seconds Out and worked my way gradually backwards, so the problems many have with the Phil era, them having heard PG first, don’t exist for me. If anything it was a little jarring the first time I heard PG!

     

    My favourite studio albums remain the relatively unloved ATTWT - which I absolutely love, one of my all-time favourite albums - and TOTT. The much-loved W&W I like, but not as much; same with Duke. Seconds Out is my favourite Genesis album (in fact my favourite live album ever, along with Space Ritual). The PG-era stuff is mostly great, but I do feel the playing and production isn’t as good as on later albums. The Seconds Out version of Supper’s Ready blows the Foxtrot version (as good as that is) away IMO. But either way, I love them; they mean the world to me. 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...