4000

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='1282243' date='Jun 25 2011, 04:28 PM']Pretty much every other Rick copy you can get is better than the Hondo.[/quote] +1000.

[quote name='JTUK' post='1282208' date='Jun 25 2011, 03:36 PM']If what you get is a the CD version why go and see them? No point at all...you know every turn they will make. The Edge does his thing and the other guys do their thing...same as, everytime. A 4 piece such as they is pretty limting, the style they use on every song, even more so... what was once ground-breaking is now hammered to death.. why make it blantantly obvious the limitations of the format and the band and the fact they have run out of ideas... If their fans want that, then fine, carry on. But I can't believe they can't be arsed to ask where they want this or that version to go.. I expect that from decent cover bands. Financially they are sorted, but artistically, they sound shot..and I doubt that is the legacy they would want..or maybe they do..and if so, they deserve the stick. As I said..I don't care...but I expected more from these guys. But, hey, they have milked the same thing for 25 years..they got a very good run out of it.[/quote] It appears that your own personal preferences are blinding you to what most people want to see. The point of going to see them is the [i]atmosphere[/i], to be part of the event, and to actually see the real band play the songs they wrote. Most people who aren't musos could care less if they did a samba version of I Will Follow, a garage version of Pride or a 20-minute improv around One. They've never claimed to be virtuosos or to be particularly left-field, and of course they do what they do. What's wrong with a (more or less) greatest hits show at a gig like that? What's wrong with a greatest hits show anyway? FWIW, "milked the same thing for 25 years" sound like you rather do care. If you really didn't care then why bother posting at all?

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1282000' date='Jun 25 2011, 11:38 AM']If the argument was luthiers know the most and that's why we believe them is true then your statement would be an argument against that. If it doesn't matter what you know then the appeal to authority argument for luthiers is bogus. Can't really have both working at the same time [/quote] My argument was pointing out that it's not necessary for them to know the true name of a wood to know what it works/sounds like. Do you have to wear shades when you wipe your backside?

[quote name='JTUK' post='1282107' date='Jun 25 2011, 01:29 PM']I'm sorry, but the band has stood still for years... same format of ALL songs. They have some classics and a few belters but they are like a faithful tribute band. Now, I don't really care one way or another..but artistcally, they are as stale as ...... !!!!!!!!!! As a tribute band, that is to be expected..but this is supposed to be one of the top bands in the world..and they put no effort at all into freshening songs up. For that they get a canning and drop down in anyone's estimation, IMO.. They are an original act for chrissakes..even pubs bands realise that flogging the same song/format to death without trying to freshen them up is soul-destroying and massively limiting. They have no choice as to what classic they can draw on... but at least give the songs a swerve here and there. You can see that set played up and down the country by a zillion pub bands.. I would expect waaaaay better... it is either lazy, complacent and downright stagnant ..any of which does not befit a major major band of the last 25 years. You wouldn't get it from Bowie or Gabriel and that is the sort of level they are at.. I really can't see any band doing it. Even the Foo's who have toured massively these last few years freshen up a gtr chord song.[/quote] Have you heard their albums? Stood still? Hardly. As for the pub band thing, er, this is the [i]original band[/i]. You could say that about anyone. And the Gabriel/Bowie comment is a bit weird; they're considered/expected to be fairly eclectic anyway. Not everyone needs to chop and change as much as they do. If I go and see Bowie, yes I might want/expect a few left turns, but if I go and see AC/DC I (and most fans) most definitely [i]don't want [/i]any left turns. If the songs are strong enough (always a matter of opinion) why change them? If it ain't broke etc...I just don't get your argument at all, other than arguably from a muso perspective. Which strangely enough, most punters aren't.....

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1281966' date='Jun 25 2011, 11:14 AM']And the years of working with loud power tools has fine tuned their ears to subtleties that can raise their prices substantially. Most luthiers don't even know the real names of the woods they use. Try pointing at one of their guitars and asking is that acer rubrum or acer saccharinum and of the 2 which has the most symmetrical dimensional stability. Then ask if it's good for metal.[/quote] So you have to know what's in a meal before you can say what it tastes like? I better get back in the kitchen.

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1281954' date='Jun 25 2011, 10:58 AM']I think for the statement old sounds better to be true you would have to more than just hear a difference and you'd have to be able to quantify that difference in some way that could be used to define other instruments. You can hear differences between 2 vintage instruments but couldn't attribute your favorite to the sound of the age of the instrument.[/quote] You know, there's an echo in here....

[quote name='JTUK' post='1281712' date='Jun 25 2011, 12:20 AM']I'd would be more concerned about a supposed headline act doing the same set that they have always done...forever and a day. Obviously song choices change but the treatemnet of the song never does or can..as they are still a basic 4 piece. It is quite unusual for a major act to not augment/change the empahsias on a song throughout the years..or even re-invent to freshen things up... In that respect U2 were dull..and the performance average. Even if major major acts..and U2 should be at that level, in term of stature..... have to play crowd faves/hits, they haven't botherered about the songs.. I can't think of any act that would be so lax and basic. That is why they deserve a panning, IMO.[/quote] They're playing Glastonbury, to loads of people who have doubtless never seen them. The set was pretty much what I'd have wanted to see. I know lots of people (punters) who absolutley hate it when they go and see a band and they mess about with the songs and at a gig like that it would have been the last thing I'd have done. FWIW I thought even with the weather and a slightly nervous start (Bono said when he got out there it was like a skating rink so he couldn't move that much) they were leagues better than anyone else I've seen at Glastonbury (and I'm not their biggest fan). I thought the songs fitted the occasion. Still, I expected to come on here and see them get slagged, because that's what we do best on the internet isn't it?

Good lad, very nice to see.

[quote name='Ou7shined' post='1280876' date='Jun 24 2011, 12:46 PM']Here's some data for you... You are 100% wrong. It wasn't an assumption, it was a proposal posed as a question - hence my sentence starting with "I wonder if.....". Have you proof of this? Your statement seems to be based upon conjecture with some anecdotal content. Whoopah! [/quote]

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1280651' date='Jun 24 2011, 10:37 AM']It's all in the mind, unless you have faith it isn't. But if you go by what people can hear and not how they feel when they are playing something then the difference is undetectable. No one can tell vintage by listening alone. It can't be the wood because you hear the vintage tone even with a new body and fingerboard. It's called psychoacoustic phenomena and is well documented as a science. No one can hear age in a controlled test. Many claim they can but no one can do it. The color of the room you are in will influence your perception of sound, your expectations of an instrument and your resulting filtering of what you select to hear or not will have a major influence on how something sounds to you.[/quote] Whilst you can't hear age, you can hear difference. Obviously "better" (to the ears of the listener) may or may not correspond with "older" but it's quite feasible an older instrument (and this also potentially applies to newer ones of course), all other things being equal, may have a sound you prefer and that isn't imagined. I do think the assumption that an older instrument definitely sounds better is inherently flawed as they'll all vary, as do new ones, and of course it's all down to personal preference anyway. My main '72 Ric is my favourite-sounding of the many, many Rics I've played. I used to think all basses made in that period would sound more or less the same, but they don't. And then of course whilst it's my favourite sounding Ric played on it's own and in most situations, in some it doesn't cut it as well. When our guitarist is using his Strat it sits perfectly. If he uses a humbucker-equipped guitar my other '72 sounds better IMO in that context. Of course where parts have been replaced, as in this case, then it's no longer the bass it was is it?

[quote name='leschirons' post='1280244' date='Jun 23 2011, 10:02 PM']Never regret not buying them, just selling them.[/quote] I've regretted both.

Superb!

I played one at Bass Day a few years ago and to be honest I've played a few Fenders I've preferred. It just didn't have "it" for me. But if it floats your boast, go for it.

If I've got frets, 20, 24, 26, whatever, as long as I can get my fingers in them they get used (no Carry On style comments please!).

In a perfect world I prefer 24, but I haven't come across a 24 fretter that sounds how I need it to sound most of the time (we'll see how the Rim does ). I'd love to be able to switch easily but as I'm usually singing as well as playing it can get a bit confusing at times, and I do play up the dusty end quite a bit. At the moment I only have the 2 Rics (both 20s) for the current band with the Rim on the way; I'd happily move back to 24 if I could get the sound as it makes far more sense to me. EDIT: My Alembic was close, but it was too heavy....

If I could get past the body contour (could get a slab or early-50s style I guess) I'd really like one; you can do most things with them. You have to pick 'em though. My mate's '78 with a Dimarzio sounds and feels great. There was (is?) a Mex P in the Gallery which I liked as much as any P I've played; only about £500 or thereabouts. For some reason I even preferred it tothe RWs I've played. I've played a few real duffers though, so try before you buy.

[quote name='Beedster' post='1277957' date='Jun 21 2011, 11:50 PM']No, I'm one also, and there's many more. Most just wisely avoid these threads [/quote]

[quote name='skankdelvar' post='1277499' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:00 PM']Skank strokes chin thoughtfully. WoT prods a sticklebrick uneasily. It commences to rain. As for doing things for one's own satisfaction [i]or[/i] indulging one's audience, well, I think the best artists are those who can do both at the same time. Mind you, that is [i]such[/i] a crashingly obvious statement. Sorry, chaps. [/quote] But as always, Skank talks the most sense..... EDIT: Reading back through the thread am I the only person who loves jazz, pop, rock, punk etc etc pretty much equally? I sincerely hope not.

[quote name='RhysP' post='1277589' date='Jun 21 2011, 07:50 PM']Music SHOULD be about being true to yourself & playing what you want to play, regardless of whether anyone else wants to hear it or not. If pleasing an audience comes before that then you shouldn't be a musician IMO - become a clown or a f***ing juggler or one of those c**ts that pretends to be a statue or some other such "entertaining" bollocks.[/quote] Good call. I like this!

[quote name='Cosmo Valdemar' post='1277344' date='Jun 21 2011, 05:07 PM']I don't know why the term 'self-indulgent' has become so derogatory - as far as I am concerned, the finest music is self-indulgent, i.e. composed for self satisfaction and for the sheer joy of it, rather than for a target audience. When I shut myself away and start working on ideas, I'm not thinking of anybody but myself.[/quote] It's not just me then...

It's not sportsfan. It means I'm being a Morecambe-guy, which is like a Wise-guy but without the short fat hairy legs.

[quote name='peteb' post='1276555' date='Jun 21 2011, 12:15 AM']I think that I must move in completely different musical circles to some people here! I have never gone to a gig on public transport and can’t imagine getting away with turning up at a show without a rig. I certainly wouldn’t trust most pub’s PAs to be responsible for 100% of my out front sound and to be honest, it is usually much better in small venues to have most of your sound come from your backline and let the PA take care of the vocals, drums & keys, etc (especially for rock bands with reasonably loud drummers)! Even if you are lucky enough to find yourself working on a stage in a big room with a good PA and a half decent sound engineer, it doesn’t hurt to have a backline to give him an idea of what the band should sound like and therefore a reference of what you want him to reproduce out front….![/quote] +1. I'd love to turn up at a gig with just a POD or something but at the many of the local gigs I've done over the years it's vocal PA only, sometimes with no monitors at all. When I played in London a lot (many years ago) it was a large PA for everything...

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1275462' date='Jun 20 2011, 12:55 AM']That was my original point when I posted that You just changed it back to the original that I was pointing out had another side.[/quote] *Cough* [i]Arsenal!!![/i]*Cough*