4000

I used a mate's 3eq at rehearsal the other week through an original Ashdown Klystron 200w 1x15 combo, and I thought it was great. Didn't really lack anything soundwise, and certainly wasn't thin, although it obviously had a different sound to the '75 P I also used. It was fat with a bit of growl and twang; I kept the controls almost flat and just added a bit of mids. Seemed to suit the 15 really well though. FWIW the passive OLP I had briefly was extremely fat, one of the fattest-sounding basses I've ever owned although from the comments I've read that seems atypical. I used that through the same rig.

[quote name='ARGH' post='428967' date='Mar 9 2009, 12:09 AM']I have to say,the amount of people working on an 'Older' Warwick,would have been the same in number as Alembic. Can we define 'Custom' please...is it a bass designed,in an original body shape,with electronics fitted as you wish,be they in house or company made.neck/body/headstock all hand carved....neck to your specs,as is the hardware...its an instrument made for you...a...one off shall we say. or is it a 'Model' with options? The latter isnt custom to me,not totally.... (waits for that to be taken out of all proportion)[/quote] Using that argument (which is a perfectly valid one), there are very, very few true "custom" builders out there. Generally that would exclude most Alembic, GB, Sei, Fodera etc etc etc. although a few of each would creep in (certainly there are a few one-off Alembics out there). Most of the people considered custom builders still have certain body styles as a starting point. To the man who preferred his Thumb to the Alembics he's tried, that's exactly as I would expect as we're all different with different requirements. No one bass is right for everybody. One thing to bear in mind is that Alembic (in common with some other custom builders) will build you any non-copyrighted body shape, and will make a neck to your exact measurements/dimensions and choice of scale length. The only thing you have to have is a neck-through or set neck (they don't do bolt-ons) and you have to use their electronics (of which there are many types). Otherwise anything goes.

[quote name='bassace' post='428233' date='Mar 7 2009, 09:12 PM']10k - but how well do you play?[/quote] As long as you've got the money and it brings you pleasure, it doesn't matter a jot.

[quote name='lozbass' post='428225' date='Mar 7 2009, 08:57 PM']Couldn't agree more but head firmly beneath parapet on this one![/quote] Safest place to be Loz.....

[quote name='ARGH' post='428185' date='Mar 7 2009, 07:43 PM']Bourgeois scum...worshipping currancy,buying revolution![/quote] Seriously, it's about art, not just function. Personally I value art very highly, in spiritual terms if nothing else.

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='428129' date='Mar 7 2009, 05:42 PM']I thought it fit the rant quite well, that's why I used it. Most of my friends work in theatre, if I was scared of gays I'd have nobody to talk to. To me the prices are insane. I can understand people spending five figures on an acoustic instrument (although I don't play upright myself), but when you can get a perfectly servicable bass guitar for a few hundred quid that will play and sound great, I don't see the point in paying much more. Two or three grand for something really special, maybe, if you've just fallen in love with the thing, but ten grand? They're having a laugh.[/quote] [i]You[/i] don't see the point in paying much more. Others do. Taking your argument to its logical conclusion means that you don't need anything better than a Squire with a decent setup. Which in a sense is true. But the reason for spending that money is to get a handmade piece of art that plays amazingly, sounds spectacular (if that's your thing) and has a unique aesthetic (again, if that's your thing). Nobody [i]needs[/i] a bass that costs more than a couple of hundred quid, the same way nobody needs a better car than one that can get you from a-b, or that nobody needs a painting by Van Gogh. That doesn't mean nobody should desire them or have them. Do you (yes, you personally) buy the cheapest, most functional clothes you can? The cheapest functioning car? The cheapest functioning tv? The cheapest pc that actually works? Because your argument says you should and that anyone who does anything else is nuts.

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='427808' date='Mar 7 2009, 03:02 AM']So two grand for the pickups? Three? Countless more country tracks feature Fenders, I imagine those records sold better too. Fusion doesn't sell all that well, except to bass anoraks. I should've known you'd be the first one with his head over the parapet! It's unfortunate that you didn't compare it to Warwicks, because I bought my Warwick for dirt cheap and it pisses all over your Alembic and doesn't look as gay. Incidentally I don't pay any tax through PAYE, most of my tax is collected through corp. tax as I'm a company director and take most of my earnings through dividends. I'm glad you got a silly-priced bass though, even if you did justify it to yourself as tax-deductible. You still could've saved yourself thousands and got a bass that sounded and played just as good and looked a lot less stupid, if you hadn't got suckered by the name and the blingy wood on the front. f***ing mug.[/quote] I've had 4 Warwicks (3 Dolphins and a Streamer, 2 of which were the "better" older ones from '91) and my 2 Alembics were so much better than them as to be a joke IMO, although they were good basses.

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='427802' date='Mar 7 2009, 02:09 AM']According to an eBay listing I read once, just the Alembic electronics cost £6000. That gives you a pretty good idea of what a total f***ing rip-off they are. If you have to pay six grand for two pickup, a hum-bucker and a preamp, you're doing it wrong. How many hit records featured a bog-standard Fender and how many showed off an Alembic? f***ing mugs.[/quote] This is one of the funniest posts I've ever seen. I hope it's ironic. More people drive Fords but that doesn't mean there's not a market for Ferraris.

[quote name='The Funk' post='426463' date='Mar 5 2009, 05:09 PM']Colaiuta is definitely Copeland-influenced and is a fantastic drummer, much more technically competent but lacking some of Copeland's exuberance.[/quote] Which is exactly why I prefer Copeland, because of his "exuberance".

[quote name='The Funk' post='426427' date='Mar 5 2009, 04:50 PM']I'd go further and say they created their own trademark sound as a rhythm section - and if anyone tries to do anything along those lines, their influence is clear for everyone to hear. They're one of the great rhythm sections because they gave us one of the classic rhythm section styles.[/quote] +1. I think they're fab; one of my favourite ever sections. Have to add I'm not really a groove guy (unless you're talking Bernard Edwards or Stu Z); I prefer a rhythmic tension (Sting/Copeland, Bruford/Squire, McVie/Fleetwood etc). They're also one of my favourite ever pop bands; not quite up there with ABBA but ahead of most others.

[quote name='BigRedX' post='265959' date='Aug 19 2008, 10:08 PM']Really like the look of the Streamline. Is there anywhere you can try these other than a trip to Status HQ?[/quote] I'd wondered that too.

[quote name='Rich' post='423103' date='Mar 2 2009, 12:42 PM']U2? Absolutely diabolical. It was notoriously difficult to fly and land, with a very high stall speed and a need for extraordinary equipment balance, leading to many operational accidents within the first few months of its operation. Later versions have however addressed most of these early faults.[/quote]

[quote name='Prosebass' post='422770' date='Mar 1 2009, 10:59 PM']The Daily Mail quote was Irony, and I have been known to play devils advocate from time to time. I agree with you entirely and we are probably trying to say the same thing. Everyone has an opinion , we may disagree, think they are misguided, cannot understand them or whatever but they can still think what they like and say what they like. I don't use the term "crap" to describe them, I do have strong opinions on Bono but in reality U2 mean very little to me apart from their weeks worth of free publicity from a sycophantic BBC. What I find strange is people coming to their defense by saying things like which in itself is subjective !!!!!!! Its all got a bit Mary Whitehouse and I think its time to end this thread especially as I was called a "w**ker" , but hey I can take it without an army of fans to put the poster of that comment to rights ! After all its only music.....Mind you the Britney / Christina Top 20 special on TMF this afternoon was good..![/quote] Unfortunately irony doesn't generally translate well on forums, as I've found to my cost in the past....shame I missed Christina though (no, I'm not being ironic!).

From Cliff Williams at one end of the spectrum to Anthony Jackson at the other with Phil, Chris Squire, John Entwistle, Carles Benevant, Steve Swallow and a zillion other great players in the middle, I think the point is soundly proven.

[quote name='wombatboter' post='422602' date='Mar 1 2009, 07:55 PM']I'm not even a big U2 fan but I'm just struck by the negativity there is on this forum... putting musicians down and really not contributing anything except saying "no". That's just the easiest thing there is and I see that all around me. If it should be encouraged that more totally useless remarks should be made all in the name of 'I'm entitled to my opinion"... well go ahead. As soon someone says anything about the uselessness they get the reaction "But we can write anything we like..". If only it would add something to what I don't know I'm not interested in that sort of people.. "McCartney is a lousy bassplayer" "Knopfler wrote stupid songs" "Slipknot rules and is better than Jamiroquai" Sigh....... You probably also won't care about the fact that there is such a big difference between reading on Bass-chat and other bass-forums across Europe where there seems to be just a tiny little bit more respect and positivity.[/quote] +1000

[quote name='Prosebass' post='422547' date='Mar 1 2009, 06:50 PM']Bit like the Catholic Church then ? What I find very strange is members telling other members how they should be expressing themselves....surely thats up to the individual ? If your heroes are being slagged off then don't throw your toys out of the pram but put a valid argument forward as to why you like them. If others still think they are "crap" and say so then either agree to disagree or read your copy of the Daily Mail.[/quote] Like [i]any[/i] church.....isn't that what music is in a sense? Maybe it isn't to you but it is to many. Ask Lemmy.... For me, music is about being moved. That's all there is. Be it Bach or Motorhead, that for me is the whole point of it. Of course that in itself is subjective. However if you feel people have no right to be moved by music and to decide the music they like based on that premise, then I find that rather peculiar. It's easy to feel that your knowledge as a musician makes you superior to the average punter when it comes to listening to music, but personally I often wish I could still hear music like the average punter hears it instead of getting worked up about exactly how the part was recorded and what the bassist was wearing that morning. As for "heroes being slagged off" etc, you seem to have completely missed the point of what I've said. None of U2 are my heroes. It's nothing to do with that. The criticism seems based purely on personal taste. I have no problem with that. What the critics seem to fail to see is that (and I can't believe I have to reiterate this; I believe I'd already put forward a valid argument which you seem to be ignoring, maybe simply because you agree with the criticism), just because they don't like it doesn't necessarily make it crap, the same as just because they do like something doesn't make it good. It's only good or bad [i]to them[/i]. Maybe that's all that's important to some, but that's what bothers me, the "I'm right and everyone else is wrong" attitude. It's not really got anything to do with U2, it's a generic failing of perception in human beings that drives me to distraction, and is responsible for most of the crap in the world. I'm not a great fan of U2 buy they seem to have touched a lot of people and become very successful playing music they believe in. Personally I have no issue with that. Ironically, your Daily Mail comment is exactly what I'm talking about, as they're guilty of the same thing and it's the polar opposite of what I'm trying to say. Or did you miss that too?

[quote name='jakesbass' post='422433' date='Mar 1 2009, 04:10 PM']I don't usually join in these things because it's just down to taste but I must admit I am mystified by the enormity of U2s popularity. I listen carefully to try and hear what appeals to people and frankly can't. I think they've written a couple of good melodies but I'm stunned that that alone has sustained such popularity. There is not a great deal to commend them musically. To my mind they are The Police with none of the musiciancship or creative talent, so the jangling reverb guitar led trio sound without much to make it feature in my ears, and I'm willing to give everything a chance. I listened carefully on friday and could discern very little of what I would describe as good or talented or musical. Obviously millions hear something I don't. Or do they.......?[/quote] I think the point is they [i]move[/i] people, and that's something that is very difficult to quantify.

[quote name='BeLow' post='422480' date='Mar 1 2009, 05:43 PM']I think this is Basschat at its worst. I actually find the whole thing depressing and it is what has resulted in myself and others coming on here far less in the last couple of years. But hey who cares as long as you have exercised your free speech in order to slag something off and have a good rant about nothing much at all. Well done keep it up. Cheerio[/quote] +1. My point has always been and always will be that just because you don't like or understand something or understand what other people see in it, that does not make it crap. "Crap" is purely subjective anyway. Everyone is entitled to dislike something (there are certainly some bands and musicians I'm not keen on), but that doesn't mean it's worthless. If that was the case nothing would have any worth because there is always someone who won't like something whatever it is. This goes for bands, musicians, art, anything.

[quote name='mrcrow' post='422361' date='Mar 1 2009, 01:50 PM']fingerstyle will allow dyanmics to be played...can you do that with a pick?[/quote] Guitarists seem to be able to do it fine, so there's no reason why bassists can't. But I think you've hit on a commonly held misconception which is that pick playing is either off or on. Not if you're any good with it it isn't.

[quote name='urb' post='422315' date='Mar 1 2009, 12:36 PM']And my prefered term for their lead singer; Bongo... always makes me chuckle. [/quote] Nice of Musicman to give him his own signature bass though.

[quote name='Jean-Luc Pickguard' post='421945' date='Feb 28 2009, 08:23 PM']I don't give a toss what other players use though. They could hit the strings with sardines for all I care..[/quote] I find them a bit soft-sounding. I prefer lobsters.

[quote name='The Bass Doc' post='421840' date='Feb 28 2009, 06:18 PM']Good job Phil Lynott (Gawd rest 'im) wasn't around to hear that - there is NO playing style that should be outlawed - otherwise we would not have had the innovating talents of so many pros who have different ways of playing to get 'their' sound[/quote] Amen to that. Does this bloke complain about [i]guitarists[/i] using a pick? Or painters using a paintbrush, or writers using a pen? What about violinists using a bow? What about using a knife and fork to eat? Or chopsticks? It's exactly the same issue.

Much of this is like the arguments we used to have at school when I was about 14. What exactly is a good/great musician? A great band? Great songs? Anyone who rigidly defines any of these things is only doing so in their own terms. Personally I think Adam Clayton does exactly what he needs to do in U2, no more, no less (and no I'm not a huge fan of the band). In my terms that makes him a good musician. Has he got chops? Who knows? Who cares? If you care more about his chops than what he plays in the song then personally I think you need to re evaluate your own attitude to playing. I also think that simply because someone doesn't play a part how you might play it doesn't mean they're bad or are playing it wrongly. We all have our musical preferences. It's easy to slag things off, but I think a "doesn't do it for me" attitude is much better than a "it's crap" attitude. I also think it's incredibly childish to slag off a band in the way some have here simply because you don't like them. As for the Edge, he created a unique guitar style. There was no-one playing like him when he first came to prominence. Now of course it's part of everyday guitar consciousness. That makes him a [i]great[/i] musician in my terms. FWIW, I also thought Clayton's tone with the semi-acoustic was really nice. Others probably think differently. So what? You could have the same argument about any tone that's ever been used (and doubtless will do at some point). Oh BTW, I danced with joy the day my Aguilar cabs went. I absolutely hated them. You know what? Others love them. That's fine by me.