Misdee

The BBOT has definitely got its own sound, and it's a very good sound It's more "open" in the treble and upper midrange. Hi mass bridges tend to sound a bit more compact to me. As others have mentioned though, the advantages of other designs is as much that they are more stable and more practical than the BBOT. Hi mass also bridges give noticeably more clarity and sustain higher up the neck, in my experience.

I'm not sure what craddock is, but it sounds a bit too close to haddock for my liking.

Doug Rauch. He is best known for his playing in Santana in the early to mid,1970s. Also played with Carly Simon Betty Davis, Lenny White, Billy Cobham and very briefly with David Bowie. A superb player and highly original bass player who was ahead of his time. He had the whole funky 16th note thing going long before the wider world was aware of Jaco, and he did some double thumping too. Unfortunately Doug became overwhelmed by drug problems and depression by the time he was 26, dropped out of the music business and died at 28 years old in 1979. One of the very best players of that era, for sure. By way of contrast, another one would be Chris Bostock who played with the JoBoxers in the early 1980s and a few other notables during that decade. Always liked his playing but he didn't go on to make very many more recordings.

It's easy to be flippant but I wouldn't underestimate the difference screw holes can make. Screw holes make a Fender bass a de facto hollow body. Think of it as micro-chambering. There is bound to be differences in both tone and weight between screw hole basses and the ones Fender couldn't be arsed with. If you look closely at some of the Masterbuilt Custom Shop basses, the screw holes are quite exquisite. God is in the details. And if you think drilling a few simple holes is easy, wait until you need them drilling in your own head. Then tell me how easy it is.

I can't help but think that this might be the thin end of the wedge. Like Warwick basses and their wax finish that has to be laboriously maintained by the owner( the thin end of the wenge, you might say) which saves Warwick the trouble and expense of finishing their basses. It starts with a screw hole and before you know it you will have to route your own truss rod channel. I put it to you that Fender, stung by criticism of their dubious quality control, and, have developed a strategy to gradually make the customer increasingly responsible for the manufacturing process. Five years from now when you buy a Fender bass you will get a box of parts, a sheet of instructions and a good luck message that also functions as a legal disclaimer.

But definitely not the screw holes, apparently. So much for period-correct. To me, vintage Fenders have always been all about the screw holes.

Over the years a lot of top pro players have used Yamaha basses, and a fair few continue to do so. The players you mention are quite a roster just in themselves! I am, unfortunately, old enough to remember when the BB basses first came out in the late 1970s/ early 1980s and they were pretty high profile at the time. Paul McCartney, Lee Sklar, Jimmy Haslip, David Hungate, Abraham Laboriel, Paul Jackson and the bloke from Chas and Dave all had one, to name but a few. They were definitely prestige instruments at the time. Carlos Santana had popularized the SG2000 and Yamaha were looking to do the same for the BB bass. A lot of well known music was recorded with Yamaha basses. I really don't see them as an inferior brand at all. In fact I think they have quite an impressive heritage when it comes to who has used them and the tracks they are on.

To be fair, I think Fender's popularity is based on the fact that they are the originators of so much that we take for granted nowadays. Their invention and creativity is not to be underestimated. How much value for money they offer in the current UK market place is another matter in so much as their equipment is much less expensive in the USA and Fender are not responsible for the exchange rate and levels of taxation on retail goods in the UK. I know Fender quality control can be a bit(very) haphazard, but they are still in many ways the most important guitar company in the world. The strength of a company like Yamaha is that they have taken the innovation of companies like Fender, learnt from it and built upon it, creating their own identity in the process.

If someone asked me to recommend an decent quality instrument for a beginner I would always point them towards Yamaha as their first line of enquiry. By the same token, Yamaha pro-level gear is top-notch. I've played Yamaha basses that are easily as good as anything boutique builders have to offer, and they're more robust, on the whole. They make equally good guitars, drums, keyboards ect. Their recording studio and hi-fi equipment is very nice,too. As a brand, l don't think Yamaha has anything to prove to anybody.

In my experience basses are quite like shoes; if they are slightly uncomfortable when you first try them then after a while they will be so uncomfortable that you can't bear them anymore.

To me, Yamaha is a prestige brand, just like Fender, Gibson,et al. From entry level to high end, they can give most other manufacturers a run for their money.

Two grand is a lot of money to pay for something you are less than completely happy with. An instrument that is too heavy will always be too heavy and you will get little joy from playing it. Like many other folks, I have learnt from experience that getting a new Fender that ticks all the right boxes can be a bit of an odyssey. That said, it's by no means a set of problems and challenges exclusive to Fender.

I also like the look of the green one.

All my favourite female players have already been mentioned in this thread many times, so I won't reiterate that. Regarding why female bass players are not that numerous, if you look with a critical eye then contemporary music is just another example of an area where work roles still have a tendency to divide along gender lines. In the music business you are still far more likely to find a woman singer, (or backing singer) than drummer or bass player. There's no real reason for that except that social convention deems some roles as feminine and others as masculine. I don't think it's a conspiracy, more a persistent prejudice. Just like you still are more likely to encounter a male roofing contractor and a female nurse. A larger physical stature is a definite advantage in playing the bass, but not essential by any means. I'm a man of fairly slight build and it has never held me back my playing particularly. That said, since I got my first short scale bass a couple of years ago and enjoying how easy it is to play, it has occurred to me that that me playing that bass must be like a bigger bloke than me playing a long scale bass.

I also need to invent a credible narrative about why I need another Jazz Bass.

It's just enough money that it's not out of the question. If you consider that it's three grand for a Stingray nowadays, it's not that bad. Three and a half to five grand for a Custom Shop bass is more than I am prepared to pay for any Fender bass, and a good example of one of these basses would be a very acceptable substitute. The challenge now is (as ever) finding a light one that Fender have put together correctly.

Okay, I stand corrected. It's just that on the video there are no screw holes on the demo bass, or any mention of the metalwork in question. I've got a 74 AVRI Jazz and it came with the full kit and caboodle. Overall it's a lovely package. Not that I can enjoy playing a Fender bass with the covers on but it's nice to look at.

These are only "kind-of" vintage reissues. For all they go on about period-accuracy, it looks like they have neglected certain details. Where are the metal pickup covers, for a start? Still look like nice basses, nevertheless. It's just a shame that the pound is so weak against the dollar. I'm surprised they are priced under two grand, the way things are going. What we need is a Cost of Living payment from the government to make up for the increase in the price of basses since they wrecked the economy. It's the least they could do, given the circumstances.

Lovely bass. I don't think you will be disappointed.

Does anyone else remember D'Addario Slow Wound strings? They were terrific but they discontinued them, they said because they had upgraded the manufacturing of the regular XL bass strings so they sounded so similar it wasn't worth making the (more expensive) Slow Wound anymore. Regarding longevity in non-coated nickel strings, my experience has been that Elites Players have just about been the best in terms of retaining their brightness and punch. I don't play it very often, but I've got a set on a Yamaha BB2024x that must have been on for twelve years since I bought it! They still sound and feel fine. Still tune perfectly well, too. Maybe it's a sign of middle age but I feel increasingly less inclined to try and sound like John Entwistle and Chris Squire nowadays, anyway. Dead strings can be a bit more forgiving of my playing, too!😊

Thanks Mike, I've been watching the series with great interest. For one thing, it had never occurred to me before that the apparent tension of certain strings might change with use. For what it's worth, the first set of bass strings I ever bought well over forty years ago were Rotosound RS66, and all these years later a fresh set of Swing Bass are still the best sounding strings on the market in my opinion.

Dunlop Nickel 40-100 ( black label) are my string of choice on most basses for the last 10 years or so. I also have D'Addario XL 40-100 on a couple of basses so I can give a reasonable assessment of the relative feel of the two sets. I would describe the tension of the Dunlops as "normal" and the D'Addarios as slightly more taught by comparison. The Dunlops certainly aren't low tension like DR round core strings or indeed Dunlop Super Bright strings. To me they feel just right. Just like the D'Addarios, they give a good all-purpose tone and they work well on a wide variety of basses. In my opinion they don't die off too quickly in so much as that they aren't overly bright to begin with. Once they are played in a bit they stay usable for ages, providing you aren't looking for Rotosound RS66 clank. I don't notice much difference to the D'Addarios in that respect. I know that Billy Gould from Faith No More uses exactly the same Dunlop 40-100 and he gets an exceedingly bright tone. Some would say too bright. They are/ were a reasonable price too, the current economic chaos not withstanding.

I can empathize with this. I have found that overall, I am much happier playing a less expensive bass with shortcomings than an relatively expensive model where I am, more often than not, agonizing over its imperfections, real or imagined.

These Le Fay basses have got a really distinctive sound, exceptionally clear and precise with a top end that sounds very extended but in a natural way. The tone sounds like it's coming from the wood and overall construction of the bass rather than just hyped up electronics.

Fair enough, I hadn't realised! I'm sure that if you had cash in your hand (18 grand I am now informed) and you visited some vintage dealers you might get a better deal for your money maybe, providing you could find a suitable bass. Thinking about it , I see far fewer vintage Rickenbacker basses for sale than vintage Fenders. I suppose the law of supply and demand means that old Rick's will go for big money. It just seems like there's always more demand for old Fenders . Without wishing to be controversial, in my experience it's hard enough to get fairly recent Rickenbacker basses to play well ( for my taste anyway). What chance would I have with an old one?