Misdee

He was a terrific bass player with a sound and style that really stood out. Quite literally; that bright P Bass tone with roundwounds and a pick was unmistakable even on medium wave radio and the lo-fi TV sets most folks had back in the day. Such an inventive and creative player. The Smiths wouldn't have been the monumental band they became without his contribution. I'm very sad. RIP Andy Rourke.😟

I wish maple necks were lacquered nowadays as standard, but it suits most manufacturers to put an oil and wax finish on because it's much less work and therefore less cost for them. By the 1970s Fender were using pretty thick laquer on their necks, and I'm sure it had a very significant effect on the tone. That combined with the fact that they were using ad-hoc variations on how they were winding their pickups from batch to batch might well explain why you come across some very raunchy P Basses from that era.

Yep, early 70s P Bass from the Joshua Tree era. Sounded great, looked the part, suited his style.

Proper Pau Ferro is reckoned by some to sound brighter than rosewood but a bit less bright than maple. You would need pretty good ears to be sure of that, though. In my experience maple is noticeably much brighter with a lacquer finish. Unfinished I don't hear that much of a difference from rosewood ect, but there's so many variables it's hard to say definitively. Just buy a bass that sounds good to you !😄

If I'm learning a song at home as an exercise I like to try work out the original bass part, if only as a starting point. Back in the days when I used to play covers in a band I was quite happy to play my rendition, but was always mindful of key elements of the original bass line. However, like the O.P, after a couple of Babychams I may well have decided to share my genius with the audience by embellishing songs with my own ideas. How much of a transgression overplaying might be is a depends greatly on the skill of the bass player. Quite often what is criticized for overplaying is actually bad playing, and lots of it. Playing what's best for the song doesn't necessarily mean playing less, but it does mean playing better. The best players can do whatever they want to and make it work. Some bass players play a lot, some play less. All that matters is how effective the overall sound is. In some circumstances less is more, in others the more the better. Rush wouldn't have been better served if Geddy Lee had taken a more minimalist approach,, for example, but his bass style would have ruined AC/DC.

Losing weight is very difficult, and keeping the weight off after you have lost it is even more difficult. And the older you are, the more difficult it becomes. You have to be really dedicated to the project or it just won't work. It might help if we knew what kind of bass the O.P is using. If it's something unusually light and insubstantial then that might give an insight into the potential remedy. Maybe a bass with a slightly curved body, like a Warwick or Spector, might help. Or a bass with a body substantial enough to flatten an unruly gut, like a Yamaha BB or Jaydee Supernatural. Or a Music Man Stingray. There's plenty of bass players who proudly sport a big belly and play a wide array of basses perfectly well. I'm sure this problem is solvable without resorting to diet and exercise.

I had exactly the same problem about 30 years ago. It took me a while to admit to myself that my belly was the problem. For a long time I blamed the strap I was using at the time. Eventually a combination of self-loathing and vanity enabled me to overcome my "stomach problem", but I'm still fighting to maintain my boyish figure every day. Would deliberately balancing the body of the bass on your upper belly elevate it to about 45 degrees, making it easier to see the fretboard? Just a thought.

I must have been listening to that track and Chuck Rainey's bass line for nigh on forty years. That isolated bass part confirms what I had already suspected, essentially that it sounds difficult to play, but in reality it's even harder than I thought it was.

I can't say I've always wanted to try one, but recently I have been flirting with the idea of a Dingwall Lee Sklar signature model. The thing is, I've never played a Dingwall, or indeed any fanned fret bass, so it would be a bit of a leap in the dark. Also, I'm very particular about string tension, and I would want strings that gave the same feel as a 40-100 set on a regular four string. So I've got a couple of potential hurdles to overcome.

Yes should have packed it in after 90125. Everything since has been a long and torturous contribution by an unwitting public to their retirement fund. Like so many bands.

A big +1 on all these points about the Thumb from me. I fancied one from when they first came out, but every time I played one with a view to buying one it was a no-go. Also bear in mind that all of the ergonomic problems of the four string Thumb are exacerbated in the five string version.

Looking at the background info it looks like EBMM have really tried to make this reissue as accurate as possible. The only grey area is the preamp. I don't know how close it is to the original epoxied ( Baxendale?) one , probably near enough. FWIW, I played a few Stingray Classics and they were superb basses, better than any vintage Stingray I ever had my hands on in terms of sound, playability and construction. The only reason I didn't buy one is I never found a light enough example. Actually I did, but by the time I rang Bass Direct someone else had just bought it!😟 A Stingray Classic would substitute perfectly well for this reissue, and I actually prefer the more generic features of the Classic. Just my personal taste, though.

It's entirely possible to mass produce quality instruments. Leo Fender came up with relatively simple designs that were robust and eminently suitable for the job. That was his genius. Also, bear in mind that Pre-CBS Fenders weren't really "mass-produced" so much as factory-made. There was still a significant degree of handmade input into each instrument.

True, but comparing retail prices in the UK and USA is a complicated business. The USA is a low taxation economy with lower retail prices, but Americans have to pay for some things that we usually get for free at the point of contact. The fundamental question is, if you were living an equivalent life in the USA would you be more able to afford the basses you want be because they are cheaper in the shop? The answer is probably not.

The Dimension was a good idea ruined by poor execution. The idea was interesting and potentially appealing to bass players but the fine details let it down. The balance of the instrument on a strap wasn't quite right and the preamp on the active models was the usual functional but uninspiring fare we have come to expect from Fender. If they are going to produce active basses they would be well advised to design or source a world class preamp to put in them. It could serve them well for years to come.

The new Stingray Specials are seriously good basses. Lighter weight, even more punchy tone, ergonomic design ect. Three grand is a bit steep,yes, but it is a very good bass. I got my hands on one for the first time recently and for me they are the best Stingrays ever. I used to have a very good pre-EB Stingray but the new Specials knock spots off it, to be honest. I'm not keen on most of the colours, that would be my only criticism of the current range.

We are living in a new reality when there is a market for "vintage" Status basses, considering how they were the embodiment of everything modern and progressive at the time. I remember when they first came out! These look like a fitting farewell from a superb British company. I'd like an earlier 80's style model in the plain graphite weave, but it looks like they are all gone.😟

Prices have gone up and they're not going to go down again. That is the new reality, I'm sorry to say. 😟 EBMM and Rickenbacker are what I would describe as production guitars, rather than mass produced instruments. I've had four brand new EBMM basses over the years and they all compared very well in most respects with good quality custom made boutique basses I have had. My basses were all standard models, not BFR. Yes, the new prices are steep, but if you want/ need a new Music Man bass what is the alternative? In the final analysis EBMM basses are probably overpriced by about 20 percent in the UK market place. I would venture that Fenders are overvalued by about the same amount. That's the premium we are paying for the economic situation in the USA and UK.

To me how much employees are being paid and treated is a complete irrelevance. It's certainly not something I want to pay over the odds to improve. I've had a hard life too. And now I'm expected to find three grand if I want a new Stingray.

Okay then, let me put it another way. If Fender Custom Shop can charge the kind of money they are for Team Built Precision and Jazz basses then this Stingray reissue isn't that untoward in its pricing. In U.S dollars at least, it's an affordable treat.

I totally agree. A 1960's P Bass isn't worth £7000-£10 000 if your only criteria is buying a tool to do a job with. Whatever folks are paying for, it isn't something tangible. But conversely, my own personal experience is that you can be paying for something equally intangible ( or completely irrelevant) if you opt for a new boutique custom made bass. Ultimately, one criteria for "worth the money" is how much of what you paid will you be able to get back if you decide to sell it. Another is how much enjoyment and fulfilment will you get from playing that bass, and there can be a conflict between the two. If I wanted a new Stingray-style bass, for example, I would do better buying a new USA Lakland 44-94 (or 44-76) than a new EBMM Stingray Special if in future I wanted to sell it on. I would lose less money. However, for my sensibilities at least, only a Musicman bass will do when it comes to Stingrays. I'd always feel dissatisfied with the Lakland, despite the superior build quality ect. So which is the best value?

Are these really mass-produced though? The essential difference between EBMM and Rickenbacker and a lot of handmade basses is that EBMM and Rickenbacker can afford a factory. That is not necessarily detrimental to the value of the instruments they produce in comparison to those made in a cottage industry.

The thing about the guitar trade is, if what you have to sell is sufficiently enticing, someone will buy it. The trick is to anticipate what it is that will prize open people's wallets. Expensive instruments can be much easier to sell than mid-priced ones, providing you have the right thing to sell.