XB26354

Er... page 1 of the Basses for sale has 27 basses, of which 19 are 4-strings.

Maybe you find it dull because of Basschat? Most of what would go in a magazine is here already. The reviews weren't great but then why bother with reviews full stop? It won't make me buy anything as everything is there on the Internet to see already. In what way is there an elitist whiff to this issue (or any other one)?

The MusicMan Sterling is made in the USA. The Sterling branded basses are made in the far east.

Please please someone tell them to use two-piece bodies for the natural basses, or at least do a cursory bit of grain matching if they're going to stick three bits of wood together! Natural PJ looks very nice, as does the B/B/M one.

Anyone get the latest copy? Quite good actually - I thought the Anthony Jackson interview was very well done - insightful (bearing in mind he's done a handful of interviews in 25 years) and interesting. He gets quite a bit of bad press here for his rather forthright views but I think in an age where technique seems to be more important than the music he is still up there with the very best. After hearing Al Di Meola's Race With The Devil On The Spanish Highway a long time ago I realised what can be done with an electric bass and a pick, but's it was only when I came across the Chaka Khan albums with Anthony's brilliant playing on them that I got inspired to play pickstyle too - and I'm glad I did because it really sounds great for certain things. The only slight flub is that I'm pretty sure Michel Camilo isn't European - I think he's from the Dominican republic? Good mix of other interviewees and always like the Basically Speaking bit. The reviews were OK, except that of all Warwicks to choose I doubt whether 99% of BGM's readership would even consider two £4K+ signature models... how about the new Pro Series from Korea? After all, they moved production to a cheaper part of the world and put the prices up by typically 30% Not a fan of Esh admittedly, but the article and reviews were pretty good. Overall I think the content and professionalism of the mag is getting better month by month.

[quote name='Bilbo' post='779155' date='Mar 18 2010, 09:43 PM']Someone asked for this one after I posted my transcription of Jeff Berlin's 'Bach'. It is the whole of his '20,000 Prayers', solos and everything, but, after getting the dots down, I was unable to fathom the chords. I made a start and guess I could keep trying but, to be blunt, I don't really want to spend that much time on it. So I figured I would post it anyway so that, if anyone is of a mind to complete it, they can. Its a [i]really[/i] heavy one!! Hope its of use to someone.[/quote] Er... that was me. Wish I hadn't asked now. Looks too blooming hard! Don't really like the tune but his articulation and technique is really spot on. Inspired, I might give the chords a bash this weekend - they quite classical to me... Cheers Bilbo.

I've been transcribing music almost as long as I've been playing bass. Like any other activity, the more you do, the better you get. As has been mentioned, some theory knowledge helps when trying to identify chords. Very loosely, chords are usually built in intervals of thirds. The bottom note (when a chord is spelled in order - we can rearrange the register in which each note appears, but for now just think bottom to top) is called the root, then comes the 3rd and 5th. This is called a triad. We can continue to add intervals of a third to get the 7th, 9th, 11th and 13th, which is as far as we go (a 15th is the root, only two octaves higher). Generally speaking a third interval can be minor (3 frets or semitones from the note you're on) or major (4 frets or semitones up). This means we can build a lot of different chords! Practically speaking, how so you go about learning to hear chords? By playing them! By far the easiest method is to get yourself a keyboard or piano and work out what each triad, 4-note 7th chord etc., sounds like. The more notes in a chord, the richer more complex it sounds. This is what I tend to do: 1. Find the bass note of the chord (easy, we're bass players, right?) 2. Find the top note of the chord. 3. Play these two notes together and add a major third. Sound right? Ok, nearly there. Sound wrong? Try the minor third. If neither sounds right at all then it's likely to be some kind of sus chord or an inversion (see the Major's articles for more info). 4. As the majority or chords are built in thirds there are simple triads inside even the most complex chords. Don't believe me? B, D and F# make up a B minor triad. However it can appear in Gmaj7, Emaj9, E9, Cmaj9#11, C9#11, Amaj13, A13 and A13sus! There are also lots or slash chords available that use a triad over a different bass note - e.g., A/B, E/C. So I would try to hear triads inside the chord. If all that sounds like too much, then just get a keyboard and muck around. Learning chords on bass is like painting your hallway through your letterbox!

There's a few at the Gallery in Camden, they are very nice. Personally I would spend a little bit extra and get the super-nice ABZ as it is not much more and made in Canada instead of China.

Get a photo and post it on here - we'll be able to identify it straight away. Warwicks have perhaps the worst depreciation of any big name make at the moment. Good for the buyer, but not so good for those who've purchased them new. Current retail prices are astoundingly expensive - the Streamer Stage 2 5-string for example will cost you £4000 - well into Fodera territory... but to be fair neck thru Warwicks were always expensive. Over the years (and not in desparation) I have let go of Streamer Stage 1 and 2 models in mint condition for sub £1000. Assuming it is a 4-string I would guess (only based on my experience of course) the following for mint s/h with all the extras: Streamer Standard £200-£300 Streamer Pro-M £300-£350 Streamer LX £500-600 Streamer $$ £600-£650 Streamer Stage 1 £700-£800 Streamer Stage 2 £900-£1000 I'd add a bit if it has a wenge neck and from the 90's as these generally seem to be a bit more desirable. When you compare the retail prices it's shocking. I guess you have to buy a Warwick to keep or trade for another Warwick!

I've recently owned an MTD 635 and. A Spector 6. I agree with OTPJ, the MTD is the better bass. It does depend what you like though - an MTD with barts and a mahogany body might be too warm if you want midrange punch, which spectors do very well. Also watch out for the 35" scale on the MTD as it is a little unusual for a 4-string.

The B-string thing is a bit contentious really. I've got a bolt on Warwick Streamer LX6 with 34" scale and I defy anyone to find a tigher, punchier B-string out there. I've been playing basses with a low B for close on 25 years now and I've owned just about every boutique make (and played plenty of basses that I haven't owned). The only consistent factor I could find that really affected B-string tone was the fingerboard wood - I've not once come across a 5 with a maple board that had a fantastic tone. Perhaps this is because a stiffer fingerboard translates the fundamental tone better? You're right that neck thru basses generally have a different tone to bolt-ons - Having owned both a Streamer LX and three Streamer Stage Ones (same woods and electronics pretty much), the neck thrus had more "bloom" to the tone, but actually the bolt-on had the tighter bottom end (which I find easier to damp and control). There was a long article about B string tone in Bass Player magazine years ago. The issue is that I have heard good B-strings with 34 and 35" scale, bolt on and neck thru, wood and graphite, and also bad B-strings with all of those features, that you just can't generalise. All that a longer scale really does is make strings of the same gauge and pitch feel tighter (which is no bad thing). A good tight witness point curve over the nut and bridge (and good strings!) make more of a difference imho. Er... what was the question again?? I tried the original K5 (which was very nice) but the new one is in black and not as attractive (I like natural wood!) imho, B-string is good on both.

I had that on a 6-string I owned, 13th fret on the C only. I sighted down the treble side of the neck and there was a slight dip in the fingerboard. Thus the fret was fine but lots of buzz. The other strings weren't affected as the dip was on the edge of the board. A fret dress, taking the frets down above that fret (ie from the 13th to the end of the board) might help. It's unlikely to be a loose fret as the other strings aren't buzzing.

[quote name='spacecowboy' post='764045' date='Mar 4 2010, 03:35 PM']A Mac Mini will not be powerful enough to use as a platform for recording music, Garageband especially the computer and memory usage by this program is substantial, the G5 Tower will be absolutely perfect for your needs, the iMac's are fine, but G5's were designed for Designers and Musicians and the processors will keep the machine alive and kicking when you need it most, I use a Mac Pro at work and if you had a spare £3000 i'd recommend my current work setup but as thats not the case i'm positive the G5 will do you proud, and you'll find the two hard drives a god send.[/quote] That's not correct. I think you'll find that the latest Mac Minis will run as much audio stuff, if not more than the most powerful quad G5. My iMac certainly does substantially more than my Quad 5 ever did (loading old projects is a joy when you see the CPU meter drop down to about half where it was before). Don't be fooled by the workstation look and see the bench tests - I believe SOS did this a while back and even the entry level Core 2 Duo Mac Mini runs more plugins etc than the Quad 2.5 G5. It is also much more future proof being a new model. Within the next 2 years it is highly unlikely anyone big will be supporting G5 processors with new software. The only downside to the Mini is that you can't easily access the RAM to upgrade it yourself. If you can stretch a little more then I would advise a refurb or s/h entry level iMac (Intel Core 2 Duo) as they have great screens, RAM you can access and plenty of hard drive space for audio etc. The latest ones can also take 16Gb of RAM! iMac G5s were OK but I've serviced a few dogs - overheating, disc eject launching the DVD across the room, odd hard drive errors etc. The newer aluminium ones look and feel much better made (and are a lot quieter).

Rehearsal is where you fine tune either covers or your originals and work out how to gel together as a band (if new) or make the tunes work with your band sound. Anything else is a jam, mess around, call it what you will. It isn't a rehearsal. Different people respond to different situations, but the only questions you need to answer are 1 - what does the music sound like, and is it getting better/tighter as the rehearsal goes on? 2 - do I like these people and can I stand being in the same room as them? Leading to 3 - am I enjoying making this music? No to any of those means to walk away - by all means take the number of any individual you might like to work with in another situation. Playing with people you don't particularly like and making crap music will do nothing for your ability or enthusiasm.

[quote name='skankdelvar' post='759075' date='Feb 27 2010, 01:26 PM']Exactly. I'm not much for changing forum rules to compel people to publish [i]any[/i] personal details simply to avoid a minor inconvenience to other members. As for paranoid? Maybe. Or maybe not. FWIW, there this guy I know, who's posted pics of his (£60,000) collection of les pauls, es-335's etc on a guitar site, with a link to his own website. His forum profile shows he lives in x-town. But he's ex-directory and there's no address on his site so he think's he's safe. A quick who-is search on his domain name shows a full street address in x-town. The location on the forum helps me to confirm it's his home address, not his hosting company. Ah, there it is on streetmap. A careful scrutiny of the front of his house shows no sign of a burglar alarm box. And he's posted on the guitar site that he's off to Majorca with the missus and kids next week. Remember, we're not the only ones who read this forum. There's a balance to be struck between security concerns, however excessive, and ease of purchase. Hamster's got it right - education not compulsion.[/quote] I agree with you. However posting generally where he lives won't give you any more info than you've obtained from the above. If people put links to their personal details on posts then that's up to them. Plenty of people do, and that's arguably a bigger privacy/security risk than saying you're from London, Yorkshire or even a general geographical area like "The South East" or "The North West". I do like the idea of an optional template as well. At the end of the day I guess it's the seller that loses out if the put no location, photos or accurate description.

[quote name='skankdelvar' post='758686' date='Feb 26 2010, 10:30 PM']I appreciate that failure to show item location from the outset may cause members some inconvenience and even cost them the effort of a PM. But I can equally understand that others of a nervous disposition might shy away from giving their location out to all and sundry, given the interweb's reputation for scamming, stalking and false identities. It might be bloody annoying, but it's also understandable, particularly if you're a newbie surrounded by a bunch of gruff blokes giving it large on core tone and how they'd like to lamp their frontman. It's fairly easy to establish where someone is - just ask them. So I oppose the motion, on the grounds that making it compulsory will probably cause some people not to post their gear for sale, hence reducing all our opportunities.[/quote] Na, it's common courtesy. You're selling something, so you should say (roughly) where you are. If you sell on almost any other commercial site you have to put some kind of location. I've lost count of the number of ads I've seen where post #2 is "pictures?" and post #3 is "where are you"? I don't even bother now if there's no location. So I oppose your counter motion, on the grounds that if you want to sell something then a large proportion of people will probably want to come and take a look

After a recent spate of ads for sale here on Basschat that have no indication, either in the ad itself or in the user avatar of the seller's location, isn't it about time it was compulsory, just like a price? There's nothing worse than seeing a lovely bass for sale, only to find out after enquiring that it's several hundred/thousand miles away! I know that you could possibly search introductions but there have been quite a few posts by users not from these shores who have either just joined without a proper intro or who are inactive. There's nothing wrong with a distance transaction in principle, but unless you're dealing face to face or are known here it's not unreasonable to suspect a scam. Given the sums that basses can go for it's at least a courtesy to let prospective buyers know where you are. What do you think?

I read in a bass player review years ago that a more dense fingerboard wood helps to contribute to a better B-string response on 5-strings. I don't know if it is true but I've never liked maple boards, either the look or extra "clank" you seem to get, especially Fenders with the glossed boards. Rosewood is a good balance but visually it's wenge every time. My latest acquisition has a macassar ebony board, which seems to be somewhere between ebony and rosewood and sounds nice!

Oh OK, you didn't mention sub-£400. Do Sadowsky, Ken Smith, Pedulla, MTD, Dingwall, Lakland, F Bass, Lull, Roscoe, Zon, Modulus or any other high-end luthier (except Spector, but then he's chopped and changed ownership and the name for 30 years+) make sub-£400 basses? All that owning a Fodera says about the average player (as opposed to a "name pro") is that they've got a lot of time on their hands and lots of money to burn In fact Fodera's NYC range is a much cheaper bolt on model - at typically £2500 they come in around half the price of a neck thru Imperial. Not cheap but by Fodera's standards a "budget" model... There is this mystique about the name - I know, I got sucked into it until I got my hands on a few. They have a certain sound and feel, just like any other hand crafted bass. Still, good luck to them - they've done well to get so many high-profile artists on board. Mine'll be an Anthony Jackson presentation, just as soon as I get the c.$20,000

The fact is that bass frequencies need large surface areas to start reacting and providing a real sense of space. I've been in the same situation with a Blues band I was in a long time ago. They had a couple of small valve amps and I had a 300W Trace 4x10 combo. In the practice room I had the volume on 8 and even with low mids boosted couldn't hear for crap. Soon as we went to a gig I had to turn down because in the larger room the bass became much louder. Then there is directionality in a lot of bass cab designs. A standard 210 or 410 cab sounds best from 15ft-20ft. You can stand right next to your amp in a practice room and hear nothing whilst the guitarist on the other side of the room can hear nothing but bass (something which designs like Schroeder seek to change). Perhaps try lifting the amp up to chest height to get the sound closer to your ears, or angle it up like a monitor. In closing, the only 210 combo I felt OK to gig with was an Epifani UL210C but it was a much larger cab than the traditional side by side, and was rated at 500W anyway. Most 210's simply do not move enough air to get true chest-level punch. If you have the boot space get a 1x15" - it'll lift the 210 up and give you more spread.

[quote name='CHRISDABASS' post='755096' date='Feb 23 2010, 03:30 PM']I think the whole reason fodera's are so good is because its one guy who makes them all. Anything else just wouldnt be the same and the brand would be diluted and thats not what they want. I dont think they're in it for the money! Look at brands like sadowsky! He could churn out thousands of basses if he brought out a budget range and employed loads more staff, but what would be the point in that?? Quality would suffer and so would the name and reputation of the company [/quote] Er.. aren't Metros precisely that, albeit in a more expensive price range? He might oversee the operation in Tokyo but he's not building them, so as Metros are around half the price of an NYC then I think they count as "budget" I've played quite a lot of Foderas, from an Anthony Jackson presentation through a couple of Imperials and VWs down to the basic 4-string Monarch. All but one of them (an Imperial Singlecut) were distinctly ordinary in finishing and tone (for the price). Most Fodera endorsees tend to have that "sound" that is like a smoother Ken Smith (which is where Vinnie Fodera learned his craft). I've just picked up a Peavey TL-6 for about 10 times less than the corresponding Fodera. It is beautifully handmade, with a carbon fibre headstock overlay and rods in the neck, superb B-string on a 34" scale, neck thru with flamed maple body and macassar ebony board. Electronics needed a bit of TLC but otherwise it could easily compete with any boutique bass. Foderas are fashionable so have made a certain niche for themselves. Nothing wrong with that imho but if you don't have £5000+, don't sweat because you can get what you want and need for a lot less...