NancyJohnson

[quote name='Nicko' timestamp='1510315097' post='3405509']
Clearly another message board full of opinionated people who cant get their facts straight. It says "[i]this list does[b] NOT [/b]contain bands that were clearly playing before he [/i][the author of the piece, Harry Fletcher] [i]was born." [/i]and then goes on to list a whol ebunch of late 60s and 70s sh1te. As far as I know the Beatlesand the Stones preceded all of the omissions listed.

No real surprises in the list apart from Super Furry Animals and the assertion that releasing an album in the Welsh language is somehow a good thing. Th piece is badly headlined, it talks about great bands, and then describes how influential the selected bands are. On that basis how can you include Joy Division who would not have existed had the founders not been blown away by the Pistols and leave out the Pistols themselves.

I understand people not liking Oasis, but they were successful and influential, although you could argue other less successful bands were forging that path before they came along.
[/quote]

I believe the uppercase/capitalisation usage of the word NOT is assertion of bands listed in the sentence that follows, rather than the ones he's already included (Pink Floyd/Roxy Music etc.).

Also, I wouldn't go so far as to just put Yes, Supertramp, ELP etc. into the sh*te category either simply from a musical heritage perspective...these [i]sh*te[/i] bands are still major influences on a lot of current bands. Whether you like them or not, had Yes/ELP etc. not been about, we wouldn't have had Rush, Dream Theater or Muse. Likewise, without Yes or ELP there wouldn't have been punk kicking off.

[size=4][font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]I suppose it brings into question what greatness is. Sales? Size of fan base? Releases? Innovation? Influence on others? It is pretty subjective and it's a nonsense. I know we're talking bands (so no Bowie/Elton John, Kate Bush etc.), but even so, Super Furry Animals?[/font][/size]

[size=4][font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Looking at the list (see below), I do wonder about the obviousness of some of the includees and absentees. No Yes? No Fleetwood Mac? No Sex Pistols? The Police? I'd also throw in bands/artists like Japan, Duranduran, ELP, Genesis, Muse, Mott The fecking Hoople, Depeche Mode, Cream.[/font][/size]

[size=4][font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]To save you the bother of clicking the link, here's the list:
20. Joy Division
19. Super Furry Animals
18. The Jam
17. T. Rex
16. Roxy Music
15. The Who
14. Black Sabbath
13. Blur
12. Queen
11. The Kinks
10. The Stone Roses
9. The Clash
8. The Cure
7. Oasis
6. The Smiths
5. The Rolling Stones
4. Pink Floyd
3. Radiohead
2. Led Zeppelin[/font][/size]
[font=tahoma,geneva,sans-serif][size=3][size=4][font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]1. The Beatles[/font][/size][/size][/font]

[font=tahoma,geneva,sans-serif][size=3][size=4][font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif][b][EDIT] [/b] I add for your deliberation two post comments by someone called petrometro1 on the ES webpage. Pretty succinct.[/font][/size][/size][/font]

[font=tahoma,geneva,sans-serif][size=3][size=4][font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]1)[/font][/size][/size][/font]
[i] when will journalists and the media ever get a grip on the English Language? Firstly, the most overhyped word bar none is "Iconic". An Icon is an Orthodox Religious Painting for heavens sake. Secondly; If this list is of the most iconic bands how is that at all possible? Its either Iconic or it isn't. Journos have a problem with unique. Fairly unique, very unique. Get real; its either unique or it isn't. As Nigel [/i][another commentator] [i]states.. this list does NOT contain bands that were clearly playing before he [/i][the author of the piece, Harry Fletcher] [i]was born. It doesn't contain Jethro Tull, Eric Clapton, Hermans Hermits, Yes, ELP, The Nice, King Crimson, Supertramp Genesis... in essence the article is not worth the paper its written on. To compare Oasis with Pink Floyd and the Rolling Stones is pathetic.[/i]

2)[i] as thought. has been with The Standard since September 2017. Resume for linked in is written entirely in the first person singular. He was in 6th form in 2010 so suspect he was born around 1993. That's about as credible as this list gets.[/i]

My band is post-punkish, whereas I listen to a lot of XTC, Jellyfish, early Queen, early Japan. So yes, there's disconnect.

Rob van den Broek (author of the Gibson Bass Book) has just posted images of Gibson's RD Artist basses on Facebook. The black one is hubba bubba for me. Lovely.

Just take my fecking money.

[quote name='The59Sound' timestamp='1510169362' post='3404478']
Rose tinted glasses at work - Jools has plenty of golden moments. At The Drive In - 2000? Alice In Chains - 1991/2? Bloc Party in 2005 were great when they made their debut.
[/quote]

It's been going 25 years and that's the best you can come up with?

For every At The Drive In, there's been dozens of Ali Faka Toure, Matilda Veindad and Black Umfolosi.

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1510178295' post='3404543']
Everyone seems to think that brass gives a warmer tone, but I find the opposite to be true. I may be in a majority of one, here...
[/quote]

I used that old Aria at a rehearsal last night...the bass is very bright tonally already. God knows what it would sound like with steel saddles.

I'm not really a fan of Fenders, but that looks lovely really.

As posted elsewhere, I went with the Kickass on my old Aria Primary...it's a wonderful bit of kit.

I don't have any issues with Babicz at all, I mean by this that I like their Gibson three-pointer replacement, but their designs always look a little unnecessarily over-engineered and I don't feel their products extend to more traditional shaped instruments. While the Babicz Z-series would have done the job admirably, I just thought the KickAss looked better suited for a P (or J) style bass.

If you do decide on the KickAss, ahead of the curve give consideration as to whether you want brass or steel saddles (the brass, apparently, gives a warmer tone, but it's pretty zingy irrespective).

[quote name='Bigwan' timestamp='1510048050' post='3403419']
Nancy will be along in a minute to say Maruszczyk should go down the tubes for doing that...
[/quote]

Ack. At least it hasn't got two big bites out of it. I'd never buy one, mind.

[Edit] If (as indicated on an earlier reply), he's offering these in custom colours too, then credit to him, because Gibson certainly missed the boat there. He needs to build them with long-stem cloverleaf machines as well. That said, I'd never buy one, mind.

[quote name='Rich' timestamp='1510055162' post='3403544']
Reading back through the thread so far, it seems that apparently Later is crap for the following reasons (some of them slightly paraphrased):[list]
[*]The bands are too extreme or boring.
[*]There's no rock, metal or prog.
[*]It's not the Old Grey Whistle Test.
[*]It's too diverse and lumpy.
[*]It's mostly about veterans, indie bands and quirky singers from islands somewhere.
[*]It's too polite and needs edge and energy.
[*]The acts are only on because they have an album to plug.
[*]It's over the hill and stuffy.
[*]There are far more well known and popular genres that don't get on it.
[*]It needs a more diverse range of music.
[*]It's trendy and pretentious.
[*]It's not my taste in music.
[/list]
I think that last one sums it up perfectly. It's crap because it doesn't have the stuff that *I* like.
Although I suppose if it's simultaneously too trendy/pretentious AND over the hill/stuffy, it must be doing something right
[/quote]

While it's a bit of a generalisation, I believe the main gripe tends to be that the format allows for bands like the aforementioned Albanian folksters Saz'iso to appear on the same bill as Noel Gallagher (or similar). A quick scan down the episode list (here, folks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Later..._with_Jools_Holland_episodes), shows dozens and dozens of bands/artistes that have had their shimmering ten minutes of BBC fame, ne'er been seen or heard of again.

I just don't have a pretentious single-worded synonym to sum this show up, but the bill always seems to be inconsistent and unpredictable.

Anyone got one of these?

I think (once the Lull drops), my attention will move onto a fretless one of these. Very much doubt I'd stretch to one of the £3k Czech Republic built models, but the cheaper WAV5 model, at around a grand, look nice.

[quote name='Barking Spiders' timestamp='1509978644' post='3402976']
My main beef with Later is they always play it safe, with the same old tired , identikit indie guitar bands, sensitive folky strummers and beardy Americana geezers. All very tame and inoffensive. Just wish they'd book some acts with a bit of balls that could tear the place down like some bonkers metal band, a hip hop combo with a bad attitude or cutting edge electronica.There's quite a lot around to choose from.
[/quote]

I remember on one of my infrequent sojourns The Darkness coming on...this has to around the time of the first album, perhaps before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHrRqFZYwNo

[quote name='steantval' timestamp='1509918161' post='3402637']
+1 A lot of true words said here.
[/quote]

Especially about my band, huh?

I haven't watched Later... for a long long time, so with my wife departed for bed and a coffee to finish I was scanning the channels for something that wasn't Wheeler Dealers or How It's Made.

And jeepers. Nothing really changes for Jools vanity show. I tuned in as Aimee Mann was finishing up. Bland and my only actual thought was she looked horribly thin, unhealthily so. Next up, Saz'iso a folk band from Albania. Christ on a bike, I [i]really [/i]need to look them up. That at the end of their performance people in the audience were actually whooping made me extremely sad as they were just so terrible.

Next up, Noel Gallagher. Left me cold. Was that woman playing scissors? Finally, for me at least, there was a Superorganism, a band that NME (rest it's soul) describe as 2017 Buzziest Band. It was at this juncture I decided it was time for bed.

All this does raise the question of how the hell does this show stay on air? I honestly doubt anyone who watches it on broadcast will actually utter the words, 'Ooh, they're good,' after each performance. I'd also doubt anyone who records this horrific mash-up of world music actually isn't reaching for the remote after the first act or two. There's such a lack of consistency; juxtaposition this (if you have a memory that long) to something like The Tube, a live show that knew it's audience and you were pretty much certain that you'd hold out until C4's News at 7.00pm.

The other thing is, we gig a lot and the majority of the bands under and over us would knock every band on that show out of the field of play. Christ, my band would knock all of these bands for six.

Public Service Broadcasting, Hammersmith, last week.

We've found them something. Amazingly, it's a venue we've been wanting to play. Boo!

Every bass I've owned was perfect for one reason or another, but it just seems to be my nature to change my gear out periodically.

If there's any correlation between price and perfection, I have a beaten up old Aria P-bass copy that (after hardware updates) still owes me less than £120 And it is perfect.

My band were due to be playing at The Islington in London on Friday 24/11/17, but the promoter has proved himself to be the 100% **** that goes before his reputation and the whole show has been bumped.

My primary concern here is that sharing the bill with us on the 24th is/was a band we gigged with in Milan last month, they're flying in for the gig on the 24th and another on the 25th (in Reading) and flying home on the 26th. They've paid for flights, hotels. I couldn't care less about my band at this juncture, I'm just looking for a slot for them in Landaan, so the weekend isn't a 50% loss.

Anyone gigging? Got space for a half hour slot? They're a great band and lovely people.

Cheers
Paul

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RF4Vy94Pyhc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYenh_EiOpc

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1509491739' post='3399467']
When I started I played bass lines on a Spanish guitar and an amp was out of the question.

A friend used his parents radiogram instead of an amp.

Today's rubbish gear is sheer luxury compared to the gear we started on back then.
[/quote]

This.

[quote name='Cato' timestamp='1509375935' post='3398424']
The 2018 RD Artist guitar is a stunner.

[url="http://www.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Designer/Gibson-USA/RD-Artist.aspx"]http://www.gibson.co.../RD-Artist.aspx[/url]

Doesn't see to be anything too special about the electrics though.

I'm not sure if there's any point in releasing a bass version if doesn't at least try to emulate the original Moog circuitry.
[/quote]

Why does the RD have the 120th Anniversary inlay? None of the other models on the 2018 catalogue seem to have it.

[quote name='Hellzero' timestamp='1509365218' post='3398307']
Final price including all customs taxes will be close to 2000-2200 GBP and you'll get a bass with a reglued broken head. Sorry, but you better wait for Sander De Gier to make its 5 strings Lowlander or ask him to make you the first one...
[/quote]

Touche

There's a clearish photo of the reverse of the headstock...there does appear to be be some rippling in the finish, but otherwise the refinish is pretty good and you'd think that if it wasn't stable then the finish would give some clues to whether the join was unstable. I think everyone would put some credence in the fact that most glues/adhesives used for headstock breaks are probably more stable/stronger than the material they're holding together.

Guitar Chimp in the US have a stupid cheap Mike Lull T5 5-string Thunderbird up at the moment, buy it now £1,375. You'd need to factor in shipping (£135) and duty/handling, but it's still very cheap.

[url="https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/272901832580?rmvSB=true"]https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/272901832580?rmvSB=true[/url]

[quote name='Meddle' timestamp='1509310863' post='3398020']
Ebay seller is well known, and can't be discussed here. it is a shame that otherwise perfectly good guitars wind up in their possession to be modified in such an unsympathetic manner, but they can't all be winners I suppose.
[/quote]

The guy became a member here on 10/10/17, did six posts, and promptly disappeared on 11/10/17. Perhaps he did a search on the stuff he'd sold previously and decided this wasn't the place for him.

I can understand moderators wrestling control of some content here, but the guy became legendary historically through his pursuit of purchasing budget instruments on eBay, [i]Frankensteining[/i] them to something he honestly believed improved them and putting them up for profitable resale on eBay. The more keen-eyed and investigative here could actually trace the purchases of guitars and parts, through the bolting together process and eventual resale.

Thing is, while we seem to be free to say something is fantastic, we're seemingly gagged/dissuaded from commenting against something we feel is horrific, for fear of rebuttal from other members. Which is a shame, because the majority of his past-mods have been hilariously awful. I feel for the purchasers of these monstrosities, but with over 1,500 positive sales on eBay, who am I to question his practices or methodology?

Caveat emptor, as our glorious Roman conquerors would have said.

Well, despite Gibson's website still maintaining that there are no basses for 2018, Sweetwater in the US are now advertising the model below for $2K. (They're listing the retail as £3.3K.)

Now, I'm not taking any credit here, but I did have some lengthy email exchanges with Thomann about a year ago to see whether they could persuade Gibson to do a Thomann run in cardinal red or sapphire blue...anything other than ebony, sunburst or the rarely available ivory. Who knows. Maybe something lodged in Gibson's psyche.

There is an ebony model, but no photos (yet).
P