Al Krow

Hey T - given that we've got your attention, how about posting a wee recording of the Chunk with and without a Brown Dog for us?

👍 excellent, that's really good to hear and another vote of confidence for Alto. Gonna be tricky to do that "prior to anything else" given what the cat dragged in a couple of hours ago...😀

Certainly on the Allen and Heath they are pretty good and certainly in terms of reverb are completely fine. I've just upgraded our A&H Zed 10FX to the A&H Zed60 14FX to take us from 4 + 2 stereo inputs to 8 + 2 stereo inputs for my main function band. But feeling that's going to be overkill for the new project which really just needs 3 (possibly 4) inputs altogether. I think from what you're saying I may be hard pressed to get anything much better than the Alesis for the size.

Sounds good...BUT IEMs are not on the agenda for us for now. As the Russian mafia boss said to his wife when she asked for a divorce, we ain't looking to spend that amount of money just yet! 😂

Remember I'm only interested in the FX versions: Alesis Dimensions: 7 3/4" L x 6" W x 2"H (= 200mm x 150mm x 50mm) (from their website) Beheringer 1202FX: 220mm x 242mm x 47mm On a surface area basis (given they are pretty much the same height) the Behringer is actually 77% bigger (i.e. almost double if we are dealing with round numbers). If that is 'man measurements' then so be it 😂

That's a good shout, but the Behringher 1202FX is almost double the size of the Alesis, at which point I'd probably think "blow it - let's just take the A&H Zed14FX". I'm kinda hoping there maybe something Alesis sized, with FX, but a touch more capable...

Well it seems I have these two adaptors to hand which between them should hopefully mean I can make use of the two stereo inputs to create a single 3rd input. We can revert to the larger Allen & Heath Zed 14FX if we find ourselves needing any more. So maybe 3 usable inputs, rather than 4, and no xlr outputs. But hey I can't expect the earth for £75 to £80!!! Before I bite the bullet, if anyone has any other recommendations for a compact mixer with FX, then I'd be keen to get your thoughts. The Allen & Heath Zed 6FX did look good, but it's also got the same "stereo" input which effectively means that it's a 4 input not a 6 input mixer and its starting to creep up in price and size at which point we may as well our Zed 14FX

Fair point, but I guess we can get around the line input issue by using a simple passive DI box? (I've got one already which avoids any additional cost). Which still leaves the mono / stereo Q: my hesitation is that many similar inputs are marked "L (mono)", but this clearly isn't.

Guys - recently came across this little mixer, which seems ideal for one of my bands which is just a four piece with one vocals and one BV; particularly as it has FX and allows a bit of reverb to be included, which is a bit of a 'must have' where vocalists are concerned in my experience and it also costs around just £75. Only (slightly numpty!) Q on this is to do with Line 3/4 which is a "stereo-paired" channel. Not clear in my head what that means in practice i.e. if we use just one acoustic guitar input into the Line 3 i.e. the L channel will that just output through the left speaker only or will it output through both speakers provided I have the pan set half way between left and right?

Yeh @Bo0tsy who has more filter pedals in his collection than anyone else I know (we're talking 20 or so?!) has often effused about how good that one is! It's a BIG pedal board consuming beast though...

Been waiting to get my hands on one of these for a little while...it's actually more compact than I had thought it would be, which is a bonus. Looking forward to A/B'ing it against the Fwonk and MXR BEF over the weekend. Those of you who have or had one - is your preference to have it band pass or low pass mode? This one has been set up with it internal switches set to low pass (vs band pass), res + (vs res - ) and buffered bypass (vs true bypass). Actually those would have been my preferences for each setting also, so it seems me and the previous owner (a dodgy bass player from this parish) are thinking along the same lines

Yeah for sure, don't disagree. Hence my comments earlier about blind testing a BB 3000 and a BB 1024. But I think Andy set out the reasons why, other than the fact that some of us (me definitely included!) find that they look awesome, in his comments on "better" very well, a few posts ago. And I'm guessing there's a reason that the BB 1200/S and BB 3000 and 5000 basses (all neck through) are held in such high esteem? I suspect it's more than just nostalgia.

No not all songs in a 2 hour set are identical in the way that they are played by either the band or me the bass player. There will be variation in guitar pedals and sound, whether rhythm guitar is brought in, whether the song is stripped back, Motown vs Rock etc etc. Sometimes it's just great on bass to just 'sit back in the mix'; other times you want / need to be more punchy in order to not be 'lost in the mix'. Earlier in the thread a few pages back John, who is another covers/ function band bassist, mentioned using his 735A mostly in passive, but switching to active 3/4 J setting when required. I'm guessing for exactly the same reasons.

Hidden in your post is actually something very helpful to me as someone who has come pretty close to getting a TRB5Pii on a couple of occasions. And then held back because what I'm really after is a P/J version of the NE2 or alternatively a neck through version of the the 735A. It's really useful to have confirmed that these two high end basses are pretty similar and says to me that I did the right thing in not going for both - so thanks for that!

Interesting discussion topic about what constitutes "better" that you've raised Andy. Can't disagree that it is ultimately subjective, although we collectively can much more easily spot when something is genuinely crap (and that's a long way from what Yammy BB's are!). You said you thought I prefer active basses. Actually that's not entirely accurate. I do love my BB NE2, for sure, which is purely active. It is such a great sounding bass (you managed to get your hands on one yet, Andy?) But my post earlier today about playing my BB 1025 (which is purely passive) confirms that I think that's also a bloody brilliant bass. My 735A I will play both passively than actively. On the other hand my Ibbys I will play almost entirely actively. So I think the more accurate answer is I like both, it will depend on the bass and the preamp, and also whether in a particular setting I need to cut through a bit more on particular numbers, in which case having active EQ on tap can be just the ticket. @krispn has just made some very good points, much more articulately than the response I'd started drafting!

So the neck through just looks great. It's supposed to improve sustain and they're still doing in the NE2. But if you blind tested a BB 3000 and a BB 1024, I wonder if you could tell them apart, other than they were different rather than one being noticeably better than the other? I guess Jack is someone who can ask for a white finish and Yammy will say "sure" or whatever the Japanese for that is

Fair do's. And if they brought out a BB 735A in a neck-through they could take a grand off me too, no question. I'd add another £50 on top if they did one in white 😁

> £1,000 plus shipping. Seems a fairly "full" price. Fortunately it's got a string missing 😁 And I'm not sure it will sound any better than a BB 1024 which will set you back less than half that? I was about to say there's even a 1024/X in the FS, but just checked and they've ALL gone! But maybe I'm just completely missing the point...

Thought I'd take my BB 1025 for a little spin with a new 4 piece outfit who met up for the first time last night. Ended up at the Pirate rehearsal studio in Greenwich. Apart from being very hidden (is that like a requirement for rehearsal studios?) it was actually pretty well stocked in terms of back line and all included in the price. Ashdown RM and Ashdown cab provided for me to play through. Well I was (genuinely) looking forward to trying a different rig out. But what is about Ashdown cabs at rehearsal studios that they are always beaten up (even when relatively new looking as this one)?! I hit the A note on the E string and the cab starts 'farting' like it's just had green veg only for the past week. The rest of the band (typically) didn't seem to mind too much, saying "they have heard worse"...Anyway we all know that the folk most bothered about bass tone (and rightly so) is us bass players. So I set up my trusty BF SC and DG M900 rig which I had brought along just in case. We weren't playing too loud so, for once, I didn't stick plugs in my ears at all during the rehearsal (partly also to be listening out for what the new guitarist was doing). What I heard coming from the bass rig (no compression, no pedals, just bass amp and cab) I just loved! So what's the point of this rambling post? Well it's simply this: those of you who have Yamaha BB1024s / 1025s, if you're not desperate to have the additional option of an active preamp on your bass then you absolutely shouldn't feel you are missing out by not having a BB 734/5A, you've got a really fine piece of kit in your hands.

On overall compactness / weight / power / cost I'm finding it hard to better the Alto TS308 as a decent little floor monitor. Given the positive feedback from folk who have owned or just heard them, I think that's where I'm landing for our band. Either way, it should be a step up in sound from the Behringer B205D. We've got our next pub gig in a couple of weeks when we can put it through its paces.

Well that's still better than "KFC...with triple gravy!" 😂🤣

Surely the best advice is surely to start with a door stop / Stylophone and work up? 😂🤣