xilddx

[quote name='DanOwens' post='1016504' date='Nov 8 2010, 04:03 PM']You see, I thought about buying that pedal but because it's so different. The sound it creates (apparently a mix between bandpass and ringmod) would further set me out from the crowd. Egocentricity encased in a genuine need to sound cool. And don't get me wrong, I'm happy to eulogise about my set-up and explain it all and offer advice as to how to do what I do better than me because I can learn and then develop, then explain, then learn etc... I suppose once you get to the heart of it it comes back to the friends episode where Joey suggests that Phoebe try and [b]do something truly altruistic and she can't because at the end of it all, we are all self-concerned.[/b] I'm an unashamed socialist and a teacher; I thrive on collaboration and development but there's still a part of me that wants to be the best (or as my article rather startlingly describes it - I want to seen to be the best). Dan[/quote] I was at a Q&A with Scott Thunes yesterday and he said, as humans, we all want to be No1, except when playing with Frank Zappa, where you wanted to be at least No2

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='1016487' date='Nov 8 2010, 03:51 PM']Inflexible in what way?[/quote] With my POD, I can change any setting and combination as I need for choruses, flangers, compression ratios, delays, reverbs, distortions, eqs, gates, etc. without having to do anything more than stamp on a button. A pedal is capable of many variable sounds but you can't easily change them while playing the bass.

[quote name='Bilbo' post='1016469' date='Nov 8 2010, 03:36 PM']What did he say? I can't read..... Can you imagine how limited the internet would be for you if you didn't read? Now transfer that to music [/quote] You would get around that with technology like blind, or people with impaired vision, do.

I've had boutique and Keeley-mod pedals for guitar, but I got them for their sounds. I got rid after a while and purely for practical reasons and sheer versatility, I got the POD X3 LIVE. I don't know what I would do without it now. I have no desire for pedals, to me they are inflexible for a live situation. The only floor unit I have ever had an envious feeling for was ped's bass synth - the tones coming out of it were incredible.

[i]"there are a great number of bass players I know who also want to distance themselves from the ‘quiet-but-reliable guy at the back’ image constructed by the media when writing about bassists. These players want to make big strides towards new and interesting sounds in the same way I do, but the distance we put between ourselves and the perceived norm seems like a caricature of teenage rebellion"[/i] You forgot people like me who dress up, dance about, wear black gloves and use DR Neons

I'll be honest, apart from seeing my hero Scott playing bass to Zappa again, the whole experience left me cold. I thought it was all very competent, but I felt empty inside. Great to see Scott though, all I could do was see him, I couldn't hear him because the sound was so poor near the front. The Q&A on Sunday with Scott and Jeff was interesting, but woefully short at 1 hour.

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='1016281' date='Nov 8 2010, 12:58 PM']I would agree, but many won't.[/quote] That's as may be. Another element is that we probably don't value our abilities enough, given from what I know of your personality. We both likely believe we are pretty ordniary and that most people have our aural skills, but I think we may be a lot better than we think we are. I'm starting to wonder about this a bit more because I base a lot of my thinking about music upon my own experiences and abilities. I lived with a sitarist for a good number of years. She is still the best musician I know. She studied with possibly the best musician on the planet, Ali Akbar Khan, and her uncle was a very well known sitarist. Indian ragas are are melody only, over a drone, but the complexity of rhythms is much more advanced than western music usually is, so is African drum music. Rhythms within rhythms. So, there is so much more to music than just theory, notation, learn it or don't learn it type questions. The real questions are to know yourself, and do what is appropriate to further your vision or desires. We don't teach philosophy in schools here (beyond the basic religious texts), maybe that is what we should all learn earlier on in life, to know oneself. After all, I have met so many musicians who don't think about such things, and maybe that is hindering their ability to make music too.

I think, Pete, that maybe people like me and you, who have a good few years playing in various situations under our belts, who don't really know much theory and have very poor reading skills - take our aural and technical skills for granted. A lot of people don't have those natural abilities and may need to learn more formally. My first music lesson as a teenager were all about learning theory and reading. But it wasn't really explained to me in a way I understood, and it really put me off, for a very long time. My heroes were people with great ears and some formal training though, Randy Rhoads, Michael Schenker, Edward Van Halen, Steve Hillage. Having, or developing, a great ear so you can recognise intervallic and rhythmic relationships is vital if your are to express yourself, as only then can you hear the music a split second before you play it. Whether you can put a name to them is a different matter and depends on what you want to achieve. The real question is probably MUSIC - LOVE versus MONEY? Or BOTH?

Right, thank you for all your very kind and humbling comments I am delighted!! I've wanted a bass that looks like Chris Squire's modified Electra Outlaw MPC X610 for quite a while, but with the cost of getting a body made being about £300 from any decent luthier, it was a bit prohibitive. But my mate Adam agreed to make one for me for the cost of materials. Naturally I gave him double that for his time and effort, Thanks Adam So with that in mind I bought a B stock Warwick Rockbass Streamer Blackhawk from Thomann to scavenge for the neck and other parts. It was actually a starter kit so it came with a Warwick 30w amp, strap, cable, gigbag, etc. I sold everything on ebay I didn't need. All I kept was the neck and the pickups. It's time for a bit of a review of it, and some pictures and a better video of Tempus Fugit, I made too many mistakes in the last one so I did it again. Here is it, followed by the pics and review. [u][b]Parts, Cost and Spec[/b][/u] £35 : POSTAGE COSTS - for parts (I was not charged duty on anything from the USA! Lucky that ) £100 : BODY - Seraya Mahogany. Made by my mate Adam. £65 : BODY FINISHING : Tonetech Luthier Supplies Oly White pre-cat Nitro rattle cans x 3, sheets of wet and dry, milliput, tack rag. £90 : NECK - 3-piece Maple/Polished Rosewood 'board. From a Warwick Rockbass Streamer Blackhawk B-stock starter kit for £260. I sold the amp and other hardware and kept the neck and the MEC pickups so I made about £130 back. £26 : NECK INLAYS - Creative Cuts Roman Numeral Vinyl. £40 : PICKUPS - MEC from the Rockbass Streamer Blackhawk. £90 : TUNERS - x 4 Hipshot Ultralite GB7 Gold (from USA on Ebay). £45 : D-TUNER - Hipshot GB7 Gold (from USA on Ebay). £90 : BRIDGE - Hipshot Black Brass Rickenbacker Replacement (from USA on Ebay). £73 : PICKGUARD - Mirror blank from WD (£28). Made by Jon Shuker (£45). £89 : TOP NUT - Warwick Brass JAN-III £8 : NECK SCREWS & BUSHINGS - Gold- From Warwick in Germany. £9 : BARREL JACK - Gold- From Warwick in Germany. £20 : STRAPLOCKS - Gold- From Warwick in Germany. £215 : EAST PREAMP - U-Retro 4-knob Gold. This is a new product and not on his site yet. It's basically the 5 knob U-retro with the Blend and Volume as a stack. £25 : STRINGS - DR Black Beauties 105 - 45 (from USA on Ebay). [b]£1,020 : TOTAL BUILD COST[/b] (A f*** of a lot more than I intended, but worth it!) The bass weighs 9lbs 13oz so it feels fairly heavy, but the bridge alone weighs 1lb 8oz! [i][b]Body and Neck[/b][/i] The body is a three piece made from Seraya Mahogany (Philippine Mahogany). 44mm thick. My friend Adam made it for me to my design. He did a cracking job and even though he's never made a neck pocket before, he did it beautifully and it fits like a glove. It's finished in Tonetech pre-cat nitro Olympic White. No clear coat. It took three rattle cans. The body was risky because grave doubts were raised about the balance. But I knew the body was heavy at 44mm and the hardware was heavy too, also the Hipshot Ultralite tuners weigh next to nothing. In the end, this is a perfectly balanced bass. It has a Hipshot Bras Rick Replacement bridge. Simple, beautiful, great engineering. It would have been even better if it was top loading but we can't have everything. I fitted gold Warwick security locks which work perfectly and look nice. Jon Shuker made the pickguard to my 1/1 scale drawing and it is a superb piece of work. The neck is fairly chunky, nearer to Warwick necks from a few years back than their current ultra-shallow necks. I like it though and I'm used to them. It's essentially a chunky Jazz neck with a nut width of 38mm. Perfect for me as I don't like P-Bass width at all. The fingerboard is glassy, highly polished and highly figured rosewood, plastic side dots and has a Warwick brass JANIII top nut which I bought as a serious luxury item (£89 ), it is superb though I sanded off the Rockbass logo from the headstock and truss rod cover and have left it plan black. On went the gold reversible Hipshot Ultralite tuners and a Hipshot D-Tuner (Bass X-Tender). [u][b]John East Preamp U-Retro Deluxe 4-Knob[/b][/u] John is a very helpful and very nice man. We had a chat and he recommended this pre. It was easy to install as there is no soldering required. It has a Blend/Volume Stack, Bass/Treble Stack with Pull for Bright, and Mid Sweep/Boost0Cut Stack, and a Passive tone circuit knob. It's very easy to use and works brilliantly. I love this bass, it plays very smoothly and sounds a bit like a Rickenbacker. It has a tight low end which needs a bit of boosting as it's not as resonant as my Warwicks, but it feels more controllable. It balances beautifully and is very comfortable to play. Strings are DR Black Beauties. Cheers all.

[quote name='JTUK' post='1015182' date='Nov 7 2010, 12:48 PM']No, that is fine...no problem. Just pointing out that this was called as a wind-up thread a good few pages ago. It will surely be called upon again some time soon. Most can see that .... but sure, I am not participating, so carry on. Doesn't matter to me either way. As you say, I'm out.[/quote] I never meant this as a wind up thread. I meant it to be an interesting intelligent discussion. If I meant it as a wind up, it would have been easier to call it "JTUK is a Twat. Discuss.". I don't think you're a twat of course.

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1014938' date='Nov 7 2010, 01:13 AM']Judging by this answer I would say he knows more theory than you. That may be wrong but you can see how wrong it is to say someone doesn't know theory because they don't take every opportunity to flaunt it like Wooten flaunts his flamenco slaps. He clearly showed facility with the topic at hand and might have been toning down his answers for the mouth breather that asked him what kind of pick he uses. [b]I think you need to reassess your assumptions on Chris. Or at least phrase things as a question and not facts[/b].[/quote] That's a fair point. I think my being on here so often, and reading music magazines, means that when I think of THEORY, I think that means having a thorough grasp of THEORY and its application. So that, like a jazz improviser, they know exactly what they are playing and how it relates to the music they are playing over so it informs their note choices. I don't believe that knowing a few scales, some of the notes on the bass, some chord intervals and being able to recognise a perfect fourth, or a minor seventh interval constitutes a thorough grasp of theory and application, and that's the premise of my OP. Chris Squire is not Janek Gwizdala when it comes to theoretical knowledge and sight reading ability, that is very clear.

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='1014303' date='Nov 6 2010, 02:34 PM']Nige, it may be pretty basic but it's still theory. I have to say these threads are amongst the most depressing on BC - and that's saying something.[/quote] Well I don't want you to be depressed. The great ambiguities of music, and art in general, are what keep it alive and kicking. Discussing them may enlighten and help form opinion. Even if there are no concrete answers. If you still get depressed, then I'd advise you avoid those things that make you feel depressed.

[quote name='skej21' post='1014286' date='Nov 6 2010, 02:07 PM']I think I would have to disagree. My bass tutor/s have always told me that you should understand as much as possible and then choose to leave stuff out. Bassists without theory knowledge and technical ability are limited in what they can play, but a lot of players who get so theoretically/technically competant find it difficult/"below them" to play "easy" lines which results in overplaying. This is just an issue due to lack of discipline IMO and I think it's better to have a wide knowledge base and be selective in what you play across a large variety of music, than be a player with no knowledge and no choices. That IMO is the best way to work.[/quote] I agree. A cabbage with theory is still a cabbage.

[quote name='skej21' post='1014255' date='Nov 6 2010, 01:38 PM']Hell no! I'm a bassist which means I can't sing (unless it's at a poor backing vox standard!) [/quote] I meant in your head, you can HEAR the sound of a whole tone, or whatever, scale in your head.

Just got the orange ones today and put them on my Corvette Fretless. They look incredible, even in normal daylight. God knows what they are like under a black light. I got them from Guitarsuperhero on ebay for about £20 including shipping. Bargain. Only took four days to arrive aswell. Acoustically they sound rich in the mids and bright, and they reek of quality!

[quote name='risingson' post='1014214' date='Nov 6 2010, 01:14 PM']I think if you have to think that hard about music whether you're theoretically competent or not then you're going about music the wrong way. Nothing should have to be hard when you play your given instrument, the short and tall of it is that knowing your theory means that you're less likely to hit a wall in your playing where you're struggling to understand what to do next. This doesn't necessarily mean that you require 4 years of formal training and a doctorate in music, it really is just common sense. For example, knowing how harmony works and what makes up chords, knowing rhythm and knowing how to transcribe stuff by ear is going to further you as a musician whether you choose to use these skills or not (quite frankly it is inevitable that you will as a bass player). I don't know much about Chris Squire other than the fact he was (is?) Yes's bass player but he seems like a good musician. Would he be a better player if he knew his theory? Maybe. Would be be a more competent musician? Undoubtedly. All I know is that people some musicians writhe when they hear theory being discussed because they naturally assume it's all about sitting down in front of a page of dots... that's not what theory is about, it's about knowing what your doing in any given situation. If you choose to use theory minus any sort of dispassionate approach to music e.g. start reharmonising things that don't need reharmonising and messing with the head of the keyboard player and guitarist, then that's indicative of poor musicianship. Simple. Bottom line is it never hurts to know what you're doing.[/quote] I think you're right for the most part. The fact is, if you have a crap ear, or can't THINK music, no amount of theory or reading is going to elevate you from being a machine operator. Just like knowing all that theory won't make you into a great songwriter. It's really all about whether you have an aptitude for making music, a kind of instinct and desire. The rest is all augmentation and helping make you the most EFFICIENT and PROFESSIONAL musician you can be. Therefore, knowing theory and being able to read notation can NEVER be a negative.

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='1014006' date='Nov 6 2010, 09:23 AM']Thank you for recognising that. It's exactly why I posted the video.[/quote] Yes but come on guys! This is pretty basic stuff. I know what things sound like and can sometimes put names to them, it's not rocket salad is it, for someone who's played that long. Can you tell the sound of a minor scale from a major? Most musicians can. BUT, if Wakeman said "Chris! Would an A[i]b[/i] Diminished scale work over a D Minor chord sequence modulating into E Major?" would he be able to answer? That's the sort of thing I mean by THEORY. Not, knowing the sound of a whole tone scale, most of us could probably sing that couldn't we?

[quote name='Bilbo' post='1013716' date='Nov 5 2010, 08:21 PM']Yes, they would.[/quote] Interesting

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' post='1013576' date='Nov 5 2010, 06:18 PM']This thread is pointless,File it with all the others! I have actually started changing if I can or cant read in different threads just for shits and giggles! The top and bottom is people have different tastes in music. Beethoven does nothing for me I would rather hear Sid viscous thrashing it out and we all know readers who are to us "better" than non readers and visa versa anyone who has decided all readers are better than none at all levels is an arse![/quote] You think my question is entirely invalid then, do you?

[quote name='Spoombung' post='1013697' date='Nov 5 2010, 07:58 PM']Yeah but he has big thigh boots.[/quote] I know, and I want some!

[quote name='Wil' post='1013411' date='Nov 5 2010, 03:28 PM']Ruffle. It's ruffle. Sorry, I had to say it. [/quote] You're quite right, I was using JTUK's term. Attempting to rattle feathers is a complete waste of one's time

[quote name='JTUK' post='1013401' date='Nov 5 2010, 03:20 PM']Why would I want to do that....? I think you are well aware how contentious this can get and you might be in the mood today to rattle a few feathers as is your want, sometimes. IMO..of course.[/quote] I think it's you rattling feathers, as is YOUR want also, on a thread that has been very civil and much more valid than the usual polarised and angry discussions about theory and reading. It's all in the title mate.

[quote name='JTUK' post='1013333' date='Nov 5 2010, 02:09 PM']or cares.. I think this is the 4 page argument thread isn't it..?[/quote] Who's arguing? Go to the Wolstonholme thread if you want to start an argument.

[quote name='ThomBassmonkey' post='1013285' date='Nov 5 2010, 01:35 PM']Agreed, but with all the patterns in theory it's easy to fall into using them. I'm in that trap at the moment (and well aware of it, it's something I need to sort out), that's not to say that theory's holding me back or that I'd be better off without it, but getting past that point is my next obstacle that I need to over-come to improve my playing. I still generally hear basslines in my head and work them out when I'm writing, it's more jams where I can get stuck doing the same things. If someone wrote songs by playing and testing things, sticking to the same few patterns would hold them back so in that sense it would be better to be without the theory (or progress past that stage). [b]Some people aren't as naturally musically inclined as others and for them, having a framework of patterns to work off would be like using a crutch instead of learning to walk on their own.[/b][/quote] Mmm, it's an interesting point.

[quote name='ThomBassmonkey' post='1013164' date='Nov 5 2010, 12:14 PM']You say he couldn't be any worse with formal training, but some people people learn theory and stick rigidly to it, losing some of the feel on the way. Not saying that's the case here, but theory's not good for everyone.[/quote] I think it's down to how creative and confident people are. I can imagine there are some people out there would would actually go backwards while going forwards but really is down to their own lack of confidence to break out of established thinking. These people were rigid anyway and probably didn't have much to give to the general public anyway. I can't really see how learning theory and notation can hold anyone back. I can see how it can have little point in some circumstances though.