neilp

With respect, what codswallop. If you're using your eyes to keep you in tune, you can't be using them for watching other musicians. You need to stop denigrating the tried, tested ways. Yes you can achieve what you think you need NOW, but further down the line the fact that you cut corners and relied on lines will come back to bite you. If lines were the way forward, trust me, I'd be using them. So would every string player in the world. They don't help you develop a technique or an ear. And as for artists using their ears to paint.... a bit like suggesting someone uses their backside to talk

Who has time for kudos? It's about the fact that I find it easier to make good music and play in tune without trying to use visual clues to get a result that is non-visual. You don't use your ears to help you paint...

Yhe point is he hasn't, and no good string player has, learned where every note on the fingerboard is, he's learned how the shifts work and how the intervals feel in different positions. Its how we should all do it, fretless or not

I think that statement is a nonsense, to be honest. It doesn't take 35 years. The dots are more use than lines anyway. Try it. Give yourself a few months. If you can play in tune with lines, you will be able to play better in tune without them, and you'll find you have more brain available for playing music. Just as for all string players, you should be focussing on the hand that actually makes the sound, and that's not your left. Sheku Kanneh Mason has no lines on his cello, and he's only 20..... Learn to do it without the training wheels

Final thought. I have 3 fretless basses. The Wal has no lines, the Cort has no lines, and the Squier has lines. I was recording recently with the Squier, because I wanted the woody, hollow Jazz Bass sound. Listening to the tracks back, I realised I was fractionally flat ALL THE TIME. Nobody has complained about my intonation in years, so I was a bit shocked. Ended up playing everything again on the Cort. Came out spot on. The Cort and the Wal are both gigged far more than the Squier. Anyone want a nice VM Jazz with J-Tone active electronics?

No, really? The point is there is no need for lines. Do what violinists do and use your ears. Jaco had lines because he took the frets off a standard Jazz, not because he needed them

There is no such thing as a lined violin, viola, cello or double bass, and there's a reason for that. The lines actually make it more difficult to play in tune... counterintuitive, but its true

To be honest, it doesn't really make much difference. I would go with unlined and trust your ears. It will take you less time to really nail the intonation if you do without the "crutch" of lines, which dont help much anyway. Even unlined basses usually have dots on the side of the board to help you navigate, and I think that's all you need. Have fun!

I will accept that I'm very lucky to be in the orchestra I play in, with a first-rate conductor who spends time on details and insists on standards that most amateur orchestras can't match. It's hard work, granted, but Neilson 5 is perfectly doable too., just find the patterns and work on it. This stuff is important to the work. Put some work in.

You may well be right. I'm on a mission to change that in my little patch of the UK though. When did I last eat a Wotsit? Long time ago....

I think your real world must be different than mine. What is this "snack" of which you speak?

So many players give up before they've even tried. When I was in Youth Orchestras (NYO even) I thought the last movement of Tchaikovsky 4 was almost unplayable. Now? Simple... Look at the notes, work out your fingering and practice. Practice at a speed at which you can play it, and keep practicing at that speed. Vary the rhythm - dotted semiquavers, triplets, whatever you want - but keep practicing slowly. The key is not to practice it wrong. You should be playing all the notes. There is a reason the composer put them in..... Last thought - if your conductor REALLY didn't notice the sketching, you need a new conductor! Ours would notice, AND he'd pull us up on it.

16ths are called semiquavers in the real world...

I love the Wal too, but the Aria was my first "proper" instrument, and I think had a major influence on my playing and my sound. It's been with me since 1984, I couldn't imagine not having it... The Wal doesn't have the emotional attachment, as wonderful as it is...

Interesting Bilbo. If one of them had to go, it would be my Wal Custom fretless. I'd keep the SB1000. I love them both and have no intention of parting with either, but the Aria is burned into my soul....

I own an Aria SB1000 which I bought in 1986. Its a 1979 bat-ear model. The quality of this bass is at least the equal of any bass I've ever played (bear in mind I also own a Wal....) and it will be the last bass I ever part with. It's a wonderful instrument. I hate to agree with you bassasin, but I think maybe you are talking rubbish lol. Look at the things Ibanez and others were selling bassists in the late 80s, and the colours.....

No. I have four basses and a double bass that are going nowhere

I have a violinist friend who currently plays an unattributed, unlabelled Italian Violin. The wood has been dated by dendrochronologists to 1722. The general belief is it's a Strad, but there's no proof, no provenance. It sounds AMAZING. Big, powerful, bright but smooth. Typical Strad. It's worth about £20k because it has no name and no provenance. No-one hearing it would doubt the quality, but price and value are not always the same thing

Not just the neck. New bass bar almost certainly, quite possibly half-edged more than once. And the ARE the pinnacle of the musical instrument world

I think maybe there was more craftsmanship applied to the building of Fender basses particularly, so the "subtractive" effects of poor assembly are less, and it's also pretty clear that there was a great deal more high quality timber available even 40 years ago than there is today. There are other factors that may come into play, like finish, wiring etc but those are much smaller, less significant factors. In the end, though, its all highly subjective. If you don't hear the difference, then for you it doesn't exist. In the audiophile world, people pay crazy sums for mains power leads that can not possibly make any difference to sound output, and swear blind, in the face of all the evidence, that they can hear the difference. It's for you to decide. If you want the older instrument, buy it. Don't ever try to tell a violinist that his Strad is past it. Having it makes him a better player, for a whole heap of reasons, not all related to any quantifiable superiority in the instrument. There are far too may factors involved to try to give a definitive answer

With electric, solid bodied instruments, an awful lot depends on the signal processing you apply. If your amp is run with lots of headroom, clean and with the EQ flat, no effects, the yes, you'll hear differences. If you have EQ'd and compressed the signal and applied effects to get "your tone" then of course you won't hear the differences. I have the instruments I have because I love the way they play and sound, and effects are just that, and used very sparingly FOR EFFECT. The difference in sound between a 66 Jazz and even a VM Squier is easily swamped by EQ and effects, but it is there.

I have work commitments on most Saturdays, won't know till nearer the time

For anyone who's in Surrey/Sussex area, I run a bass workshop every month, usually either a Monday or a Friday depending on demand. All ages, all standards very welcome. We try to have fun as well as learning. Message me if you fancy coming along.

I think I'd drive, if at all possible. The thought of my bass in the hold of an aircraft terrifies me....

And if you changed that ridiculous key signature to one sharp, you could play the whole thing as a rising line, which might be even better. After all, could be argued that the first bar-and -a- beat has been taken up an octave, totally ruining it...