neilp

On 05/07/2021 at 22:24, Dad3353 said:

Hmm...

If you try to count 1.2.3.4. all the way through, there'll be moments when the '1' is no longer the '1'. 

No, we're thinking about it wrong. The drums are in 4 all the way through. Trying to play it with different length bars is what makes it difficult. Forget the notation, listen to the song, count it in 4 and follow the drums. I promise, it will make sense

On 06/07/2021 at 00:09, Dad3353 said:

The pink sections are the non-4/4 bars (2/4 and 5/4...). There's a metronome click to help illustrate, with a slightly stronger '1'.

No, the pink sections are parts of a longer, 4/4 phrase that have accents shifted from where the typical back beat would put them. Count it in 4, listen to the drums and it will become clear

On 01/07/2021 at 21:45, Dad3353 said:

No, that's the same tempo (150..?) for everyone, but some bars are 2/4, others 4/4 or 5/4 (but the drums stay on 4/4 mostly, really...). Several time signatures, but all the same tempo. Here's an obscure example of polytempo; be warned, it's not easy to listen to or to play; it's for that reason that polytempo is so rare...

Allstar, Smash Mouth ...

All of the bars are 4/4. The thing that varies is the length of the phrases, not the tempo or the time signature. Thats why so many people struggle to play it, they try to divide up the bars differently. If you listen to the drums playing the straight 4/4 you can then place the phrases against that, and it's relatively simple as long as you can play the riff rhythmically

2 hours ago, NickA said:

My new cello bridge cost £154 fitted ( no adjustors of course ) the blank was the best (despiau, grade A, C02) one they had in stock at £84, fitting £70 (an hour's and a bit work I guess). They didn't do all the fancy stuff of removing and shaping bits of the bridge blank that some people insist on.... but it fits the belly and the finger board curve perfectly; for a £10k istrument it's fine .. seemed a bit harsh at first but now played in nicely.  If I had a £100k cello I might be more fussy! 

The nearest equivalent despiau 4/4 DB bridge I found is £117, same price with adjusters pre fitted if you drop a few quality grades. Quite adequate for most us amateurs I'd imagine.

Admitted, if you want the finest grade A blank, custom carved, then fitted with the finest ebony adjusters, it's going to cost!

NB it's not the Jag technician you're paying for, it's the fancy show room, the massive tooling cost, an overweight management structure and the profit margin that heads off to India! 😉

Well aware of that, I work there! But at the end of the day, what you're paying for matters far far less than how much you're paying!! My feeling is, given how often you need to change a bridge, paying a bit extra for the best blank and the best job is well worth it, if you can. Given how much some people spend chasing the "perfect" set of strings!!

On 09/06/2021 at 20:27, NickA said:

Certainly is.  Whether or not it makes a difference .. I don't have a clue.

 

Ouch!!! just OUCH.  That seems unreasonably expensive.  I was going to get an adjustable fitted to mine ... now (being somewhat unemployed) maybe I won't.

Have you ever seen how much work goes into turning a blank into a proper, fitted bridge? Never mind the extra work to fit adjusters properly. To give you an idea how cheap luthiers are, an hour of the time of a "technician" at a Jaguar dealership hereabouts will cost you £200. Compare the skill levels....

Best - I can't choose, so either Q Tips at The Lakers Hotel in Redhill early 1980, or Springsteen at St James Park in 1985

Worst - Bad Manners at Bristol University Students Union in 1984 (I think). Dreadful, chaotic, awful sound, out of tune, apathetic drivel

I'm not a huge fan, but U2 were and are the tightest band I've ever seen. Clayton undoubtedly has the ability to play lots and lots more notes than he does, but makes the CHOICE not to. No way a band can be that tight and powerful with a bad bass player.

20 hours ago, Dan Dare said:

This. Songs, films, paintings, sculpture - in fact, all art - reflect the time and the culture they were created in. If they don't please or suit you, don't sing, play, look at or listen to them. But please don't whinge about or attempt to "cancel" them. I don't like the great majority of films. The gratuitous violence, covert (and overt) political agenda they promote and the manipulative appeal to base emotions in most irritate me. So I don't watch them (don't even have a telly). However, I recognise that others are free to make their own choices.

I don't think anyone has raised the idea of "cancelling" anyone or anything, the discussion has all been about personal feelings and personal decisions. And if songs, films, paintings or sculptures reflect attitudes from the time and culture they were created in, and those attitudes (racism, approval of slave trade, misogyny for example) are generally deemed by modern society to be unacceptable, what is wrong with refusing to play, listen to or look at them? Or should we just allow these toxic attitudes to hang around?

It's German, maybe 1920s/30s I reckon. Scroll looks quite nice, shame someone cut the hatpegs off! It's been in the wars though, those new bits of wood in the ribs don't help its cause any and there are lots of cracks in the top and the back. As it doesn't look great, its value depends largely on how it plays and how it sounds. Could be a grand, could be 3 or 4....

6 minutes ago, EssentialTension said:

Maybe  adifferent thing but ... Muddy Waters knicked it, then the Small Faces knicked it from him to get it ready for Led Zepp ...

 

Marriott always said he was happy, even flattered, that Plant borrowed so much from that song. And after all, however much all the Zeppelin bashers go on, it's mostly sour grapes over the success. Whole Lotta Love is a much better, more interesting song

On 02/01/2017 at 20:54, Winny Pooh said:

Alanah Miles' Black Velvet has some tasty playing on it FWIW

That record is a synth. I don't know why, it's dead easy and sounds better on a fretless. I like Tony Levin's playing, and Tony Franklin may be the best thing about The Firm

On 22/04/2018 at 06:49, phil.c60 said:

You clearly didn't read the line that said "if we decide that the feel for the song is...." I think that's got "feel" covered. Then he needs to count us in reliably when we're gigging. Forget the maths, try literacy.

You don't need it counted in at 129 or at 130, you need it counted in at the tempo you decided on at rehearsal. You don't even need to know what that tempo is in BPM, as long as you know how it feels. Counting in is no different than playing. If you use loops etc you might need a click. Otherwise keep the mechanical timekeeping out of it and learn to play the song at the right tempo, judged by how it feels. Metronomes are a practice tool.

3 hours ago, MacDaddy said:

 

would you keep wearing your trousers if they were too tight?

Why accept what you have if you can change it to what you want? Most of my guitars have re-shaped necks, or upgraded pups, or chamforing.

Not my basses though 😜

I think the answer to that is "no reason at all", except that I think it tends to become a displacement activity for some, like the endless search for the perfect strings that some double bass players get involved in (honestly, who has time for messing with mixed sets of strings????). I think the answer to most of the problems people encounter with neck profiles, balance, string spacing etc etc is simply to play the bass and get used to it, and focus on making music. Just my opinion, not saying anyone is wrong, just that there's a risk of too much focus on the gear.....

On 02/06/2021 at 18:45, TheGreek said:

I have no issues with either J or P profile necks. The only bass I've ever had issues with the neck profile was on a Wal.

So in my collection I have two Aria SB1000s - one fretted and one fretless, a 2001 Epiphone Thunderbird, a 1985 Wal fretless and my first ever bass, a Satellite Jazz copy from 1979. All very different neck profiles, which is an issue that, being honest, I never even think about. In the same way it would never occur to me to worry about what wood a bass is made from. If you don't know, you can't tell from listening. I think we all worry about these things far too much. Consumer culture has taught us to expect to have EXACTLY what we think we want, regardless of its actual merits. GAS at work.....

On 29/05/2021 at 17:53, Ricky Rioli said:

I remember Noel Gallagher's unconvincing attempt to roll back his estimation of them as "bedwetters" 

While I entirely agree with this particular opinion, I don't think I give a flying f-ck what that whiny, arrogant tosser or his lairy brother think

2 hours ago, neepheid said:

Am I being oversensitive if I pick up a sanctimonious "if you don't take a spare bass (and whatever else) to the gig then you're an inferior bass player" vibe in threads like these?  Some of you might just want to rein that in a little - some people can only afford one bass.  Some of us don't take it as seriously as you - I regularly play in an originals band which hasn't "made it" and therefore gets a derisory token gesture of renumeration for our troubles, so excuse me if I lift a finger to that in my own lazy way because I don't particularly feel "professional" in this scenario.

 

Yes, you are being over sensitive! I think it's about how you view the whole thing. Being unprepared certainly doesn't make you an inferior musician, but it might make you a less reliable, flakier band member. I make no judgement, but I would be pretty whizzed off if my guitarist or  keyboard player didn't have spares and it ruined the gig....wouldn't you? At the absolute minimum spare strings, batteries, leads, DI box and some tools. If you really only have one bass and can't afford another one, fair enough, but be as prepared as you can be, surely? The lazy one finger says it all, really....

If I'm being paid for a gig, then yes, I always have backups (bass and amp). Mind you, the gigs where I would play one bass throughout by choice are pretty rare, so I normally have a fretted and a fretless at least. Spare batteries and strings too. I don't think it makes a difference what kind of gig it is, if you're being paid then it's a professional engagement and you should be prepared as best you can.

Having said that, I've never broken a bass string and I can only think of one occasion when a battery died!

If you want a real challenge, play them "at pitch". Certainly the first three are doable, (prelude to 3 is tough if not played in thumb position) and your thumb technique will definitely improve. Some of the intervals are actually quite a lot harder if played down an octave, and there are some string crossing issues (arco players) which are much more easily resolved in thumb position. They make great studies for electric bass.

It's worth remembering that a lot of folk have spent a great deal of money acquiring large numbers of basses - many more than they actually need to cover every genre of music in existence! That is absolutely fine and a choice that we're all entitled to make, but when hard times come and you find that you don't have savings to fall back on, it's probably worth regarding the dozens of basses you've acquired over the years as your savings. And because they are consumer goods, and subject to the normal rules of supply and demand, you might find you would have been better off stashing the fivers under your bed. You might not, of course, but that's a chance you take when you "invest" in things like basses.

The fool, usually

On 18/05/2021 at 12:25, leftybassman392 said:

Without wishing to sound contentious (no, really), I have to say that quoting singers like these as a reason for not using pitch correction is not an argument I understand. Are you saying you shouldn't use pitch correction for fear of missing out on another Rod Stewart?

 

I'm not saying you shouldn't use it, I'm saying that it's unnecessary in 99% of the situations it's used in, and devalues the efforts of musicians to express themselves. Some (quite a lot) of the expressiveness of musicians is down to being able deliberately to vary tuning, and Autotune is used far too much, in my opinion. It is just my opinion.

On the other hand, if it means we don't get another Rod Stewart, wheel it in and set it up!!!!

On 17/05/2021 at 23:17, leftybassman392 said:

Not aimed at anyone in particular, but...

I don't buy the 'things produced in a studio aren't real music' line. Of course it's real music! It has notes, tunes, chords, rhythms and everything else that makes music music (and please, for goodness' sake, don't talk to me about live music having a 'soul'). To claim otherwise frankly looks perverse to my jaundiced eye; it just hasn't been done in the way you would like to see it done is all.

[/rant] As you were.

To me, notes, rhythms, chords and tunes are the least important parts of music. Granted, they are necessary for something to be called "music", but are they sufficient? Not in my book. Your view may differ, but I want to hear the people, and hear them expressing some joy in what they do. Even if it's angry joy!

I think the point I'm trying to make is that when I listen to music (and I totally accept that this may not be true for you guys, or indeed anyone else, possibly!), the thing I am most interested in hearing is the individual character of what the people involved are doing. If there are mistakes, that's fine, all musicians make mistakes. If there are so many as to detract from the music, it means the musicians are not good enough. That's true whether live or recorded. Once you autotune and grid the whole thing, you remove a lot of the humanity from it, and I personally lose interest. You may not. Each to his own I guess

5 hours ago, WinterMute said:

They are entirely correct that recorded music is a poorer version of the original performances, as it relies on mics, speakers and psychoacoustics to recreate the original in an inferior manner, however, I can't actually fit a symphony orchestra or Rush in my living room or car, much less have them play for me on a packed tube train, so what are you gonna do?

Purists gonna pure.

Speaking as a veteran audio engineer, the worst possible start to a session is some musician saying "can you make it sound exactly like it does live" the answer to which is invariably "no". We can certainly approach that vibe, but even binaural recordings of performances are artificial recreations of a moment in time. The moment a microphone is involved the music becomes a different animal. We accept the conventions of recording as a necessary evil so that we can enjoy the music we want to listen to, when we want to listen to it.

Even the mighty Deusche Gramafon record to Protools and edit bar by bar these days.

That's the point. It's not even a poorer version, it's just an imitation of a performance. The performance will never be the same twice. Nothing to do with mics or speaker or plug-ins.

7 hours ago, leftybassman392 said:

while industry professionals tend to do what needs to be done to fulfil the customer's specifications. You pays yer money and all that...

 

 

Who is the customer? The listener? Has anyone ever asked what the listener wants, or Has the fact that these tools are available meant that engineers use them , and distributors (I won't call them Record Companies, because they're not any more..) then come to expect the "polished", "perfect" sound on all recorded media?

I know what the answer is, by the way. The consumer was never given the choice.

A similar discussion was had many years ago when I was at the Royal College of Music. A world renowned pianist and conductor voiced the opinion that recorded music was not in fact music at all, because music (sound) does not persist in the real world, so recorded music is at best a facsimile, and if lots of tools are used to "correct" and "polish" the facsimile, it very rapidly loses all similarity to an actual performance. I'm approaching all this from the point of view of a musician, not an engineer, mathematician or studio rat. Discuss...