Annoying Twit

[quote name='SteveO' timestamp='1396866688' post='2418051'] absolutely, but your 2 examples of 8/8 demonstrate my point that the time sig does not dictate the feel or rhythm, it just indicates the convention being used to chop the tune up into bars. Perhaps I am being too literal with the op question "does everyone know their time signatures" [/quote] That's not quite right, as the beats are emphasised, but the divisions aren't. Hence, the 4/4 and 8/8 examples have the beats in different positions, which makes the rhythms quite different. It's not just a matter of counting, but a matter of distinguishing beats from divisions. Hence the 4/4 and 8/8 examples I give have very different feels/rhythms. Count them out, emphasising the beats, and de-emphasising the rhythms, and you'll see what I mean.

[quote name='Phil Adams' timestamp='1396865510' post='2418017'] I thought 3/3 was waltz time. See, I never said I know my time signatures. [/quote] Unless someone comes along and corrects me (which I would be grateful for), as far as I know what I've written above is pretty much what anyone not super-adventurous in music needs to know about time signatures. Apart from songs with sections in different time signatures (Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds) and songs that drop in an occasional bar in a different time signature (Crowded House's "Kare Kare") and songs that have a complicated time signature which is alternating bars of different time signatures. E.g. one bar of 3/4 followed by a bar of 4/4 and repeat. That's different from 7/4 as the 1st and 4th beat of the two bar group would have equal emphasis. Oh and people like Zappa deciding that they're going to write music on the synclavier which is one bar with 32 divisions, one bar with 31 divisions, then one with 30 divisions, and so on until the end of the song 32 bars later. There's not really a lot to learn in terms of time signatures. Then the theory based player can get on with using the theory.

[quote name='SteveO' timestamp='1396860069' post='2417924'] What is there to know? top number is how many per bar, bottom number indicates what it is you are counting. Some time sigs conventionally have a particular feel i.e 12/8 is usually 4 sets of 3 quavers, but not always. 5/4 is usually played as a group of 3 crotchets then 2 crotchets, occasionally 2 crotchets then 3 crotchets and sometimes 2 crotchets, 2 crotchets and 1 crotchet to finish the bar. The point is that the rhythmic feel of the music is not indicated or dictated by the time signature, that is in the phrasing of the notes. [/quote] It's useful to know the difference between simple, compound, and odd time signatures IMHO. E.g. 4/4 = simple, 12/8 = compound, and 8/8 = odd. For Ed: A simple time signature is one where the beats are divided into two. E.g. 4/4 = 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and 3/4 = 1 and 2 and 3 and 7/4 = 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and 5 and 6 and 7 and Compound time signatures have beats divided into three. E.g. 6/8 = 1 and a 2 and a 9/8 = 1 and a 2 and a 3 and a Odd time signatures have beats that are divided into different numbers of divisions. E..g 8/8 = 1 and a 2 and a 3 and 8/8 (another one) = 1 and 2 and a 3 and a 12/16 (I hope one example of) = 1 and a 2 and a 3 and 4 and 5 and The reason the two 8/8 rhythms aren't 4/4 is that they are odd time signatures, and we have already used 4/4 for the simple time signature given above, so we have to use 8/8. Try counting a 4/4 beat by reading out what I've written (but loop it). Emphasise the numbers and de-emphasise 'and's and 'a's. Then try the 8/8 examples. You should find that both the 8/8 examples are quite different rhythms than the 4/4. Similarly for 3/4 versus 6/8. Music written in 4/4 should sound different from 8/8, but admittedly I'm having trouble writing something for drum machines that I don't naturally count as 4/4 when I listen to it.

I feel that I know my time signatures. However, the other day I was trying to program 8/8 time signatures into a drum machine, and everything I did sounded like a funky 4/4 beat to me. In that if I just counted naturally along with the beat, it would be 4/4. However, I find it easier to come up with basslines that are 8/8 rather than 4/4, as with arpeggios it's easier to distinguish the (typically for me) three beats of an 8/8 bar. Coming up with basslines that sound natural, not forced, for even simple time signatures such as 5/4 and 7/4 is quite a challenge though. I seem to end up with something that sounds like it's naturally 4/4 but is either missing a beat, or has an additional spurious beat. But, I'm happy to at least be aware of what I'm not able to do so that I can work on it. I frequently ask quite skilled musicians if they can tell me the difference between 4/4 and 8/8. It's very surprising how few can. Even though simple introductions to music theory (such as 8notes.com) cover it.

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1396784471' post='2417233'] Long ago, when I first started playing the guitar in my teens learnt where the notes were in the major, minor and pentatonic scales were and that was it. I never practiced playing scales because I never played them in my songs so I couldn't see any point. Pretty soon after that I stopped playing the notes that were supposed to be right according to the key of the piece and started playing the notes I could hear in my head when I listened to what the other instruments were doing. I took a little longer, but the parts I was playing were far more interesting. These days conventional scales seem to have little part in the music I'm playing. The baseline to the verse of "SpiderQueen" contains every semitone from E to Bb and adding in the chorus and playing something a bit more complex using the notes of the guitar chords would allow me to play every note in the octave except Eb and I'm sure I could shoehorn it in somewhere in make it sound musical if I really wanted. And this is just a simple punk rock song... [/quote] One thing that's interesting in your post is that you do actually quote a song which has a bass line that can be inspected. Do you have a tab of the bassline to this song, or should I work it out by ear to see what you are doing. (I'm guessing the song is on youtube or similar). However, your post does seem to suggest that knowing theory is in some way a disincentive to use notes that aren't in the key that is currently being played. Is this an accurate interpretation of your post? And if so, why would knowing a scale be a disincentive to use notes not in the most appropriate scale (if any) for the music currently being played? Wouldn't it make it easier to deliberately choose notes not in the scale, because the player will know which notes these are?

Here's a Gear4Music not-amazingly-cheapie neck through. Brand new for £189 including postage. http://www.gear4music.com/Guitar-and-Bass/Oregon-Neck-Thru-Bass-Guitar-and-Case-by-Gear4music-Natural/8FM?origin=product-ads&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=&utm_campaign=PLA+G4M&utm_content=vshj0Orl%7Cdc_pcrid_30515377999_plid__kword__match__&gclid=CPe00JeDzb0CFe6WtAodJy4AXg Or, buy one second hand on ebay for £195, collection only in Twickenham. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/OREGON-NECK-THRU-FINE-WOOD-FINISH-GEAR-FOR-MUSIC-BASS-GUITAR-/161269832964?pt=UK_Musical_Instruments_Guitars_CV&hash=item258c6e5d04

[quote name='HowieBass' timestamp='1396725949' post='2416867'] I'd want to check what the top C sounds like with the bridge pickup, the string isn't too well placed over the poles. [/quote] Exactly the same problem was pointed out when one of these Fanndecs was discussed in a past year. Reviewing those threads suggests that my visual tastes have remained fairly constant over the years, but my long term memory is abysmal. In a previous thread Jon Letts discussed a number of apparent fit and finish problems with one of these.

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1396728635' post='2416904'] We'll have to agree to disagree about this. Just because some of his work is musically simple doesn't necessarily make it conservative in my book, but of course your mileage may vary, etc. Look at the range and variety of styles and ideas on 'Apollo', for example. [/quote] I was talking about the application of musical theory in composition, as that's what's relevant (in my opinion) for the subject of this thread. Apollo: Atmospheres and Soundtracks has pieces that are mostly just sequences of quite simple chords. What makes it interesting is the degree of minimalism (a musical theory in itself), and the voicing/synthesis programming/production of the pieces. Compare Apollo to, say, Zappa's Jazz From Hell.

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1396724492' post='2416832'] I wouldn't call Brian Eno 'musically very conservative'. The opposite, in fact. [/quote] In the arrangements, maybe. But his actual composition is quite conservative. Simple chord progressions and melodies. Look at the chords for "Spider and I". http://tabs.ultimate-guitar.com/b/brian_eno/spider_and_i_crd_796920id_02032009date.htm Look at Sky Saw. http://tabs.ultimate-guitar.com/b/brian_eno/sky_saw_tab.htm It has that John Cale viola and interestingly arranged Percy Jones bass (from memory), but musically it's quite simple.

I really like the look of these Fanndecs. However, I've never played one, so don't know what they're really like. On previous threads on here, I think some people said that they're quite decent. [url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/FANNDEC-FRETLESS-6-STRING-THRU-NECK-BASS-ACTIVE-WALNUT-/321359455675?pt=UK_Musical_Instruments_Guitars_CV&hash=item4ad28425bb"]http://www.ebay.co.u...=item4ad28425bb[/url] My memory is *%&£. I searched through past history here, and while I've posted listings of these since 2011 (oh, if only I'd practiced an hour a day since then with no dropping out), no-one seemed to have ever played one. And the original new listings for these suggest they were a relative 'internet cheapie'. I still think they look really nice though.

Interesting idea. Buy the kit, and convert a small sized classical guitar. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/DIY-bass-ukulele-kit-build-your-own-electro-acoustic-U-bass-/261444702139?pt=UK_Musical_Instruments_Guitars_CV&hash=item3cdf518fbb

[quote name='Dr.Dave' timestamp='1396710076' post='2416663'] Know my scales ?? God , no ! I don't know the names of the notes above the fifth fret. I just do it. No idea how and I can't remember what it's like to not be able to play anything I want. Not that I'm advocating anyone do it my way. It's a good thing to have as much musical knowledge and theory as possible and I'd encourage any player to get those skills. It's just that I couldn't be arsed. [/quote] I would expect that you probably have a lot of musical knowledge and theory, but probably developed through trial/error and flexibly reusing patterns from songs that you know. Maybe you don't know the names for the concepts you've (re-)discovered, but I'd be very surprised if there isn't a whole lot of reusable bass music knowledge in your head.

I agree. The North Star looks very nice. But I'm not sure about the Noveau. I prefer the look of some Wishbasses. The Noveau probably comes with better quality finish though.

When I see discussions about music theory being 'limiting', my response is to ask people to name some music that wouldn't have been written by someone who understands music theory. Many of the most outrageous composers who broke all the rules had a very good understanding of music theory, e.g. Zappa, Stockhausen, etc. While some composers who don't have a good understanding of music theory are musically very conservative. E.g. Brian Eno. A knowledge of 'the rules' is as much an invitation to break them as it is to follow them. And if someone understands their scales, then they know what they are doing when they go outside the boxes. I seem to recall reading a quote by John McLaughlin saying that he knew what every semitone sounds like in all tonalities, Personally my impression of people who avoid music theory is that they spend all their time rediscovering the lydian mode or the VIIm7b5 chord, and then congratulate themselves for going into uncharted territory that no theoretician would every find. However, on the other hand it may help with inspiration if people believe that they are exploring uncharted territory, this may be more inspiring than if they know that this has all been done many times before. George Martin reported that the Beatles were very excited by the last vocal harmony chord of 'She Loves You', saying that it had never been heard before. GM said that he told him that the chord (a major 6th I believe) had actually been used in music before. I don't know if there is really much in the way of music that can't easily be reached from standard scales. On youtube there's an example where someone solos over a chord with 40 different scales. It's very interesting to hear how the first few scales put really interesting different flavours into the music, but after a while, there are considerably diminishing returns. I would like to know where this music is that will sound good and natural, and isn't accessible through theory. And by "accessible through theory" I include modifications such as playing the Mixolydian mode, but playing the major 7th on descending runs. (I bet this actually has a name ).

After reading this thread I went off and learned the Byzantine scale (one of the scales that is referred to as the 'arabic' scale).

My Rockbass 5 string is pretty simple. It does have two pickups, and a tone control. But, since changing pickup or adjusting the tone control makes pretty much no difference to the sound at all, they don't really count.

That's bizarre! This aspiration standard has reasonable, if not mega-cheap, postage, and had a 99p start will no reserve. We'll see what it sells for. [url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Overwater-Active-Electric-Bass-Guitar-ex-display-item-ex-dem-new-Pearl-Black-/171287931026?pt=UK_Musical_Instruments_Guitars_CV&hash=item27e18e6892"]http://www.ebay.co.u...=item27e18e6892[/url] From a personal, short term, point of view, it's to my advantage if there are good quality basses available for not a lot of money. However, having perused the original (?) tanglewater thread http://basschat.co.uk/topic/82230-overwater-basses-by-tanglewood I wonder if lack of resale value will damage the bass market in the long term. If basses don't have reasonable resale value, then that will discourage people from buying them new. And that will discourage companies and individuals from pursuing the same sort of project in the future.

"as it's only a Northern Song." The Beatles (written by Harrison) to continue: Flesh and bone by the telephone

"but I just met a lady called Dinah Moe Humm". Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention Over-nite Sensation. To continue: "Four turkeys in a big black car"

[quote name='UglyDog' timestamp='1396367422' post='2412759'] "I'm trying to sell it babe, honest, look here's the advert... it's not my fault if the market's sluggish is it? Look, why don't I just keep it for now and we try to sell some of your shoes instead? You've got an awful lot of them and... love, put that kitchen knife down... you've got a lot and you've never even worn some of... ok, joke's over, put the knife down... errm, sweetheart..?..." [/quote] I feel flattered. http://basschat.co.uk/topic/233173-this-is-what-i-have-to-put-up-with/page__view__findpost__p__2407885

Now, this looks fantastic IMHO. I lowballed it, but was instantly outbid by a previous bid. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Ibanez-Musician-MC900-Vintage-Active-Thru-necked-Bass-plus-high-quality-case-/111314627229?pt=UK_Musical_Instruments_Guitars_CV&hash=item19eade6a9d

I've been impressed, so far, at how much using a Behringer BDI21 makes a passive bass active. The EQ seems very useful. Hence, while I'm unlikely to buy anything in the very short term, I'm curious to know what other bass preamps are useful, and in particular which ones would be even better than the Behringer. I note the recommendation of the Fishman outboard. What other options are there, and would they be better than the BDI21 in active-ising a bass?

I have a Shine SB26. I removed the pickups to swap them for different ones. I just checked the original pickups, and can only tell you that there are no identifying marks on the pickups, front side, or underneath. BTW: When I swapped the humbuckers for blade single coils, the sound didn't change all that much. Except that I can now get the blade magnets much closer to the strings with extra grunt due to that. So much grunt that with the pickups proper close I can't use all of the bass boost at full volume or the preamp distorts. But, the pickup swap suggests to me that the sound of the SB26 is more due to the wooden bits of the bass and the preamp, than the pickups. Not quite sure that this is a useful post in any way, but this is the internet...

I sometimes think we should have a thread for basses which are not in any way notable, but where a listing is good value and someone might get a reasonable deal. E.g. this: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Yamaha-4-string-frettless-bass-RBX270F-/321366059904?pt=UK_Musical_Instruments_Guitars_CV&hash=item4ad2e8eb80 RBX270Fs seem to go for about £100-120, so someone could save about, oh, £20 quid over a normal purchase here. But, there are no claims that it is a prototype made in the Matsugen factory, there are no used sanitary napkins sitting on a table in the photo, nothing particularly discussable at all. It just seems to me to be a reasonable, if not exceptional, deal. For anyone who lives near Salisbury.