Bassassin

[quote name='jihemt' post='17745' date='Jun 14 2007, 05:45 PM']what would be, according to all of you, the "average" price for theses ibanez copies ?
i'll maybe sell mine (maybe !!!) to get money to buy a "real" 4003 that a friend of mine plan to let go...
cruel dilemmna !! [/quote]
Depends if you can get an Ebay auction to run to completion without it being pulled by the RickenCops. I've seen them fetch around, and slightly over, £500. That's specifically Ibanez-branded ones, because Ebay idiots will pay a premium for that name. I've often commented on the ridiculousness of that, given that I've seen real Ricks sell outside Ebay for not much more.

Your Ibanez probably wouldn't get as much in a private sale, though - "Ebay Madness" is a big factor!

How much is your friend looking for for the 4003?

J.

[quote name='Happy Jack' post='17270' date='Jun 13 2007, 11:02 PM']Another "Ibanez" surfaces ...

[url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rickenbacker-Copy-Bass-Guitar-in-case-for-restoration_W0QQitemZ250130079834QQihZ015QQcategoryZ4713QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rickenbacker-Copy-Ba...1QQcmdZViewItem[/url][/quote]

Unusual to see a Southpaw - the only other I've seen is Deksawyer's (did he come over from BT or get sick of all the running & hiding?) and his is an Ibanez.

Strangely, if the number the guy quotes is a serial number, it looks consistent with Fuji Gen numbering, so it might in fact have been sold as an Ibanez. Wonder if it has checked binding?

J.

[quote name='David Nimrod' post='16965' date='Jun 13 2007, 03:41 PM']Geddy talks about being 'funky' but although I rate him as a rock player, unless I'm missing something, he just ain't funky![/quote]
No - much as I love him, he's one of the most funk-free bassists ever! I can only think he means contextually - funky compared to [i]La Villa Strangiato[/i], rather than funky like James Brown!

J.

It doesn't understand plurals of the same evil word, either:

[member of the ladies tennis circuit]
lesbians

WT[push in the truck]?

J.

It's also upset by certain anatomical terms, which are neither offensive nor insulting, such as [Mars and Venus], [Allota Fagine] or [Skoda Fabia], yet we can all say vulva, clitoris, testicles and scrotum without hurting anyone! Isn't that nice?

It also seems to like a profusion of terms for hardcore [men's crack florist squad] sex activities, too. Except for [lucky dipping].

J.

dlloyd - we're probably broadly singing from the same hymn sheet - my daughter (who's 14 now) started swearing like it was a "naughty" thing when she came into regular contact with a range of children from various backgrounds, once she started school. Prior to that, I'd not really attempted to shield her from bad language - but she would really only hear it in context, so it wasn't something she was any more likely to repeat than stuff about basses!

However it was important to contextualise it once she actually started using it - telling her that random swearing just made you look a bit dim, rather than it being shocking, was effective - but the fact she'd heard these words in context and attached little importance to them, made it probably quite a lot easier.

I'd still maintain UK based web forums won't be subject to the Public Order Act, any legislation is a lot more likely to be comparable to the kinds of laws that govern print publication or broadcasting.

Any language filter is going to leave the original point /intent of the word concerned plainly apparent - which is really why they're little more than prudish irritations, in my opinion. I was particularly irked by the new one here when it suddenly started making PM correspondences unreadable - I'm sometimes apt to express myself with a bit more colour in a private correspondence - but evidently not private enough.

And the last bit proves my point - pretending people aren't swearing ain't gonna make 'em play nice!

J.

[quote name='dlloyd' post='16352' date='Jun 12 2007, 04:56 PM']Okay, I wasn't aware that you were that serious about it. I'll take you through it.

It is inappropriate to swear in front of children.

You swear loudly and repeatedly in public, particularly in front of kids, and you'll soon attract the attentions of the law. Sections 4 and 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 as ammended by POA 1994 and all that.

You can argue a defence based on reasonable use, or that your words were not intended in an abusive way, but that would involve a court appearance and most people go with the caution.

Do you consider internet forums a special case? That they shouldn't be subject to the same norms of communication as "real life"?

Replacing the words with thinly disguised euphemisms is another matter, one that I wasn't really touching on.[/quote]

"Inappropriate"? Why? Are you speaking strictly from a legal perspective or is that a personal moral standpoint? If the former, it's outwith what I'm really interested in discussing, if the latter, your personal values are your own concern & I won't argue with that - but it's always interesting to hear reasons, rather than unsupported absolutes.

Internet forums [i]aren't[/i] subject to the laws you mention - which is why they self-regulate, as this one is attempting to do.

"Replacing the words with thinly disguised euphemisms" is really the whole point of this discussion – remember your earlier point was this:

[quote name='dlloyd' post='16252' date='Jun 12 2007, 02:28 PM']I'd feel the same if we were talking about an adults only forum, but (and maybe I'm making assumptions) this forum should be open for everyone including 12 year old kids (or younger) who may have just taken up the bass. I think the language should be tempered accordingly.[/quote]
- Where you support the forum's censorship in order to make it suitable for younger users.

The examples & legal recourses you mention are extreme, and entirely inapplicable to an internet forum. As I mentioned before, the original BW had no profanity filter, yet I very seldom encountered any "offensive" language there, and when I did, it was at least contextually relevant.

The nature of self-expression via keyboard is entirely different to "real life" and hardly comparable - it's simply not possible to have the kind of spontaneous outburst of profanity you describe - on the contrary, everything you read is by comparison, very carefully considered. That makes it hard to see autocensors as doing anything useful, beyond imposing predetermined prudery upon users - often with the sort of idiotic results we've been seeing lately.

The other side of this is that for any remotely articulate person, it's incredibly easy to be massively insulting and offensive, without any recourse to profane language at all.

J.

[quote name='dlloyd' post='16322' date='Jun 12 2007, 03:57 PM']It's one thing for kids to be discovering the complexities and delights of adverbial epithets for theirselves. That's fine and expected although not all kids choose to use flowery language. It's another thing for it to be imposed on them from adults using a public forum. Think of it as an extension of real life... swearing is generally tolerated in an adults only situation, such as in a pub. You do it repeatedly in a shopping centre where families are walking past and you'll get a seat in white van with fluorescent detailing.[/quote]

Aside from the fact that all you appear to have done is re-state your original comment with added verbosity and thesaurus consultation, rather than actually hint at a reason [i]why[/i] you think it makes any actual difference - in what way then, do you consider that a piece of software on a forum, which substitutes "inoffensive" words and phrases for "bad" ones - while still allowing it to be [i]perfectly and abundantly goat-buggeringly obvious[/i] what the poster typed originally - offers any form of "protection" to a child's tiny, fragile developing sensibilities, from the crass vulgarity of adult communication?

I think if you had much contact with or experience of kids, you'd actually discover that many of them don't so much "discover the complexities and delights of adverbial epithets" as use them as punctuation. Much like their parents do.

J.

[quote name='dlloyd' post='16309' date='Jun 12 2007, 03:36 PM']I'm fully aware of how some kids use language amongst theirselves. But there is a big, big difference between this and adults swearing in front of kids.[/quote]
Would you care to elaborate on the nature of the difference? I'm not challenging your opinion necessarily, just interested.

J.

[quote name='Hamster' post='16295' date='Jun 12 2007, 03:19 PM']Most posters seem to be able to express themselves without the use of sexual swear words....[/quote]
[i]Quod Erat[/i] funking [i]Demonstrandum[/i].

That's the entire [i]point[/i].

J.

[quote name='dlloyd' post='16252' date='Jun 12 2007, 02:28 PM']...this forum should be open for everyone including 12 year old kids (or younger). I think the language should be tempered accordingly.[/quote]

So that means we should also have a filter that translates everything into txt spk? an we shud rite evthin in lwr case n not acshly bothr 2 try n spel cus its 2 time cnsumin?



J.

[quote name='Oxblood' post='16281' date='Jun 12 2007, 03:07 PM']Now that's interesting, Jon. So you can see the whole word unmolested, yes? On my screen it came out as S[flower of power]horpe![/quote]
I can, yes. But if I embolden the emotionally damaging & psychologically scarring bit, then I see what you see. I really think the author of this useless piece of software was a right talentless lady's front bottom. And very obviously, an American.

BW didn't have a "won't somebody please think of the children" filter, and oddly enough - no one died.

J.

Is an autocensor really necessary - personally I find having my self-expression tampered with, as if I was a 7 year old, or an American or something, massively more insulting than any "bad cusswords" people might use. I hate this sort of thing. Besides - they can always be circumvented.

And how come it lets you get away with Scunthorpe?

Jon.

Bignose out of Rush, talking about his playing style, the various different instruments he's used, his influences etc, and even plonking around a bit on a bass:

[url="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6814432195895010358&q=geddy+lee"]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=68...amp;q=geddy+lee[/url]



Jon.

[quote name='jihemt' post='15404' date='Jun 11 2007, 07:06 AM']looks good...i'd like to find one in jetglo ! but i only saw the one in bass center, which is too expensive and look quite ugly with its strange bridge pu...[/quote]

Dunno why, but most of the old copies came in that unconvincing yellowy-pink fireglo, or maple. The only ones I can think of which were available in black were Ibanez. You could look out for a later Ibanez copy, which had "proper" Rick-style pickups rather than humbuckers - but they're even rarer than the type you already have.

A guy who used to post on BW/BT (not sure if he came to ChaseBat) had a left-handed one.

J.

A Shaftesbury:

[url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=002&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=120130590110&rd=1&rd=1"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...p;rd=1&rd=1[/url]

Apparently the fact it's been touched by some talentless oxygen thieves is a point of interest.

J.

There's been a lot of speculation about Lemmy's maple board Rick on the RickResource forum - most people reckon it's a copy, but one guy says he read an interview where Lem said he visited the Rick factory & they had this one-off prototype - which he promptly bought.

Doubt he remembers the facts himself!

All of Lemmy's Ricks are wildly customised anyway, so it's really difficult to try & identify from photos. I've never seen a Rick copy like that, though - and I've seen one or two!

There were quite a few Japanese copies with maple boards, though (my Rickenbugger has one) but all the ones I've seen have triangular position markers (sometimes in black) rather than dots.

That there Tuxedo Rick is lovely - probably better with the stripped finish, IMO.


Jon.

A "Rockinbetter":

[url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=014&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=330130375664&rd=1&rd=1"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...p;rd=1&rd=1[/url]

£499 BIN. Looks really tacky.

J.

Blimey - can't do five easily. No way could I limit it to 5 current favourites, but I'll try early influences whose playing I still love:

Geddy

Dennis Dunaway

Jean Jacques Burnel

Mark King

John Entwhiste


- and a cast of thousands...

Jon.

[quote name='Russ' post='11919' date='Jun 4 2007, 04:36 PM']These ones...

[url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=010&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=200116205993&rd=1&rd=1"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...p;rd=1&rd=1[/url][/quote]
Yep. Picked one up last summer, we were considering doing some "unplugged" stuff & busking (never happened, drummer freaked at the idea of not having a proper kit to hide behind. ) and it was surprisingly OK.

Unrepentant bin-diving gyppo that I am, I bought it as "damaged/repairable" off Fleabay for a tenner! Mine was a fretless, and the "damage" was a neck with a pronounced back curve just before the nut, meaning that it was quite buzzy (but not unplayably so) at the first position marker.

Otherwise it played very nicely. Sounded pleasant too, both unplugged, and particularly amplified. The downside of the medium-scale & small body is that it's not very loud, & struggles against an acoustic guitar when not plugged in. However, for just mucking about at home it's fine. Plugged in is much better - the preamp & EQ was very useable and it really sounded impressive for the cash. Have to say, I didn't try it at high volume, so I don't know how prone to feedback or other resonant nastiness it would have been in a gig scenario.

It was also very solidly built - no idea what sort of woods used (mine was a natural finish) but it was pretty well put together, as far as I could see. One suitably tacky detail was the decorative soundhole rosette - it was actually one of those glittery holographic transfers! Somehow it suits it!

Anyway - not having a real use for it, and not having room to justify keeping it, (and of course being a bit of a gyppo) - I put it back on the Bay & sold it for considerably more than I paid.

But really, if I had acoustic GAS, I'd definitely consider another one, if (and I realise it's a pretty big "if") mine was anything to go on. Can't go too far wrong for £59 - or only £53 for this one:

[url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Electro-Acoustic-Bass-Guitar-new-43in-Pink-Pink-Pink_W0QQitemZ200116205995QQihZ010QQcategoryZ4713QQcmdZViewItem"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Electro-Acoustic-Bas...3QQcmdZViewItem[/url]

Man enough?



Jon.

[quote name='Bloodaxe' post='12734' date='Jun 5 2007, 11:02 PM']On the possible bargain front is [url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ARIA-PRO-II-2-BASS-SUPERB-QUALITY-VINTAGE-AND-RARE_W0QQitemZ220118549443QQihZ012QQcategoryZ112668QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem"]this oddity[/url] - looks like a hybrid Aria/Vantage. Certainly in need of a bit of TLC, be interesting to see what it ends up at.

Pete.[/quote]
Been GASing in that thing's general direction myself - it doesn't appear in any of the Aria catalogues or listings on Matsumoku.org - but I have seen one before. Back in the 80s I was big into a band called The Armoury Show - their bassist, Russell Webb, played the exact same thing. Sounded great, too.

Just did a bit of digging & found a pic:

[attachment=468:armouryshowbass.jpg]

Jon.

[quote name='Sercet' post='11920' date='Jun 4 2007, 04:37 PM'][url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120116534644"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...em=120116534644[/url][/quote]
Thanks for finding that.

Lovely bass - is it the same, & how much was the one you saw, Mart?

J.

This is actually bugging me intensely - one of these (or at least, sounding like the description) appeared on Fleabay maybe about a month ago. I watched it until the price went over what I was prepared to pay & then I deleted it. The listing won't have expired yet, but I can't find it!

The bass itself was neck through, symmetrical body, single pup, not a copy of anything, but quite Alembic-ish, like many MIJ basses from the era. It was Japanese - had a black /gold MIJ sticker on the back of the head, & "Lincoln" on the front.

If I find the listing, I'll link it here.

Jon.

[quote name='TheRev' post='10610' date='Jun 1 2007, 03:42 PM']Was the 4005 the semi acoustic one? I seem to remember Mani's splattered one had a slash shaped soundhole.[/quote]
Yep - that'd be a 4005 - rare as rocking-horse poo, them.

Going to contradict myself, too - that's a 3000 Mani's playing in the pic - medium scale version of the 3001. And I think that's what the Arctics geezer's playing, as well.

J.

Go back with a camera!

Jon.