itu

Tuners to both sides of the headstock, like 3+1, 2+2, 3+2. I also like the idea, that the strings are inline from bridge to saddle to tuner. Zero fret and string retainer if needed, phosphorescent side dots are a must. I hate front dots/blocks. I am very bad in designing, that's why links: https://gb.pinterest.com/b25976y/guitar-headstock/ https://www.shutterstock.com/gb/search/guitar-headstock https://www.guitarpedalx.com/news/gpx-blog/the-shape-of-a-guitars-headstock-has-a-significant-impact-on-tuning-stability

As @bertbass wrote, it takes time to find the right gauge. 30-90 was very fun in the 80's. I have tried flats, tapes, bronze, nickel and SS RWs, groundwounds, exotic tunings, piccolo sets etc. I have listened to other people's comments about "the best" set, but in the 90's I started a comprehensive (and pricey!) test of different materials and gauges. B is 120 now, and as slapping isn't needed/wanted/popular anymore, the SS RW 40-95 has been the choice, for me, that is. Testing different sets is time consuming and costs a lot, but after that you know what you want. I use D'Addario and GHS, because of long scale basses, 34"-36". I know nickel would be very suitable for fretless, but I only buy two brands and two sets, and they are always at hand. I tend to change a set every 4-6 months depending on the use.

I bought an MM4 tinted in green with matt lacquer and no front markers. It has very good profile to my hands, and it is as wide as a P (checked this from Dawn). But they refused to sell any other headstock design. I had to ask for a Status neck (like a wide 5), but they said that all other neck designs are sold only as complete Status instruments. Fair game. I sold my first Status lined fretless neck years ago. It was a thin J that I didn't like so much, but this MM4 is excellent. I suppose @Kiwi has to specify the details, and then we'll see his selection of necks. Were the dimensions good or bad to me does not matter, his work matters and is super interesting.

If you start a loudness war, no wattage will be enough. Learn to play hard by thinking your stuff is hard. It is not done with volume, and it sounds very different, much better. (Hard to explain, but when you hear the difference, you understand this.) If something is not heard, lower all other channels, do NOT push more volume!

1) Connect mixer to the same outlet as everything else is to avoin ground loops. 2) Connect all cables. 3) Check that the main output ("MAIN MIX") is set to lowest. 4) Turn the units ON starting from the mixer, like the signal is flowing (while turning OFF, do it the opposite way, from speakers towards the microphones). This way you avoid pops that may come from the equipment. If you look at the desk, think the signal goes from top to bottom, and then from left to right. At this point every pot should be set to noon, and sliders to their lowest position. Connect a mic to the Channel 1. Set the slider to 0 dB. Start to talk something to the mic (1,2,3...) and slide the MAIN MIX until you hear something from the PA. If you hear nothing, check cables, slide MAIN MIX down and check that the power amp is ON, and the levels are set to noon. Try the MAIN MIX again. Do it slowly. If you get sound through the system, you should know something about the channel strip. GAIN sets the level of the channel and is dependent on the program (mic, line). You turn that clockwise until you get distortion to the sound, and then slightly back. Set and forget. Keep in mind that now is a good place to name the channels. If 1 is for your vocal mic, name it so. LOW CUT is very feasible for vocals, because feedback starts from the low end. Low frequencies are not needed so much with vocals. You can think that the full bandwidth is divided from the lowest frequencies like this: BD (bass drum), bass, guit/keys, vocals, high stuff like some percussions. If you push lots of stuff to vocal frequencies, the voice will need more power, or then it will be buried under that everything. This is approximate, and you have to make trials to understand this. With equalizer you can free more headroom to vocals. COMP is also useful with vocals, because it amplifies lowest levels and the highest are sort of limited. You get fuller vocals, but this effect needs some testing to get the best out of it. EQ, as I said earlier, feedback starts from low, and vocals don't go very low. Therefore you can cut LOW say 3-9 dB and emphasize HIGH like 3 dB. MIDS you need to test: this board has semi-parametric mids. While singing, test it by turning MID to -15 dB and turn the FREQ back and forth. Then turn MID to +9 dB and do the same. Some complicated spaces may benefit a lot from this MID/FREQ, if the sound is lacking something, or the feedback tries to push through. Use the MID/FREQ like a notch filter (-15 dB), and turn the FREQ to tame the feedback frequency. And if you turn all up, something is wrong. Separate EQ from GAIN. Use EQ to cut any problematic frequency. AUX is most likely not needed here, yet, but it is very usable feat with monitoring etc. You can think it like control of a monitor mixing level. FX is simply commanding the amount of effect you use. I suppose your favourite will be REVERB 01 HALL, because it makes the vocals fuller. See the upper right side of the mixer. Lots of effects may be fun for some time, but usually any effect should be spice, not an ingredient. PAN is a bit like balance in HiFi. With PAN you can adjust the stereo picture. From the hall side the leftmost singer will be panned a little towards to the left side (PAN is viewed from the hall, not stage). If you listen to 1950's up to early 1970's recordings, mixing could have been panned from side to side: "Let's put vocals to right corner along with bass and kazoo, drums should go to left, and so will rhythm guitar". This kind of mixing sounds very strange nowadays. If you need to mix anything past 9 dB, check why? Now you know the very basics, and the rest is using the system a lot. Try to understand the placings of the sources in the mix (PAN), and in the frequency bands (EQ). Then it is easier to make reasonable choices when something doesn't seem to work. Every room is different, and when you go out gigging, you may need to adjust EQ quite some. Remember to use your phone camera to reset the mixer to your basic settings (rehearsal place or similar). Every mixer works more or less like this, although they may look different prima vista. Just think a second, and you are ready to go. While doing everything in a similar way in the beginning, it will give you more self confidence to manage the system well. And it is very good way to learn while asking a seasoned person to help you. Hope this helps.

A mold costs around £3000-15000. It needs some fixing, and its lifetime depends on the material (cheap and soft aluminium, or hard and pricey steel). Therefore the real price will certainly be higher than the given cost. And as the 4 string bass is the most common (90 % of all basses?), I would start with it.

Which I think is so cheap: I would like to see shapes from other decades than 50's. I do not play surf. But commercially it most likely is the road to happiness.

Of all 4 string carbon necks I've played I like Status MM4 a lot because of its profile. Vigier Passion II has another good profile. This is naturally subjective, because I've heard someone to love Steinberger (feels awkward to me). Five string is a more complicated topic. Most of the necks are with 17 mm string spacing and it is too tight for me. Modulus has thin and very playable neck but I never felt the spacing comfortable. I have found that spacing varies between 14 and 21.5 mm from bass to bass, and (18-)19 mm feels the most natural (to me, that is). I think that a 18-19 mm spacing allows tighter spacing, too, if the bridge allows it. But 17 mm spacing will never make 19 mm possible when the neck dimensions hinder it. Scale lengths, I like to be on the longer side, 34-36". But the spacing and neck profile are much more important to me. Why have I chosen graphite over wood? Environmental stability. No need to adjust. Black looks good. Matt lacquer feels good under the thumb. Tinting or the top twill gives a nice touch. And I don't care about suitability to some body or neck pocket dimensions. Neck is the thing and everything else follows that. (Brass or steel screw inserts, please.)

1st 4001 GT MG Genesis 5 Vigier Passion series II DB Clevinger 5

Do they sell some Pinoability along with the bass? Just asking for a friend...

That was the original reason I have used that in few of my basses. Simple blend pot cuts highs and with a vol they change the sound.

I'd go with a switch: ser/par, or ser/single. The more you put pots to the signal, the less you get highs when the impedance gets lower. Every pot in a signal means that they act as tones, too. That's why I like Mixpot.

Boss SY-1 has similar feature. It tracks surprisingly well, although I feel that it makes a calculation and follows after a short delay, like after the Attack (ADSR, anyone?). But if there's any signal coming in, the note stays there for ages.

That body colour is nice, but I will not hunt that one because of the not dark fretboard. I have played a nice Pensa-Suhr, and that I would buy, but it has disappeared completely.

I saw the gig where Clarke, Wooten and Miller were playing together. To me the whole set sounded lame, because it felt like a set of showoffs, but no songs/music. There Miller was probably the best while backing up his two colleagues. When he started to thumb, the feel was lost just like with the two others. I have seen Clarke soloing with his band and it was a really good show, likewise when Wooten was playing with Bela Fleck.

Smörgås? I may be Danish. Could it be Rutgerssån(g)?

If you want B/T/tone, and blend/vol, your wish not to have stacked pots is rough. However if you leave T away, put the output jack to side or back (consider Strat style plate, like in Ritters have), you could have 4 pots in the front. Or if the T has switch and works as a tone, too, that would do. I think John East had one option, where all adjustments were divided to separate pots, but I couldn't find it now. His preamps are highest end, and are designed in a very interesting way. John used to design mixing consoles, and it can be seen in his creations.

A preamp may have some or many of the following features: - active mixing (instead of two vol, or blend) - bass -middle - treble - semiparametric eq - filter - tilt eq - individual adjustments for two pickups or coils On top of that there may be: - ser/par/single switching for pickups or coils - pickup selector - passive, or rather, hi-Z switch - hi-Z tone During the years some effects have been built to basses, like fuzz, and comp. Even a headphone amp. List the feats you want, and we can try to recommend something suitable to your bass.

@spyder: two more to reach 5.

Use a name tag Björn Svensson. Tape the bass with a SAAB or Volvo or Bahco logo, and the amp with an SSAB. SSAB is a metal company, as far as I know. If I remember right the bass string core comes from Sandvik.

...or disco lights.

I can see tin, and components, but the iron has been cold on the table.

I think - although not my idea - that a good sideman is far more important than a flashy soloist. It may even be so that a flashy soloist can be a lame sideman. Such a player may not be the best bandmate.

In Japan people do pronounce R very close to L, which they do not even have in their kanji, hiragana, or katakana. Therefore the seller looks a lot like a Japanese person. I have heard that they have learned English with their own writing, where intonation is important. Many speak English, but if your intonation fails, some do not understand you.