Stub Mandrel

Recalling my training in numerical taxonomy some forty years ago, I did consider the potential for using multivariate analysis in order to place amplifiers in some sort ot multidimensional space... but common sense rejected it... It's interesting to speculate what the variables might be, but it must be done by the makers of emulators and modelling amps. Blackstar's mini guitar amps have a knob that changes the sound from 'american' to 'british'. You could have multiple sliders for 'heft', 'grit', 'warmth' etc...

Not a bad thing to keep their music in front of live audiences I have friends in tributes to all three of those bands!

Heft is "BASSY PUNCHY FAT PRESCENCE EDGY" all at the same time!

Is there an 'upsurge' in AOR tributes... Steely Dan, Fletwood Mac, Pink Floyd etc. Is it just my imagination?

A simpler version for amps with three channel EQ might be: BASS MIDDLE TREBLE WEIGHTY BLOATED HONKY STEELY HARSH BASSY PUNCHY FAT PRESCENCE EDGY TIGHT BALANCED SWEET LIGHT SCOOPED MELLOW THIN WEAK MUDDY

OK... here are some thoughts, if anyone has Affinity Photo, you can try editing it... Describe Sound.afphoto

I hope you manage to get one together before that 🤣

The Elf has a 400Hz cut with the tone controls flat (as does the Warwick Gnome), see the amp tests linked above. The pre-shape tone was much loved by slappers like Mark King. It has its uses.

Exactly, indie isn't a style, it's just a mixed bag of non-mainstream bands.

It was just my perception at the time, I suppose I was starting to think about my career and future, and starting to feel I'd got past the age for something like that.

Better descriptions here, it associates frequency ranges with many adjectives. https://www.google.com/url?q=https://michaelrasbury.org/uva/images/notesimages/describingsound.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwipxbbnjOODAxXuQEEAHWf1CgAQFnoECAQQAg&usg=AOvVaw23D_KEk0mDXYR0QPQBWawl

Found this at: https://www.audiophileon.com/news/how-to-describe-sound-an-audiophile-terminology-guide Common terms and descriptions used by Audiophiles Airy – Describes the space and openness of the product, usually associated with open-back headphones and live-sounding music. Analytical – A term used to describe a product that produces a high level of detail about the music being played back Balance – Usually, the tuning of the earphone. For example, a well-balanced headphone would display the attributes of not having one particularly dominant frequency, e.g., the bass, mids, and highs are all balanced. Bass – This is the lower-end frequency of human hearing. You can measure bass in quantity (heaviness) and quality (the clarity within the frequency). Other bass descriptors are muddy and boomy. Bloat – Bloat is usually present in the mid-bass. Bright/Brightness – usually displayed in the upper frequencies or upper mids. Brightness is a feature enjoyed by many but walks a thin line to becoming unpleasant due to the potential of treble peaking. Congestion – Sounds overlapping each other and poor clarity. Crisp – Clear Dark/Darkness – Usually where the higher frequencies are less prominent. Decay – How a sound/note/resonance fades away, i.e., the note decay was lengthy. Depth – How far away the instrument’s spacing is from back to front. Detail – The attention to a full reproduction with all sound/notes being audible and present. Forward – A more intense overall presentation of the sound. Opposite of laid back and relaxed. Fun – A usually high-energy sound with an emphasized bass. Harsh- is usually used to describe the upper mid to upper frequencies when you get too much treble, which is an unpleasant quality. Highs – The upper frequencies/ higher notes. Imaging – The placement and position of an instrument as interpreted through a product. Lush – A rich tone and usually with some warmth to the overall presentation. Microphonics – Friction sound heard in a headphone/Earphone caused by the cable's movement or rubbing. High microphonics = Bad. Mids/Midrange – The middle frequencies (usually the main body of vocals and acoustic guitars, amongst others ((see instrument frequency chart)) Muddy – Unclear presentation of a sound, the opposite of clean/clear. Natural – Sounds as it should, real and true to life. Openness – Displays good width and depth in the presentation, with plenty of room in between instruments. Punch – The impact and pop of a particular sound/frequency etc Sibilant – The high unpleasant peaks that are usually unpleasant to the ear if too prevalent. Signature – the overall tone/tuning of a headphone or earphone. Descriptors can be balanced, bassy, sibilant, etc. Soundstage – Described in 3d terms (height, width and depth) Timbre – The tone of a note Transparent – Similar to clarity, it is a clean, clear, open, and detailed quality. Warm/warmth – Engaging vocals, bumped mid-bass, and a clear, lush midrange.

This is self-evidently true, otherwise dep gigs would be impossible (let's discount sight reading). This is self-evidently true, if you already have an idea of the structure and character of the song you will learn it faster and may be able to 'busk' it. This is self-evidently true. I doubt there are many people participating in this thread who couldn't get "Tramp's Vest" down note-perfect, including the stop, after a single play through.

I made the mistake of thinking that because I was in my mid-30s and the drummer was in his 40s that the band I was in was unlikely to go anywhere. Sadly they seem to have imploded after I left, a great shame as the BL was an excellent songwriter and I reckon they could have had success in a "Beautiful South meets the Jam" sort of way.

I'm afraid I can't provide the requested information. Neither can anyone else, as we don't have a fuffin' clue what you are on about. May I suggest that instead you post something more provocative, such as "Young People Make A Mockery Of My Lifelong Musical Struggles," or "Nikki Haley Is Going To Eat Great Ormond Street Hospital Because America." These will be more likely to invoke a useful response.

Totally gratuitous, but just to keep things on topic :-)

I think I'm only in danger of buying PA gear this year... already out on tier 2 as spent a few quid on a cheap Behringer 4:1 line mixer.

LOL! I donated that as it had scarred me for life!

Probably borderline... they use a small font. Many will find it acceptable. The rules changed a year or two ago, in response to many egregiously long signatures full of images ("this is my bass museum...") so the maximum signature is three lines, two URLs and one image now. I think the offending signatures must pre-date the change.

Hey! My bass is as ugly as sin (and is crap in all sorts of other ways) but it sure sounds good!

The jury is still out here. The work on little super short scales but can look unbalanced on long scales IMHO.

I routinely ignore people signatures if they are more than a line or two long, especially the one that are a post ion themselves. I don't want to ignore all signatures, as I normally read even the long ones once. There's at least one mod with a very long sig (8 lines including blank lines) but I notice that unlike ordinary members, mods don't have ignore settings. Possibly this is so you can't ignore moderators? That's fair enough, but it would still be nice to ignore bloated moderator sigs...

Some amp response tests have been done at Bass Bashes, but I haven't seen any of the curves here.

Makes my point! To me Markbass is, but compated to Fender Rumble/Orange Crush/Ashdown.... Wonder if we could choose opposites and then rank amps between them?

The ability to learn fast is a skill to be learned. Now I have experience of jam nights (playing things blind with modest expectations) and depping (learning or refreshing 25-35 songs, with limited time, maybe no rehearsal with expectation of a quality performance) my attitude to bands learning songs has changed. I left a band after a year of honing things forever... The blues rock band I'm in, we will try and rehearse a song once or twice before playing it, but sometimes we will just jam something. This is largely down to knowing each others' style and habits so we can react on the fly; somee of our well rehearsed stuff is often different every time, although things like Radar Love are pretty much note for note every time. For more standard covers stuff, I think four or five new songs is perfectly reasonable for anyone, assuming a modest period to prepare. Ten is doable, if people are willing and able to put in the time, but some will struggle. Just two or three is barely worth the effort. As for number of rehearsals, just make sure they are for getting polished and used to playing together, not learning (the exception is if you all agree a new song and gave a shot at busking it).