Count Bassy

On 31/12/2022 at 20:30, Mikey D said:

Starting to be seen out in the wild...

 

First: fretless EHB1005F-AOB

 

 

 

https://www.ibanez.com/eu/news/detail/20221207141839.html

 

5 string EUB?

More widely available black flat ehb1505ms?

Some new SRs as is usually...

No new prestige range (yet)?

It's such a shame that the Demo Video doesn't show it being played as a bass.

On 07/10/2022 at 17:55, Sonic_Groove said:

Blues Colin Hodgkinson Styley

 

 

I love Colin Hodginson, but this really doesn't do it for me. Way too fast for one thing, but possibly this technique doesn't work if slowed down?

3 minutes ago, blisters on my fingers said:

"If the RM workers think that they are undervalued then they could go and work for someone else who will pay more**. Much easier than striking."

 

"But I also added the note on the ** that "Therein lies the problem" or similar. The crucial point being that there isn't anyone paying more in that business."

 

Can you not see that is a ridiculous circuitous argument ?

 

Apologies in advance if I'm missing the point.

 

 

It probably is going round in circles. The problem is probably the lack of subtlety in the typed word. 5 minutes over a pint and we'd probably be in full agreement.

On a more serious note, if you were to go with untralites, there is a lot of excess wood on that machine head, the removal of which might also make a big difference.

I real like the head shape on the Ibanez SR series: Just enough wood to take the 5 tuners, but leaving enough to make it aesthetically pleasing.

4 hours ago, 3below said:

Rather than converting to headless have you considered lightweight tuners - Hipshots have dramatically improved two of my basses

 

or simply hang a brick off the bridge end.😁

2 minutes ago, blisters on my fingers said:

I don't want to fall out with anybody on this forum. 

It is a forum and I would hope that we can forumize to heartz content😀

 

You did post this though.....

 

"If the RM workers think that they are undervalued then they could go and work for someone else who will pay more**. Much easier than striking."

 

To be fair my friend....

 

How does that come across ? 

 

 

But I also added the note on the ** that "Therein lies the problem" or similar. The crucial point being that there isn't anyone paying more in that business.

Of course, what we all really want to know is "What does Chompsky say about it all"?

My son's band once took up a commercial offer from a company that picks up the band and it's gear and delvers them to the gig (including load in) and then picked the gear up the next day and returned it. I guess basicaly you're hiring roadies for the gig.

They got a very good deal as it was start up business I believe, with an introductory offer, and the the band and the gig were both in London.

2 hours ago, blisters on my fingers said:

 So the answer to an industrial dispute is to not bother.....just go and work for a competitor that already pays even less?

That's not what I said, or certainly not what I meant (and I think you know that).

I was saying that it's hard to on strike for more pay, or go to an alternative employer, if that alternative employer is already paying less than your current one.

We might not like the situation, but people (including you and me) have to live in the current real world rather than the world as they'd like it to be.

10 hours ago, blisters on my fingers said:

"Who determines what anyone deserves?"

 

Royal Mail management and their friends in high places. 

 

Unless you go on strike and fight for a better deal.

 

If that doesn't work claim benefits, work for less at DPD,** it will be your own fault, that is the sort of thing that happens. Or something.

Not really. If the RM workers think that they are undervalued then they could go and work for someone else who will pay more**. Much easier than striking.

**..... and there is the problem. For people who handle parcels and postage the RM people are possibly some of the better paid.

36 minutes ago, blisters on my fingers said:

Why doesn't Royal Mail and all of their competitors pay their employees far less than they deserve, that way we will have full employment and guaranteed jobs for all ?

Who determines what anyone deserves? Sure RM could pay more,  but (as I've said) that could easily lead to fewer jobs in RM. Those people then end up on benefits, or working for even less money elsewhere.

As I say, I don't like it, but (rightly or wrongly) we live in a free market economy, and that is the sort of thing that happens.

Other current strikers are not quite in the same situation. Nurses, border force, railway workers; irrespective of what they might or might not deserve they don't work in a competitive market, so their strikes are more likely to work, and be less likely to damage their own employers' long term "business".

57 minutes ago, chris_b said:

 

In the past I was likely to vote with my wallet, but these days I'm more inclined to support the guy who is being screwed, particularly if his bosses are laughing all the way to their off-shore tax havens.

Don't get me started on Amazon!!

12 hours ago, blisters on my fingers said:

You @Tim2291maybe are not aware that your postman could well have to take a meal break at a predetermined daily time so that he does not fall foul of driver regulations.

His collection time from your business could also be programmed into his daily work schedule, not set by him, but by his management and agreed in your companys contract with Royal Mail.

Most businesses do not want collections of mail or parcels at the very last moment of the working day, he could well be trying to "keep the customer satisfied"-- it is so easy to just portray somebody else as a workshy loafer.

 

Isn't it?

 

 

Exactly. It's like trains. Just because they might arrive early doesn't mean that they are allowed to leave early. If a company works around a 4pm postal collection, they would be pretty peed off if they found at had already gone at 3.30pm.

18 hours ago, skilamalink said:

Royal Mail made a profit of £758,000,000 last year so there is no need for the attacks on the workers' terms and conditions and no justification for the well below inflation pay offer. The company can afford it.

 

Royal Mail have to run the universal coverage by law. If they don't then who will?

Not arguing with any of that, as I said I sympathise with the workers, but the fact remains that Royal Mail will be loosing customers through these strikes, which will inevitably mean less jobs. Also, Royal Mail parcels operates in a competitive environment so if the competion pays their drivers less it makes it hard for the Royal Mail to compete. Ie more lost contracts, more job losses.

I don't like it, but it's how it is.

20 hours ago, Grimalkin said:

 

It should never have been privatised in the first place.

Totally agree with you (Wow, never thought I'd find myself saying that).

On 17/12/2022 at 15:50, Martin E said:

The other problem with barrel jacks is they have such tiny tags to solder onto. Particularly if you have an active bass, the stereo jacks needed to switch on the circuitry have really minute tags all within a millimetre of each other.  They have no holes to hook the wire in to make a mechanical connection and just rely on the tiny blob of solder to keep them in place thus making another weak link for things to go wrong.

But they are bit fiddly, but If the solder joint is a weak point, or you have a "Blob" of solder, then you need to work on your soldering technique!

Radio Caroline? Is this the 1970s still?

I sympathise with the Royal Mail workers, but suspect they are onto a loser with these strikes.

The money making part of the Royal Mail is the parcels service, which unfortunately for the workers is the one area where there is major commercial competition (which isn't on strike). Many commercial users of the royal mail pacels service will be jumping ship to these private companies after these strikes, leaving them with the loss making letters service, (with the universal coverage commitment) so job losses in the Royal Mail will be worse than ever.

On 15/12/2022 at 20:14, John Cribbin said:

Pure Tone Hmmmm .....

 

I've not used or have any intention of using them. I have seen on some forums a few people raving about them and how they will last longer than the existing jacks. Now considering we are all aware of thousands of instruments and amps from the 50's and 60's that still have their original jacks still working, come back in 2080 and tell me they are still going strong.

 

They may sound good on paper. but in a guitar situation, I'd say they are nothing more than a solution looking for a problem.

Not tried them but I quite like the look of them, having the sping contact for the earth rather than relying on contact down the barrel section seems like a good idea. However the Neutrik ones with the XLR type fitting also have this feature (and can be had in locking format as well)

None of these sites have any snense of geography. I put in my location and typically specify a 30 mile radius. THen get rocmmendations ranging from London to North Wales.

Heft: Is it measured in RMS, or Peak?🙂

On 12/12/2022 at 20:20, YouMa said:

If you look at most of the "heros" they were all snorters really. Especially slappers. I read a book about ww2 being won on meth. Same thing really. Makes you think.

 

The Germans gave it to their troops, but they still lost.

On 02/12/2022 at 08:09, uk_lefty said:

Was there an "iconic" or distinct bass guitar that you think of in the years 2000-2009?  Warwick maybe?  My band have done a "00's night" a few months back and it was successful so we're doing another tonight. We're thinking this could be a way to get out there to more venues so trying to build it up... So at the moment I'm playing a Stingray which is a pretty universal bass from 70's onwards, but if I were to go for something more period correct for the look.... Interested in opinions here. Thanks! 

Us bassists eh? We think the audience cares (or even notices) what bass we play.

57 minutes ago, missis sumner said:

Yeah, well, my 4 string did a job on those two songs, but in a higher octave.  I just find the lower notes on the 5 string sound better, because that's how those two songs were recorded (Don't Break My Heart Again, Separate Ways (Shallow Side version), so I' now trying to find a use, in the rest of the songs, to not look like a pretentious silly billy.  There is also the fact that I can barely play a four string.

I think you've answered your own question.

7 hours ago, Steve Browning said:

I'm afraid Kate Bush is already on my island. Sorry. 🙂

As your luxury item?