TheLowDown

Best way to be. 4 strings are standard and are used for almost all songs but 5 strings are very occasionally used, such as in in theatre work. It's good to regularly play both though because it gives your playing and way of thinking about the fretboard some flexibility. One of my rules of thumb is to only use the best tool for the job. Using a 5 or 6 string when a 4 string will do is like using the proverbial sledgehammer. For the CEADG tuning, it would mean that I would have to reconfigure many of the patterns I have in my head. For example when I want to find a major 3rd, two of the places that I look would be one string down and 3 frets down as well as 2 strings down 2 frets up. With the CEADG tuning that would now find me playing a 4th and a tritone, respectively. I would have to set up a special IF...THEN...ELSE condition in my head to get around it. I don't go in for alt tuning for that reason.

That would really mess with my OCD! The 5 string is asymmetrical as it is.

Ah yes, plated 👍

I use nickel coated roundwound strings on mine. I think the old adage about roundwounds carving up your fretboard is very overstated, and even on something like a black walnut fretboard it would take many years to have any noticeable effect. The nickel coated plated ones are quite smooth and are good and practical balance between really expensive flatwounds and steel roundwounds. The ones I use are D'addario EXL170-6. I paid £23 for mine on Amazon.

Buy cheap basses like I do, then nobody will want to nick them. But seriously, I would be highly dubious about that idea because peace of mind would be a priority for me. I wouldn't dare go away on holiday without taking every steal-worthy item indoors. I would have to have a big sign outside saying "Snake sanctuary"

That's not an issue. it should happen because of the way that the nerves are connected between the fingers. I use OFPF all the time even though I probably should ideally use Simandl when appropriate if I was going for 100% effectiveness. I don't have a problem with OFPF even on the first 4 frets because I make good use of shifting. Every day I practise shifting as part of my current daily exercises so that's probably why.

I think a lot of it should depend on if it's going to be your main/primary bass. If not, would the Sandberg provide value?

I thought it was usually just root notes in punk. Because punk is so busy for the bass to be audible, it doesn't benefit from having anything more than that, and could probably do away with the bass altogether and just have down tuned guitars.

Velvet Underground were toying with distortion and feedback in 1964/65, but their album wasn't released until 67 due to legal issues. Arguably, they could have been the first. For "Equipment shaping music, or music shaping equipment?", it's very much a 2 way process feeding into each other. I don't think either can be claimed to be the major driver.

That's why I mentioned that "elsewhere it's been reported....". I've always found that there's often a large range of weights reported even for the same bass.

An inexpensive comfortable to hold lightweight bass with no neck dive and where the neck is joined firmly to the body.

I've just Googled the alder version and it's 4kg (8.8lbs). Elsewhere it's been reported at 4.3 - 4.5kg (9.5 - 9.9lbs). That's the Harley Benton Enhanced MP-5EB alder version.

I would have the HB without doubt. As mentioned by ribbetingfrog, the neck and body are good, and that's all that matters because I consider them to be the chassis and the framework of the bass. A bass is after all a collection of parts put together such as the neck, body, bridge, tuners, pickup, preamp and so forth. The electronics are just bolt ons, and you can change them out like replacing the sound card in a PC. As long as the motherboard(ahem, body and neck) is good and you're getting it for a great price, just add the bits you want to improve and save some money. I would much rather have that than paying 3 times the price for a PC with a graphics card, sound card, and slow RAM, none of which I would have wanted. In this case, the Sandberg but it could be a Fender or some other bass whose pickups or tuners I wouldn't have wanted.

Telekinesis. I think "F# E string" to myself and it just happens.

I use an app called Metronomics for the drum rhythms.

Doesn't that mean less control? That's what i mean - the fingers alone can do it a lot more effectively. On a 5 or 6 string it would become a nightmare if I have to phrase the notes with the pick while keeping the lower strings muted, and is making unnecessary hard work of the situation. Fingers of fretting hand are for the higher strings.

No, how could I effectively mute the lower strings when using a pick? Fingers do a much better job.

Never bothered with a pick. Fingers for maximum control.

My ego saves me a lot of money then.

Well, yes that's possible. But given the sales it would be improbable.

Much of the reason will be ego. I don't there will be many practical reasons. Because of their focus on performance, a great many of those German cars are well known for being some of the least reliable on the road, and notoriously expensive to repair. I'll stick to my Harley Benton.

As well as a 5 and 6 string, I have a 4 string Harley Benton that cost around £128(with 20% VAT). What features or qualities is it lacking that a £700 or £3000 bass will provide that will add value to my bass playing? And the answer is exactly why I bought it rather than a much more expensive bass.

I recently read on another forum an interesting viewpoint based on one luthier's long term experience of tone-woods, and it is most likely the best interpretation of tone-woods I've heard so far. You can read the much longer version in the link above, but to summarise: -the stronger/stiffer the structure of the bass, the less the choice of woods matter to the tone. In most neck-thru solid bodies, the wood has zero effect on the tone. In most bolt-on solid bodies, the wood has almost zero effect on the tone. Only the strings and pickups matter to tone. -the more structural weaknesses in the bass - such as cavities in hollow bodies, semi hollow, and acoustic guitars, and relatively soft wood - the more the woods matter to the tone. This is where you can hear the character between different woods and which is what luthiers work with. -even in basses where there are structural weaknesses, you can't say that if it has X wood then it will sound any different to Y wood. It's possible to get a maple body/neck bass to sound exactly the same as what people perceive a mahogany body/neck bass to sound like, and vice versa, by shaping the weaknesses. -for those that believe that woods matter to the tone and those that believe that woods don't matter to the tone, you're both half correct. Discuss.

Well if you think you're getting a better bass, then that's all that matters, eh. If you're more than happy with it, then there is no issue for you.

Often it's about perception regarding how much people paid for their item. "Nicer to play" "and "better made" are highly subjective. Scientists have have many times conducted real world experiments and found that people consistently perceive a higher priced item as being "better", even when it was the same.