risingson

I've got the RH750, it's a great head and I've never had so many compliments about the sound of an amp before from sound guys and audience. I don't find the amp to be overly limiting in its performance, it does do highs if you want them unlike the RH450, and it's not harsh sounding like a lot of modern amps, always found EBS bad for this. It doesn't sound too much like Ampeg stuff like a lot of people reckon it does, I've always found Ampeg amps to lack control when it comes to EQ and the EQ options on the 750 are seemingly limitless. It's got more of a low mid focus and doesn't do massive sub lows but to be honest that's the last thing I need saturating the stage when I'm playing with bands. I'd really recommend it.

[quote name='neepheid' timestamp='1383302020' post='2262763']
Anti-Chinese bass sentiments? What is this, Talkbass?
[/quote]

I read some of that stuff. Some people over there truly have their heads jammed firmly up their arses!

On the flip side, Justin Meldal Johnson, producer and session extraordinaire has reported very good things about the Starcaster having used it with M83 live. I'm choosing to trust the man's opinion over the people who haven't touched the bass yet but are still passing opinion on it.

[quote name='Prime_BASS' timestamp='1383252922' post='2262304']


I'm 24, I don't mind the hollow bodied vintage stuff, the other one that's out that's symmetric looks nice, black headstuck in red yum. My guitar is a 335 dot derivative, I love the jack casady bass and the dean cabbie too.

But this, it's shambolic. It looks like someone made a bass using a melted picture of a 335as inspiration. Like a weird indie copy that has an offset body the wrong way.

I also question the chinese origin. Im a bit of snob when it comes to place of manufacture, but I'm sure as hell not going to spend that kind of mullah in a Chinese instrument when there are possibly hundreds fir around £200

Edit- on my phone hence poor usage of language and typing ability
[/quote]

There's nothing to be snobbish about until you've played one. Presumably you don't have a problem owning any of the tablets or computers on the market right now? Got a MacBook?

I'm looking forward to challenging the QC perception with the new Starcaster. Increasingly it means little if nothing at all, I'll own both American made and Chinese made basses so I'll be able to make an informed decision hopefully! We'll see.

[quote name='Lozz196' timestamp='1383246742' post='2262175']



Kind-of reminds me of when Brit-Pop was about, many of the bands suddenly all seemed to be using 335s. I like the look of these basses, but the sound-clip is what really gets it for me, think they sound great.
[/quote]

Aye me too! Looking forward to getting hold of it.

[quote name='Prime_BASS' timestamp='1383235981' post='2261964']
I think it looks ridiculous myself.
Cant see why they are liked so much, maybe I'm not of that "age"
[/quote]

I'm 24, I'm a sucker for vintage style gear though. They seem to be marketing them to a younger crowd for whatever reason, presumably to hit the alternative hipster side of the market so perhaps you actually represent a minority. I'm going to use it for most music I play if it suits.

Ahh well I've just ordered the Cherry Burst one, in Sweden right now gigging so it'll be with me next week when I arrive home. Will post first impressions and that!

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1382622370' post='2254541']
And Fodera's "New York" location hardly looks like a prime bit of real estate. It's down by what appears to be docks in Brooklyn, and not even a "trendy" part like Dumbo where Sadowsky used to be based...
[/quote]

Give it a few years because Brooklyn round the shirts of Manhattan is about to explode. Any property round there will be worth holding onto.

[quote name='Josh' timestamp='1382643190' post='2255014']
I must be in the minority of those who these guys do absolutely nothing for. Polished technique and slick production and arranging, but it's just too much for me to enjoy both as a musician and general listener.
[/quote]

You're not alone on this I don't think, kind of stale listening.

Anyone got one yet? I am desperate to get hold of one but I'm away in Sweden for their general release date! Bad GAS the likes of which I've not experienced in a while, I need more details from someone who's played one!

[quote name='Musicman20' timestamp='1381828957' post='2244161']
I'm still interested in one of these...I just can't be bothered to sort a case for it, which is putting me off haha!
[/quote]

Likewise, I travel a lot abroad and with a semi-hollow I'd worry more, bring something substantial out Fender and I'm all over the cherry burst!

I don't really understand 'overpriced' as a thing, my opinion has changed over the years and frankly I don't give a sh*te how much I - or anyone else for that matter - is willing to pay for an instrument based on what I or anyone else considers it to be worth. It's massively subjective nonsense really, with snobbery and reverse snobbery acting as bookends either side of the debate.

I've seen the vid already Steve but I think it's amazing, a few of my mates jammed with the drummer recently when he was over in the UK, the whole band are killer. I do sometimes find their music a little too 'clean' but on this occasion I just thought it was staggering musicianship. And Donny's daughter has got one hell of a voice.

I'm never a fan of one instrument that detracts from a song, and the bass at times is definitely doing that in this clip. The bass tone is kind of secondary for me, always has been. Still, I managed to get through 2 minutes of the song which is at least longer than I would have had it been one of Sheehan's solos!

EDIT just listened for that bit longer, lo and behold, a bass solo! He reminds me a bit of Flea's way of live performance in this actually. Relentless bass hammering.

[quote name='leroybasslines' timestamp='1381434552' post='2239173']
A while back, when I had nothing better to do, I decided to make a Pino playlist on Spotify. I tried to include as much different stuff he's played on as possible. [url="http://open.spotify.com/user/owen_liam/playlist/4J0KMwu3HUz9u2joumbZ2Z"]Mr Pino Palladino[/url] for the webplayer, or click [url="spotify:user:owen_liam:playlist:4J0KMwu3HUz9u2joumbZ2Z"]Mr Pino Palladino[/url] for the Spotify URl. It's not meant to be exhaustive, just a snapshot of some of his playing over the years; it blows my mind to hear the diversity and variety of stuff he's done. Feel free to add tracks - it's a public list and I'd love to hear some oddities and unexpected tracks!

[CODE]<iframe src="https://embed.spotify.com/?uri=spotify:user:owen_liam:playlist:4J0KMwu3HUz9u2joumbZ2Z" width="300" height="380" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true"></iframe>
[/CODE]
[/quote]

Thanks for this, you posted it a while back but I could never find the original post again!

Chicago, Fleetwood Mac, Radiohead, to name a few.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1381515405' post='2240247']


How?

If I was distributing a free download to loads of people then, yes, I'd be depriving them of money.

But if I download a file for which I would not otherwise pay for myself then how does that affect the artist?

Perhaps I'm abnormal but I've not stopped buying music since the internet arrived. What I have done is listened to a much wider range of music than I used to. The stuff I don't like I don't buy but the likelihood is that I've bought stuff [u]because [/u]I've discovered it while listening to free copies.

If it wasn't for terabyte hard drives I'd probably delete all the stuff I've only listened to once and never will again - would that make things any better?
[/quote]

Because a product you would otherwise pay for in a shop or online you are no longer paying for, very simple consumerism. Correct me if I'm wrong but you're arguing that because yours would be an isolated case of illegal download that the benefits of a band reaching an otherwise untapped market audience is beneficial. I don't disagree, but black and white facts are that if you're not paying for a product that relies on a transaction of money for the artist to profit then the artist is losing out. A relatively small cost if it was an isolated occurrence, a bigger issue when the incidence is multiplied, at which stage your argument provides a blueprint for proponents of illegal downloads.

David Byrne makes some interesting points here. He goes further than Thom Yorke in being honest about how much he owes to labels who have been willing to take a punt on his own music, a time which I now think for the majors has passed.

http://m.pitchfork.com/news/52617-david-byrne-slams-streaming-services-in-new-op-ed/

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1381527263' post='2240480']
How about this guy then?
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyUZh_Cbw6Q[/media]
[/quote]

Great, massively entertaining!

Although as a wise man once said, music isn't entertainment, it's art...

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1381431553' post='2239102']
There is loads of music out there that I would never ever buy but I might download a copy for free, listen to it once and then never again - 'take it or leave it' music. How is that depriving an artist of any money?
[/quote]

Because you're depriving them of their ability to get paid?

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1381428531' post='2239061']
I've been asking someone, anyone, to explain how an artist loses out if someone who wouldn't normally buy their music makes a copy of it instead?

I'm genuinely open to an explanation.
[/quote]

They lose out on money obviously, providing the band have made their music in part to generate some money.

The crux of your post I can agree with and indeed I have done so from the start (read my first post) but your personal opinion of the band is stopping any subjectivity in your overall argument, which is a shame. I suppose it would be convenient to treat that initial post of yours as an attempt at humour now you've been offered multiple evidence to the contrary!

Not my thing at all, I got about 30 seconds through and then enough was enough. I have no problem with people experimenting like that but I'll always think that the electric bass is voiced so badly for this kind of stuff. Why do something on a 7 string bass that can be enjoyed and performed infinitely better on a guitar or piano, something with a stronger melodic voice? The comparison with Wooten is daft as well.

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1381416936' post='2238799']
That is the whole point of what I am saying: their music would probably be a lot better if they were motivated by those things ! Instead they have spent over a decade churning out all kinds of turgid rubbish in the name of art .
[/quote]

'Better'? 'Better' according to who? It's just that you seem to be confusing your own personal opinion of the band with the millions and millions of people globally that would disagree with your notion that the music they've been making since 1997 has gotten somehow worse, that is if we're going off of album sales, sold out arenas and festival bookings etc. The reality is that it's simply evolved into something you either don't like or perhaps don't understand.

I get that Radiohead's albums post '97 are like marmite, especially stuff like Kid A that polarises opinion amongst people that don't like or 'get' their move into electronica (so is Coldplay's new music and direction by the way amongst older fans, which is why it's tremendously ironic you used them as an example). But quite why Radiohead should be 'populist' is beyond me. Is that what bands have to do once they've had initial success? And according to who?

Your original quote without taking it out of context read like this:

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1381318770' post='2237428']
The truth is that no one has actually listened to any of his records since O.K Computer
[/quote]

Which without question is a falsity isn't it? You are trying to pass off your personal opinion in support of an argument that is completely flawed.

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1381408397' post='2238608']


"Maverick independent release" is how the band present their recordings to the public , a stance which is undermined if they are relying on EMI.

You don't seem to grasp the difference between commercia faliure and relative commercial faliure. The yardstick by which I am measuring the success of Radiohead post-OK Computer is the populist appeal of their music, and it has very little of that .
[/quote]

The start part of this post is definitely true but come on, bands are presented in all sorts of ways by label PR. The reality is never presented properly and I would be the first to agree that Thom owes his success to the majors.

And with that aside, the stats stack against your argument massively. As has already been pointed out to you Radiohead are not a commercial or a relative commercial failure, they have been masters of their own destinies of late and have actively chosen to distribute their own music in their own way - having been hugely successful either way. Your Coldplay simile made me laugh too, their success hinged on the fact that Radiohead had opened numerous doors that led to the success of bands like Muse and Coldplay to walk through. Their decision to alter their approach to music was a conscious effort to evolve their music without the pressure of the fans of their previous work pressing for more of the same, and still they proved successful. Sounds more like you take issue with the band than anything else, reminiscent of the Beatles thread actually... refusing facts staring the critics in the face.

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1381382418' post='2238228']
Those records may have sold impressively for maverick independent releases , but they have failed to capitalise on the success Radiohead had in the mid to late 1990's when they were on the verge of becoming one of the most commercially successful bands in the World . In that context , subsequent sales have in fact been dissappointing . The exploits of bands like Coldplay in the interim period only goes to show the size of the potential market for navel gazing quasi -Indie bands with a knack for recycling tired old cliches. Radiohead failed to exploit the market when they had a chance , instead deciding to plough their own furrow, and have paid the price in terms comparatively modest sales. They still shift a lot of records by most standards , but they could have shifted a lot more had they not become so enamoured of their own genius and hell bent on avoiding becoming exploited by at the hands of a scurrilous. music industry that was conspiring to make them multi millionaires by encouraging them to serenade this World's dissaffected souls with their own distinctive brand of miserablist Indie power ballads .
[/quote]

It sounds like you've listened to a bit of the band, read a bit about the band and then have gone and made some sweeping and misinformed conclusions about the band. I'm not sure which yardstick you've chosen to measure the success of Radiohead post-OK Computer but I think you're misinformed on the subject and if you're suggesting Radiohead became some sort of commercial failure then you're completely off-target. 'Maverick independent releases'? When did EMI become a maverick independent label?