Beedster

That's the reality from the POV of many sellers of used gear, a lot of people either don't notice faults or don't worry about faults. I'm not one of those people

PJB powered speakers are in essence what you're talking about, and they're lovely 👍

That was serious BTW, the lines he played were sublime, many of the tracks and bands in which he played them are to me the worst type of 70's/80's self-indulgent fusion. Probably true of many other virtuoso, Rocco Prestia perhaps?

Nice guy, and like the vid, but I guess everyone's idea of good tone varies 🤔

Either way, not an easy gig when there's another bassist in the band

I've travelled further to be honest Jack, but suspect the 40-min from Harrow criterion might have brought me to the attention of Kent, Essex and Herts Constabularies on a regular basis

Damn, position filled. I was hoping you'd struggle to find the right person and remove the competency criterion

Yep, and if that was Sheeran or similar genre-hopping sleb, a vast number of people would be going crazy about it 🤔

Pretty sure the American music community didn't greet B. B. King's final album, recorded when he was 83, in the same way 🤔

Nicely put 👍

100% Greg, 100%. If I could have done 5% of what they've done and still be doing 5% of what they're still be doing I'd count myself extremely fortunate and extremely successful 👍 And Let it Bleed is probably still my fave album 👍

They’d also be BBOW 👍

@BigRedX please tell me that is your bass, that you want to sell it, and that you'll take £250?

BTW I don't doubt the value of the work they do, but there is clear bias BTW I don't doubt the value of their mission, but there is clear bias if they are arguing that what they did counts as a form of scientific research

As has been said before.....

This exemplifies the non-science around all of this. First it's one study. Second has it been published? Third there's clear bias in the organisation's aims - committed to the use of non tropical woods. Fourth the study is destined to find the effect in question (check out the audience). And n=2! It's PR not science. There was a similar PR piece years ago from an organisation called the European Hydration Agency or similar, who pushed out numerous dataset on a regular basis about the need for people to carry bottle of water everywhere to avoid everything from mental illness to road rage. Oh, they also waned against the perils of tap water, so it was about commercially bought water. You'll never guess who the organisation was funded by...........?

I think that was the conclusion this thread had arrived at unless I'm missing something?

Probably true, listen to any player playing any bass the way s/he plays it, through their own EQ, FX, rig, and it pretty much all sounds the same, especially when you stick another loads of musos in the mix But deep down in the murky depths of grain and fibre, scientifically measurable differences lurk 😀

Yep this is an area in which empirical (as opposed to theoretical*) science won't help, if only because the sheer numbers of data samples required would render the costs of the whole process far far far greater than any benefits. Precisions generally sound more like other Precisions than do Jazzes, which tend to sound mode like other Jazzes than they do Precisions. That's good enough for me 👍 * The theoretical science is pretty clear; there is ALWAYS going to be a difference. The question is how small a difference are we looking for? I listen to some audio clips online in which sound engineers respond with 'Wow, did you hear that compressor kick in?" to which my answer is nearly always "Um, no, I don't think I did" Expert ears hear more than inexpert ears, and technology can 'hear' more than the most expert ears can hear. But what's the minimum worthwhile effect here, no one actually knows. But it's probably way way bigger than would satisfy a purist in a lab and way smaller than would ever matter to an audience member or audio consumer, and probably even most players.

Jaco