uncle psychosis

[quote name='Hutton' timestamp='1384730758' post='2280171'] It depends on what your idea of perfect is? A great sounding and playing bass for me is perfect. The neck pocket gap is irrelevant. [/quote] Exactly. You can't tell if a bass is good or not by looking at the neck pocket. You tell by playing it. If it sounds good and plays good then the neck is right, regardless of how many sheets of paper you can fit down the side of the neck. I can't help but wonder if people aren't inventing issues where there aren't any.

[quote name='simon1964' timestamp='1384619228' post='2278824'] To put some context and balance to all of that, the Hall family actually acquired Rickenbacker in 1953, way before Japenese companies started copying Rickenbackers. I remain in the apparent minority who cannot see any problem with a company protecting its own design rights. [/quote] I have no problem with Rick protecting their design rights. The problem I have is that Rickenbacker aggressively pursue private sellers of old Ricky copies that were made *before* Rickenbackers legal rights to protection were granted and who are not breaking any British laws, and all the while there are loads of shops openly selling modern Ricky copies who apparently just get left to it by John Hall. It's a joke.

Danelectro U2. [URL=http://s978.photobucket.com/user/uncle_psychosis/media/guitar/Danelectro/DSC_0674.jpg.html][IMG]http://i978.photobucket.com/albums/ae269/uncle_psychosis/guitar/Danelectro/DSC_0674.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

[quote name='Billy Apple' timestamp='1384607212' post='2278629'] But the site is not a paid for service. [/quote] [i]The marketplace[/i] is, and thats what is causing the "issues". [quote]I'm not sure what you mean by the 'Mods do this for free' being stretched a bit, but they do, [/quote] Because its hard to tell someone "this site is run for free" on one hand and on the other hand say "it costs £20 to use the marketplace". I know how much work the mods do---and I'm thankful for it---but once money has changed hands peoples' attitudes invariably change, especially since the money isn't being handed over for "basschat membership" but for a very specific service provided by the site. Thinking purely from a user point of view, they've paid basschat for a service and whether or not basschat pays its mods / admins isn't really relevant at that point. If you buy a TV from Dixons what salary the sales assistant is on isn't relevant to your expectations of their service. There are, essentially, now two basschats---the free one which is an awesome forum staffed by awesome volunteers, and the marketplace which is a paid-for service. People's expectations of the two are naturally going to be different. Thats all I'm saying. [quote]it becomes tiresome having to mod stuff where Members are chancing their arm, or grinding personal axes.[/quote] Absolutely, but not all comments or issues surrounding the marketplace fall into those categories. I personally think that it would have been better to charge a "membership fee", like talkbass, rather than providing a specific service in return for a fee. But then again its not my website so its not up to me!

[quote name='xilddx' timestamp='1384603791' post='2278570'] it's almost always the Marketplace that causes these frictions. I don't know how the owners and mods feel about doing all this work and still getting criticised. It made me feel sad last night. [/quote] Once you start providing a paid-for service you are always going to get complaints. Once money started changing hands the "the mods do this for free, be thankful for the forum" attitude (an admirable attitude at that) was always going to be stretched a bit.

[quote name='BobVbass' timestamp='1384332093' post='2275242'] Thank god someone said it finally! I've tried just about every TE stack and combo (except the V's) and I've found them all dismal sounding and underpowered. [/quote] I won't quibble over the "dismal sounding" bit but I'm amazed anyone can think they're underpowered. I never have to turn them past about 3 or 4 on the dial before they get to the "drown out everyone else" stage...

They seem to be killer basses. Shame I find them so horrifically ugly I wish I could get on with the looks, everyone raves about them so much...

[quote name='mcnach' timestamp='1384366660' post='2275799'] There may be regional variations in availability. In the US at least it seems you can get a green SBMM SUB: [url="http://www.musiciansfriend.com/bass/sterling-by-music-man-s.u.b.-ray4-bass-guitar/h82042000004000"]http://www.musicians...h82042000004000[/url] [/quote] Crikey, even I quite like that!

[quote name='thebassist' timestamp='1384342051' post='2275416'] I just imported a Bass valued at $499 and got stung for £93 import/handling costs! I'm not sure I'd bother importing again. [/quote] Thats pretty much what it costs. 25% off the total cost (item AND shipping) to cover the fees and duty. Importing isn't as worthwhile as it was a few years ago when the pound was stronger against the Yen and the Dollar.

You wouldn't want to be in the conservatory anyway. It'll be too hot in the summer and too cold in the winter

[quote name='philw' timestamp='1384339596' post='2275387'] Hmmm, well I guess it's fine if it works, but duty and tax (VAT) alone on a £1k guitar import from the US would normally work out at around £243. So I've no idea how Musician's Friend manage it, or how they've done a deal with UK Customs & Excise for the duty and VAT (legally the responsibility of the importer) to be paid up-front.[/quote] Lots of places now seem to be offering the same service, and there is some stuff on the HMRC website about it being possible to pay duty up front with transactions from some countries. I guess they're just trying to make international trade simpler.

[quote name='Tripehound' timestamp='1384295540' post='2275061'] I'm looking to buy a new bass - specifically a Lakland Hollowbody. The price new seems to be around £1300 but it seems Musicians Friend in the US will ship me one for a grand plus fifty-odd quid for postage. Significantly they claim that this figure includes all taxes and duties. I've also noticed some vendors on eBay offering this service. It appears very competitive - a 250 quid saving is not to be sniffed at - but it still makes me uneasy. Has anyone a tale to tell of using a service like this? [/quote] Such services exist and appear to be above board. The only issue I'd have with it is what happens if there is a problem with the instrument and you have to send it back. I would want to know what the returns process was and how much I'd be out of pocket were that to be the case.

[quote name='iconic' timestamp='1384329044' post='2275207'] 'Generally'...what you pay in dollars is the figure in pounds after duties....vat...tax etc. [/quote] Did you read the OP?

500 Miles is an absolute gift to the gigging band. It's really really easy and goes down a storm. Embrace the easy wins, people :-D

"White Wedding"---as much as I like it---is an [i]interesting[/i] choice for a wedding. See also "every breath you take" and "The One I Love".

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1384180951' post='2273600'] Hang on a minute, Scottish people telling us that pubs aren't neccesarilly about getting drunk ? . That's like me telling Suzannah Reid that it's not about sex, I just think your an incredibly talented journalist and television presenter. Or like me telling Carole Vorderman that she is not just a great arse to gawp at on T.V but actually genuinely really clever , i.e not quite true. [/quote] Hilarious.

If you're going to be keeping expensive gear in there then get a professional in and do it properly. Insulation, heating, the works.

[url="http://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/arts/news/pubs-are-about-company-not-getting-drunk-1-3181729"]Pubs are about company, not getting drunk[/url] Good article in the Scotsman over the weekend.

Who was the band on here that did the awesome promo video with the blue tuxedos etc? They were great, and they travel if I remember rightly. Only issue might be that the truly outstanding bands are probably booked at this point Wedding season is mad like that.

[quote name='Colonel36' timestamp='1384012848' post='2271918'] That'll be "The Reflex" mix uncle p. Some of those "Reflex mixes" are class. [/quote] That's the one. Some of their mixes are killer, like you say.

The Jacksons had some great baselines in some great songs. I always loved ABC. Craig Charles has been playing an absolutely killer remix of that recently on his funk and soul show on 6music.

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1383832290' post='2269720'] In a band context it depends on the band. From a personal PoV I won't even consider trying (let alone buying) a bass I consider to be ugly. There is such a wide range of basses available these days that there is very little reason to be playing an instrument that doesn't tick all the boxes for looks, playability and sound. [/quote] This is almost word for word exactly what I was going to post.

[quote name='molan' timestamp='1383823697' post='2269529'] Because, in my professional sphere, I have repeatedly seen research carried out in order to generate news. Simple as that really. [/quote] I guess if you work in advertising its easy to assume that everyone is lying about everything all the time

[quote name='molan' timestamp='1383821325' post='2269467'] I had read in quite a few places that this report was only news because the findings went against what was generally believed and I just took their word for it. Maybe I'm just jaundiced from working with too many huge businesses (particularly the global pharma brands) that conduct, incredibly well researched, scientific studies in order to gain publicity or add credence to a product claim. I've seen 10 year studies conducted to prove that one product has a particular benefit in order to validate it. Then another massive global concern publishes a report from a seemingly just as authoritative source saying something different. i guess my point was that a lot of research appears to be conducted with a view to publishing something new and, ideally, newsworthy in order to demonstrate the credentials of the researchers. If all a study does is to expand something people already know then it isn't news, it doesn't generate any sort of significant media coverage and the report disappears without trace. An example might be 'scientists prove water is wet' - no-one is going to publish this because it isn't newsworthy or interesting. Well, I guess maybe the Daily Mail might be able to put some spin on it by adding that English water is wetter, and therefore more desirable so the entire population of Bulgaria are planning to migrate to England, live on benefits and breed openly gay children in order to take advantage [/quote] I still don't understand why you think the "newsworthy"-ness of a piece of research is even remotely relevant. If the science was performed [i]properly[/i]---which this was---then whether or not journalists decide to write about it is by the by. Being newsworthy does not mean that the research is "cheap scientific hokum". You don't get into PNAS with puff pieces, you get in with good research. Did you really dismiss a piece of peer reviewed research in a distinguished journal as "cheap hokum" on the say-so of some dudes on internet guitar forums? Thats quite impressive. As for the pharma stuff---contrary to the belief of most laymen, science isn't exact. Its perfectly possible for two studies to be performed perfectly and come to different conclusions. The universe is strange like that. Thats why it takes lots of studies by lots of people before something will get accepted as "fact". Yes, big companies quite often want to do particular research in order to validate some product, but so long as they do their research honestly and submit it for full peer review there's nothing wrong with that. Self-published pieces should always be treated with suspicion, but peer reviewed research in respected journals has to be taken at face value.

[quote name='molan' timestamp='1383816390' post='2269373'] I can see where you are coming from but I can't believe this story would have been published anywhere other than scientific journals if it had found that people could tell the difference. It simply wouldn't have been 'news'. I'm certainly not qualified to judge the validity of any piece of scientific research but, having spent nearly 35 years in marketing I am able to have a decent view on PR and journalism. [/quote] I don't see what the point you are trying to make is. The fact that journalists decided to print a story based on a study is completely irrelevant to the valid scientific findings of that study. Journalists running pieces about research doesn't somehow invalidate that research. There were lots of newspaper articles about the discovery of the Higgs Boson recently, I suppose thats just "cheap scientific hokum" too?