Vibrating G String

Here's my old AH250 that I bought new in 1987, I loved it while I had it but I'm happy to never carry that beast up another flight of stairs. Here's a shot of it's sexy bag and the fish sticker which helped complete the aquarium illusion. [attachment=67554:TraceElliotAH250_2.jpg][attachment=67556:TraceElliotAH250_5.jpg][attachment=67555: TraceElliotAH250_7.jpg]

Joe, you can't see me but I'm standing on my chair and applauding I too say screw the price tag and just by the best bass for the money. MIA's cost more because people will pay more, and by people I mean other people

[quote name='flyfisher' post='1072674' date='Dec 30 2010, 05:12 AM']Fair point. But a single broadcast of a recording is surely just one performance? The PRS seem to take the view that if someone listens to that single broadcast performance on a radio in the privacy of their home then there is nothing else to pay - which seems fair. But if that single broadcast performance is listened to by someone on a radio in a workplace then the PRS regards that as a separate performance, so a fee is payable by the owner of that workplace. That seems to me to constitute charging more than one fee for a single actual performance, i.e. the actual recording is only played once by the main broadcaster, however and wherever people listen to it.[/quote] Are people getting charged for listening to personal radios at their own desk? Or do they just get charged when the business plays the music? I could see charging the business in the same way they do a pub but a person at their desk sounds more ridiculous. If a broadcast on a personal radio at your desk is chargeable then an iPod with headphones during work hours should also be under the same argument.

[quote name='flyfisher' post='1072644' date='Dec 30 2010, 04:42 AM']I see what you're getting at but I'm not entirely convinced. The broadcaster pays a fee based on its listener figures. Fair enough. But a portion of those listeners (i.e the commercial ones) are also being charged a fee. I suppose the PRS could argue that they remove the commercial listeners from the broadcasters audience figures, thus reducing the broadcasters fee (i.e the fee sharing you mentioned), but I'd be sceptical about how they could achieve that in practice. I guess it's just too complicated to really define a performance, especially when it comes to radio listening, so the PRS just do whatever they can get away with. Thus, businesses are easy targets, but someone having a party and blaring out music to 100 guests is more difficult to target. But, again, I'm not really having a go at [u]why[/u] the PRS do what they do - given their remit, their behaviour is perfectly understandable - my issue is whether what they do is fair. Many businesses do things that are legal and which they can get away with, but that's not the same as being fair.[/quote] I don't think fair is achievable. And I agree with your points. Any solution will have a large group unhappy with it.

[quote name='flyfisher' post='1071620' date='Dec 29 2010, 04:01 AM']If the licensing model is based on the broadcasters paying to transmit stuff to the entire listening public then it's clearly unreasonable (or anomalous at best) to double-charge a portion of that listening public just because they happen to be listening to the broadcast at their workplace. It's precisely this sort of anomaly that generates bad feelings of unfairness in the first place. And once such feelings take hold it certainly won't be changed by laws and prosecutions.[/quote] If you don't look at it as double charging but sharing in the charges by all parties benefiting it seems more reasonable. How would you feel if you were hired to play at a pub and they recorded your performance and played it over and over without paying you or even letting you know. Would you feel you have the right to double charge them for your work?

[quote name='flyfisher' post='1071500' date='Dec 29 2010, 02:06 AM']Imagine a 'bakers rights society' that collected a fee from shops just for the privilege of stocking their products in the first place, in addition to collecting a portion of the actual sales [u]as well[/u]. I suspect most people would think that rather unfair.[/quote] In the US supermarkets charge for shelf space. If you want to be in a good spot in the store you pay the store, then they take a markup too. Just FYI.

You can still wrap around the tuner first but before you put tension on the string push the ball end side of the string out of the bridge about an inch or so (2 or 3 cm. will also work) and it will untwist. Then bring it up to tension and enjoy twist free lazy string changes.

[quote name='redstriper' post='1068795' date='Dec 24 2010, 07:14 AM']And who is Flea, Geddy or Justin ?[/quote] That is out of the mainstream bass for: Red Hot Chili Peppers Rush Tool

Sweet

Push down on the string just behind the nut, if that makes it go away your nut is slotted badly.

Bubinga is very hard. My favs would be maple neck, pau ferro fingerboard and poplar body.

[quote name='flyfisher' post='1070674' date='Dec 27 2010, 04:09 PM']It would be interesting to know the sales of The Beatles on iTunes since the music industry made such a big splash about their catalogue now being online. Does anyone really believe there were loads of people just waiting to finally buy Beatles tunes online, when their CDs have been available for years?[/quote]Here's the results for the first week. Beatles Sales On iTunes Top 450K November 23, 2010 12:00 EST – Digital & Mobile By By Billboard staff The initial Beatles sales figures are in: More than 450,000 albums and 2 million individual songs were sold on iTunes worldwide, according to Apple, since the Beatles catalog was made available Tuesday (Nov. 16). In U.S. the best-selling album was "Abbey Road" and best-selling song was "Here Comes the Sun." [url="http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/news/e3i39b5c49ccd74a21f12815b9fb843970c"]http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_dis...2815b9fb843970c[/url]

[quote name='jakesbass' post='1070082' date='Dec 27 2010, 05:11 AM']BTW it mathS[/quote] It's, not it

[quote name='arthurhenry' post='1069974' date='Dec 27 2010, 02:41 AM']I have never illegally downloaded music and would be uncomfortable doing so, but what if you're downloading a song for your band to learn and play live potentially hundreds of times? In theory at least, the artists would still receive royalties via the PRS, so does that make it OK?[/quote]No. [quote name='wotnwhy' post='1070138' date='Dec 27 2010, 06:26 AM']If a man takes a loaf of bread to feed his starving family, is that stealing?[/quote] Yes. Both of these questions attempt to rationalize theft by intent. The intent is irrelevant to the property owner who has had their property stolen. Both of the above examples are examples of cognitive dissonance. You want to steal but don't want to be a thief so a construct is created that makes your stealing noble. I download music all the time. I steal it. End of story

[quote name='owen' post='1069858' date='Dec 26 2010, 02:58 PM']I am not making any argument here, but could you explain why? If you send it with fully tracked + insured service surely it is no riskier than the UK.[/quote] When you send across countries there are often more couriers involved. The complexity makes resolving issues more difficult as one courier can blame the other for issues. Insurance becomes harder to claim when companies can blame each other. Also there's the perception that the longer journey brings higher risk for damage in transit. If you've ever tried to make an insurance claim on a package you wouldn't feel comfortable relying on it. I believe UPS limits claims for musical instruments even if you purchase additional insurance. I've sent a few eBay items across the globe but I insist the buyer leaves positive feedback before I ship it and therefore assumes all the shipping risk. And then there's good old xenophobia

[quote name='Adrenochrome' post='1068543' date='Dec 24 2010, 02:00 AM']2. The bridge saddle on the B string might not move far enough back to intonate well up the neck.[/quote] If this happens a taper core string may intonate in the saddle range available where a non taper core wouldn't. Anthony Jackson used to string his Jazz BEAD before he got his first 6 string. It's an old school trick

He plays a sleigh red Dingwall, and he doesn't eat all those cookies any more. Sometimes he plays with his brother Carlos Santa.

[quote name='redstriper' post='1068413' date='Dec 23 2010, 04:19 PM']Back to tone and what I think I've learned so far: It's all psychology really - if you believe that you have a good tone, then you do (whatever gear you use) and this helps you play better. But if you think that you have a bad tone, you're doomed to discontent and poor performances. So change the way you think instead of your gear. I know I've got a [b]great[/b] bass tone.............. (which is nice) [/quote] I don't know if I'd swing that far to one side. Your mind is just one part of the equation, most of us tend to think we are perfect little perception devices and discount our mind completely. If we accept that out mind has a lot to do with our perception I think we make better choices and are less affected by advertising hype and quasi religious hair splitting. I tend to believe that those who think they've nailed their perfect singular tone simply can't hear the changes brought on by other variables and are just convinced of the power of their purchases and how close their gear is to Fleas, Geddys or Justins.

[quote name='redstriper' post='1067661' date='Dec 23 2010, 03:57 AM']I wasn't being sarcastic at all, I appreciate your advice here and I'm finding it most refreshing.[/quote] Then I'm clearly misreading you, my apologies

[quote name='scalpy' post='1067635' date='Dec 23 2010, 03:33 AM']If tone isn't important why is there a multi-million pound industry based around live sound and recording, let alone instruments?[/quote]Because it's profitable. Why do people spend billions each year on diets?[quote]Why is a good mix engineer worth their weight in gold?[/quote] Because they have good credits and people will pay for anything that they think will make them a star.

[quote name='TimR' post='1067615' date='Dec 23 2010, 03:21 AM']What other musicians are there that obsess and swap instruments so much?[/quote] IME that would mainly be guitarists including bass guitar and keyboard players.

I have bought basses that I didn't like the tone of, my Tobias renegade for example. Thought the tone sucked, then I figured it out and now it's a fave.

[quote name='redstriper' post='1066952' date='Dec 22 2010, 08:43 AM']Why not buy something that sounds bad, if tone doesn't matter ? In fact why bother listening at all ? Your 'sounds good' will not be the same as mine - tone, like everything else is subjective and I want to 'sound good' to me, not you.[/quote] I'll pretend I didn't see any sarcasm and say there is some truth to that. Somewhat. Our definition of what sounds good is based partly on our familiarity with it. Buying something that doesn't sound good right away can help you build the skills to have more control over your tone, like a piano player who can't swap out pianos all the time. Picking a bass can be like picking a dog, which one you grab may not be that important at first sight but after ten years of bonding your mutt becomes unique to you and impossible to replace as it will never be the same.

[quote name='redstriper' post='1066888' date='Dec 22 2010, 07:40 AM']The previous owner changed the body and board because the originals were so badly burnt by the first owner who often set fire to it as part of his stage show.[/quote] Clearly you had one of the first roasted necks, nothing sounds like roasted maple

[quote name='redstriper' post='1066755' date='Dec 22 2010, 05:27 AM']In breaking news, this changed a few days ago when I played a MIM Fender jazz at a friend's house. It was beautifully set up with flats and a low action and it wasn't too heavy, it was the closest in tone to my old bass that I have found. It isn't for sale, but my friend said he can set up almost any Fender or Squier in the same way and I have decided to look for the lightest jazz I can find.[/quote] To me this suggests the string choice has a dominant tone shaping function. I think if you had someone else record a handful of J basses with flats plucked over the neck you'd have a hard time picking yours out from the bunch. What we hear has been shown to be an experience formed by more than one sense, when you play a bass you've had for 30 years you have a very strong expectation of what you'll hear. So while you may never find a bass that sounds exactly the same to you it shouldn't be too hard to find one that can't be distinguished tonally by anyone else.