JTUK

I'd put 2x410's up against that and expect it to belt it. There isn't much advantage to this config unless you split the signal/bi-amp and even then, the gains aren't enough to pursue it, IME. You'd have to invest in a bollocking stereo amp to get anywhere and the cost against the gains..?? hmmm. but at least you'd have control with power balance and x-over point, hopefully, otherwise if a mono signal...you are hopelessly out of control with what goes where..

[quote name='Prime_BASS' timestamp='1338020397' post='1668632'] also it shouldn't be surprising that more speakers give you more..... As good as some of the tiny 1x10/1x12 cabs are, if you compare it to anything a lot bigger, it will get truanced. Unless you arte using Barefaced..... [/quote] nope...it will get tonked by decent 410's.... so assume you joke. I can't think of 2x112's that can get there, let alone one. My 2x210's trounce my 2x112's in everything bar weight and carry.

The duo concentric cone has been around for ages..nothing new there.

I think you'd have to go a long way to beat a good 410...but you might decide you can get by if weight and space is the major consideration.

I'll have everything I need to take the bass apart, inc a whole raft of allen keys and a very comprehensive tool kit. About the only thing I don't normally take is a soldering set. Spare strings in good nick, batteries, cables, plug boards, are basics.

Agree..a lot of amps just can't sound the same going up through the volume dial... and it depends if you can live with what the amp sounds like when pushed hard. This is why I would want a lot of power left in the tank for amp and cab.and also might go to general build quality and this sorts the men out from the boys, ampwise.IMO

I've had a few 18's years ago as they were the only way to put any real bottom into the sound. Completely useless on their own tho, but as chris say's you were just happy to get useable lows. I used an Acoustic 301 for the same reason but you needed a good enough amp to run another cab to get any real defintion..typically a 4x12 but getting an amp that could do that was just as bigger problem as anything else soundwise. SWR did put out a Big Ben 118 but they were into bi-amp mode with their amps so this made sense when used with another toppier cab...but all overkill now. 18's are subs territory today and you have to ask yourself in what context you could ever use one.

Depends if you can get gear on the tech rider. There are probably 3 general stage of doing this... You schlep around in a band van with your backline gear so this needs to be able to all fit in ..or you get flown in and the backline is provided.. or you are big enough to take the entire production out and your set-up with be packed up with all the rest I would suggest that a 100x30ft stage would drown your gear and you'd need pro monitoring. You need to draw up a tech rider to give out to the Events and they need to send you theirs.

I've seen luthiers hand rasp the bodies over weeks and laquer for a month...so the can be a MASSIVE distinction but it is that sort of attention to detail and hand work that costs the extra....

Depends on your hands and the strenght in your fingers and fingering technique. I'd say no bigger than 100-40's myself.... depends if you intend to clamp the strings with a grip or use more finesse. You will need strongs fingers and muscle strenght to fight a 45 string with your little finger after going off a gtr... and you need to take action into account.

nope..I use what I use because it does what I want it to. Why else would I want it? My sound and tone and therefore style, is the same ..pretty much..at home or on a gig. The only reason I can see where you might change things up is for visual/cosmetic reasons and that might be valid if large sums were involved. For me, the whole point of playback systems is to produce the sound I want to hear and sound-like to go togther with what I play like.

[size=5][sup]I have a guy in Maidstone but he is decidely old skool, so you would need to chat to him about this. PM me for contact details.[/sup][/size] [size=5][sup]There are a few guys in that tech sticky around Dartford/Gravesend, IIRC[/sup][/size]

Can't argue with the price but you get what you pay for...so if it works out then, bonus. A slight tangent here.. I was talking to a good friend who is very grounded in all things musical..and predominantly sound re-enforcement and we were talking about amps and cab component quality. I mentioned a few names and he surprised me by telling how much kit he had had come back for repair/replacements. Makes you pretty wary of going anywhere near some of that, by the volume of returns he talked about. Maybe this is a thread in itself..

IMO, a 110 is a practice monitor or a very quiet jazzer. A 112 is a better option for rehearsal but if there isn't much difference between rehearsal volume and gig volume, then you'll go to 2 anyway, IMO. and then all you are doing is upgrading the 212 for 2x112 and the gain is portabilty against cost. The cheapest way to do this is Hy-drives or EBS classic 112, I'd venture...or get lucky second hand.

It wouldn't be my match on the face of it...but as a stop gap, then sure. I think TC amps will work best with cabs designed for their nuances..and I really liked the RH750 with matching RS210 cabs..but would be wary otherwise. But then this is normal with a lot of amps and cabs..so match well and others don't... You can have forgiving and clean amps and cabs so generally clean and clean works and dirty/forgiving match well, but as always, plug it in and see what you think/hear. If I was going down the TC route..it would be with their cabs as well, eventually.

Understand the first in diary sentiment, but......there are exceptions IMO... But as long as YOU sort out the mess then you can change a booking in exceptional circumstances. You could use an online calender for all to see who is available..but it needs to be keep bang upto date otherwise there is no point.

This whole thing goes to quality and control. You may be able to use less desirable or throwaway bits and bods and luck out on a good sounding bass but you would need to find that and hear it, to know whether that was true...IMO. Once you get into custom jobs, you have to worry less...or should do otherwise you have the wrong builder..... about good or very good choices of components and build but then the leap of faith is that you do not know exactly how it will sound until your have strung it up and plugged it in. It is still the way to go for me though...

I always take certain claims with a pinch of salt especially regarding cabs...and even more so regarding Americans and their latest best things. As in all these cases, you need to hear the things, in an ideal world, and I wouldn't be paying over the odds for forum hype. For example, I really like the look of Baer, but they aren't available here so that rules them out as far as I am concerned. Other stuff, I just can't get past the poor presentation so that says if they can't get that right, why trust anything else they do..

I agree you need to shop wisely but, IMO, an upgrade would be HK upwards. There isn't a lot between PV and then JBL and Mackie in terms of sound Versus reliability, IME and not worth a band investment. The singer should be able to do a gig with a functioning P.A and then if things progress you look to spend more wisely, At 70 gigs a year, the OP NEEDS a good P.A band-wise so £3-4K or less .. should be the ticket.depending if your amps and mixer are upto the upgrade. Anything less than much superior P.A, and the band shouldn't bother. The gtr duo equation should not have any impact on whether the band contributes this or that as he only gets to use..for his purposes what he owns, He may want to borrow it etc etc ..but a couple of thousands on a band P.A by the band is for them to tell him where to go..or not. Personally a sizeable invetsment by the band should not be risked on other gigs that don't earn for the band ... as they may drop a cab..get beer knocked over etc etc.. and he sounds like the type of guy to think the band should stump up the repair bill I am all for give and take... but it needs to be reasonable.

[quote name='BottomE' timestamp='1337608481' post='1662655'] Seems to be 2 schools of thought here. [list] [*]Those that use the PA should pay for it [*]Everyone should pay for it [/list] I think after looking at all the posts... The singer is cool to get her own monitors - agreed. Why she doesn't have any in the first place is up for debate but hey ho its a decent offer. The guitarist is being a twat for expecting to own something (and use in an unrelated project) that we are all expected to pay for. He can Foxtrot Oscar on that. If we get a more powerful rig that all can use i'd be happy to pay my share. If they opt for a shinier newer version of what we already have then they can pay for it. I thank you [/quote] Not unreasonable, IMO.

No, I suspect he means that he knows how to mix his sound in the context of the bands he plays in, he wants and needs to hear everything and knows where and how to place his rig and if he should get that drastically wrong once in a blue moon as the room may have just that idiosyncratic shape, damping problem or some other curve ball...then he has others in the band who can correct it or advise and one or two trusted ears out front. If people have to have cabs in their ears because that is the only way they can hear what is going on..who do you think is more likely getting it wrong and has no idea what they are doing or how to go about it.....?? If guys regularly come up to you and say 'love that bass sound' or 'I would love to be able to get that sound' 'excellent mix outfront', 'I could hear every note'...bla bla.. why should that bass player want to change anything..?

If I was looking for a singer.... them having kit might be an issue and if it is, then they either own it or should buy it as they aren't much use without one. If, at a later point, we needed something else to be able to do a job, we would either hire it at a extra cost to the client....which is what we started doing and still do once or twice a year for the bigger gigs, or embellish our own to that degree so we can charge back the band for supplying it ...which in reality means we charge the client the extra and share that amongst the owners of the kit. This inculdes lights.

If we need to start slowly, we will use the first number as a feeler/soundcheck-check with something like 'Come together' We might up it a bit with an Elbow number, 'Grounds for divorce' or if it is more of a show that we need to jump right into, 'Chain gang' or something of that pace.

I think you might find working pro bass players have that one thing down well at least. It may well be that is all they have down and are complete cack elsewhere but they have enough to do the job they are supposed to do...otherwise in most cases, they wouldn't be doing it. Get quite a few people out of that 'comfort zone' and they either bring their style across and blat it..which can work well, or they really struggle.. I recall doing an audition with a name drummer that most here would know and reverve, possibly, for a soul review show and altho he could lay it down, he couldn't empathise with the music at all. I don't even know why he was there..maybe his manager sent him. On local gigs round here you see a few name drummers depping..... and out of their niche, they might struggle and one or two aren't even regarded as the best around, which considering the gigs they've done, is an eye-opener.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1337511393' post='1661056'] Some interesting comments here about how someone can be a perfectly good bassist ( perhaps any instrumentalist?) without having an understanding of music theory, note positions, scales, chords etc. Macca is famously quoted as not being able to read or write music and, whatever your opinions of him, it doesn't seem to have held him back. [b]So . . . . why does music teaching always concentrate on the theory, on notes, scales, chords etc?[/b] I'm not suggesting there is no place for such teaching - of course there is - but why is there no alternative teaching methods that promote the 'self-taught' methods such as jamming along to favourite songs, showing how to play certain licks, that sort of thing? Or maybe there is and I've never noticed. [/quote] Because you are perpetuating ignorance otherwise... Some can get by on that and do very very well...others are stifled but maybe don't realise it or either care. If you are learning then sooner or later you are going to come up against more educated musicians..I am not saying this alone makes them better that may not apply at all...but it means you both may struggle to converse, should you have cause to do so..which is likely.