thodrik

Good to hear everything turned out great after the previous problems. I love that pick up combination (Jazz and big humbucker), be it on Sandberg,Musicman or anything else! I hope the Rh750 issues are resolved soon too.

Unless you have your own soundman/woman at all gigs that will DI you happily at all gigs I would advise to invest in some kind of bass amp, even if it is purely for on stage monitoring purposes. From experience I have found that some soundpersons are totally opposed to DIing and sending bass back through a monitor. Also some PA systems in venues are really only much good for vocals, or there are there are no monitors available for bass. You probably have more of an idea than me when it comes to using slaves and a couple of speakers. I would think for convenience a half-decent combo would be easier to lug around, and it is easy to find lightweight stuff nowadays.

Very cool idea

So how many gigs did the Warwick last for? Well it looks like a sparkly Precision. So Fender make a few, Mr Clayton selects the best ones and the ones he doesn't want get sold off at a great profit. Good business for Fender. I'm glad at least it doesn't have one of those relic finishes that are so common now. I'm guess the finish shines nicely on stage when you are playing in large arenas with one of the most famous bands on the planet. It is what it is. I personally think Mr Clayton has shown more imagination when designing basses than when writing basslines. (In seriousness though, he is a competent player.)

[quote name='Dave Vader' post='1253640' date='Jun 2 2011, 10:15 AM']Yeah, check the high sellers they've done on BBC4 recently, Nick Drake, Sister Rosetta Thorpes.... (getting my coat...)[/quote] Fair enough, though in rock music/classic rock music they don't seem to push the boat out as much. I think that my main point is simply that documentaries on Queen, Deep Purple, the Who and Led Zep have been done to death, ignoring a lot of artists that could be the subject of an interesting documentary. Whether Queen are better or have greater mass appeal than the Smiths does not concern me, as I am not likely to listen to either one of them.

[quote name='Gunsfreddy2003' post='1251810' date='May 31 2011, 05:40 PM']Looking at the list of bands below - I rest my case! I wouldn't put any of them in the same league as Queen. Don't ever recall The Smiths selling out Wembley!![/quote] Umm, I was obviously wasn't using the names based on commercial sales (though AC/DC for one have sold a boatload over the years). I never knew a requirement of 'selling out Wembly' or selling as many records as Queen was required before the BBC will consider doing a documentary, but looking at the BBC's track record. maybe it is! I was listing a bunch of bands that would provide for interesting documentaries that have not already been done to death over and over. I'm not dismissing the merits of Queen, Led Zep, Deep Purple and in all honesty prefer them to many of the bands I listed. I just find that the BBC take a very narrow view when it comes to 'rock' music documentaries. Most of them are great admittedly, but usually we've seen most of the stories and talking heads before. I just think that as a public service broadcaster BBC should be providing a bit more.

[quote name='Gunsfreddy2003' post='1251566' date='May 31 2011, 02:38 PM']To be fair to the Beeb this had plenty of bits and pieces that were new and unseen and I have seen them all! Trouble is there are very few bands about since those that you mention that you could make a documentary about - apart from Metallica of course.[/quote] The Smiths, The Cult, Stone Roses, Oasis, Blur, Radiohead, Nazareth, Sensational Alex Harvey Band, the Kinks, Free, Yes, the Clash, Rory Gallagher, Gary Moore, Robin Trower, AC/DC(though the BBC like to pretend they don't really exist!), New Order, Buzzcocks and Depeche Mode. I'm sure all of those bands/persons have interesting stories that would make for a 'aren't they really awesome' BBC documentary. If the BBC focuses on any of these groups its usually in a big compilation documentary where they get a few sentences in before talking about Queen, Live Aid, Led Zep, Clapton and the other usual suspects. The new footage was great but didn't really provide much really to the normal narrative of 'Queen were a great band, (insert footage of them being great), they had some tough times (insert Freddie's solo album), but they were really awesome at Live Aid and made a great comeback (insert Midge Ure and footage of them being awesome at said show), then Freddie got ill and died, but not without recording some great songs (still photos/videos of him being ill, followed by footage of Wembly concert). It was a great documentary though, I'm just saying that I didn't really get anything new. Though I am now starting to see similarities between Roger Taylor and Lars Ulrich that I didn't see before.

Good show last night, though hardly different from every other BBC documentary focusing on Queen/Freddie Mercury/Live Aid/rock music in general. I think at 25 I can do without seeing another BBC 'rock' documentary focusing on any one of: Live Aid, Queen, Led Zep, the Who, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd, the Beatles, Rolling Stones or anything involving Eric Clapton. Its not that I'm not a fan, its just that I am fed up of the BBC essentially making the same documentaries over and over, when they could just repeat the one they made before. Its not like they are going to get any new information, or that the subject matter is focusing on anything new, (the Paul Rogers/Queen thing was pretty much glossed over entirely).

[quote name='JTUK' post='1251282' date='May 31 2011, 11:48 AM']I would start flat and centred..most people say they want mids when they can't really handle them style/sound-wise. That is why the smiley position is used..and maybe even constitue a pre-set..depending on the TE model. Starting with an open string is a good idea... and just tweak a slider to hear what is happening. Don't use the extreme max or cut as you have nowhere else to go with it.. IMO...and depending how close the next Freq point is ( fader/slider) that will impact on the other freq as well.. So slowly and with logic..so you don't get all confused. These thinsg can be a powerful tone shaping tool and you can tie yourself up in knots. Tweak slowly and a little at a time.. Of course, the best idea... is not to have to do any of all this..and just plug in with the EQ switched off of flat to that amp...ie, centred. Don't get carried away with 'flat'..some amps and cabs are tuned to anything but..just consider it as a return /starter point on your kit.[/quote] Pretty much this. It depends on the bass, the amp, the cabs and personal taste. From experience I have found that running a Trace Elliot amp 'flat' (no eq and no preshape) is very different from running say, an Ampeg SVT, Gallien Krueger or the Hartke etc flat. I found the 'flat' TE sound to be very mid-heavy when using a passive bass, but it can sound great with a bit of tweaking. I think that the Trace Elliot mosfet amps are designed with the idea that everybody pretty much uses the preshape and the graphic eq and feels comfortable tweaking things to get the sound they like. With Trace Elliot amps the preshape will also have a pretty big effect on the sound if you have it on. So cutting around 500Hz with the preshape on could produce a much more scooped sound than if the preshape is off. As a rule of thumb I would just avoid boosting much below 60Hz and above 5Khz or having one fader maxed out, but the next one to the left or right cut out entirely. If I mind right the TE manuals used to have a basic guide on the EQ system. You could just download a manual from their site to have a read through.

I have been using the Trace Elliot 1028H and 1518 separate cabs and they sound fine. I have either been using it with an EBS Fafner (440 watts at 4 ohms) or an older Trace Elliot SMX (300 watts at 4ohms). I have never felt like I have lacked power/loudness and I have not suffered from any phasing issues. An efficient 300 watt at 4ohms amp should manage to cut through in most environments, unless you are playing with 2 guitarists using Mesa Dual Rectifiers through a full stack. There seems to be a mixed reaction to the newer Trace Elliot amps. Some love them and some think that they are nowhere near as good as they were back in the day. The new cabs are a lot lighter than the old ones, though consequently I think that they lack the old 'built like a tank' build quality. I would advise to try one of the new amps to see if it is up your street. You can pick up an older Trace Elliot amp for less than half of the price of the new line. Trace Elliot is now a subsidiary of Peavey now anyway and the amps are made in the Peavey plant in the US, though designed in the UK (I think so anyway...). I think that Hartke is better value for money than the Trace Elliot amps when doing a price comparison when new. However if you want a good Trace Elliot amp, then get a Trace Elliot amp.

Prices like that are a dagger in the heart to the next generation of youtube bassists obsessed with Tool! I'm guessing that for a small workshop delivering a unique product with a high level of demand from consumers, the prices are not far off similar companies. The waiting list is just what it is. I'm just glad they are still in production really.

When a standard US Fender is going for around £1200 and the US Deluxe is going for £1500, the Metro prices don't look that bad. Prices for a lot of stuff has gone pretty sky high. Also the Metro basses are not 'budget' basses built in some massive Cort factory. The quality of construction and design of my Metro is as good as any bass I have tried, and I have tried a few. If folk want to dismiss it because it is an expensive bass that is made in Japan, then let them. Most people that have tried and did not like a Metro would probably not like an NYC either. They are pretty much the same bass. The Sadowskys look similar to Fenders but have a bit more of a clinical sound to them. Some people like it, some people don't. If you want something to sound exactly like a Fender, just get a Fender. Only thing I have against them is that the maple fingerboards on the Metros have a very plain look to them. Mind you I also see that in a lot of NYCs that are ordered without the overly fancy options, so I think it is just a Sadowsky trait rather than proof of it being a cheap bass. Sometimes There was a big thread here last year where everyone got their 'I love/hate Sadowsky' feelings out. I doubt anything has changed frankly and that this will go the same way.

From playing a bunch of really high end bass I have not really found one that played better than my old Precision. There was nothing that I could do technically on a Wal, Sadowsky, Sandberg, Warwick, Vigier, Lakland etc that I couldn't do on my Precision. I have however played many modern basses that naturally 'sounded' a lot better than my Precision, due to the onboard eq. That said, if I fiddled about with the eq on an amp or pre-amp long enough I am sure that I could get my Fender sounding as full as the others, but I would never get the full on modern 'zing' to it. A good player will get a good sound out of most basses. The benefit of the range of basses available is that it allows the bassist to find a bass that matches their exact specifications and tonal expectations. If this however leads you to a 1970s Fender Jazz bass, then get a 1970s Fender Jazz.

It depends on the amp, the bass, the room I'm in, the cab I am using, the state of my strings, effects pedals I am using and the type of music I am playing. On each of my amps the 'flat' settings produce entirely different sounds, so the whole thing turns into a 'how long is a piece of string?' debate. Sometimes you can get great sounds of amps that sound terrible (to me anyway) with everything in the twelve o'clock position or without any pre-shapes or eq settings (Ashdown/Trace Elliot). I think that the trick is spending time with the amp so you can work out what works and does not work for you. It is not a sin to alter the amp eq to get a sound you like, in fact that is what the knobs and sliders are generally there for. One of my amps sounds great with minimal eq boosts and without any pre-shapes, whereas the other requires some button pressing. I frankly don't care either way as they are totally different amps with different characteristics.

[quote name='51m0n' post='1227377' date='May 11 2011, 12:13 PM']When I was 21 I had the same attitude. One silly overconfident cockup later and I've been helping various osteopaths' pension plans for the better part of 20 years. Be careful out there all of you who like the heavy gear, a truly knackered back is for life, not just for christmas....[/quote] Ow! Sorry to hear that. I don't think any of my stuff is actually 'heavy'. I have never owned an all valve amp, 8x10 or one of those 4x10s that weigh about 100lbs. Mind you, I'm turning 25 next week so I'll have to be careful anyway! Most of the heavier gear really requires two people to lift it.

As a 24 year old male with no physical disabilities, I have never really been taken in by the argument that any piece of bass gear weighing over 12 lbs is just too heavy to be considered as a purchase. I think that lighter cabinets are awesome, you could barely move the old Trace Elliot cabinets. The new Trace Elliot cabinets are a lot lighter and still sound good. I'm not a techincal expert but I'm sure that a well designed lightweight 4x10 is capable of sounding as good as a heavier 4x10 cabinet. Of course this can depend on the design and construction of the cabinet itself. A bad cabinet is a bad cabinet regardless of weight. In terms of amps, the quality of sound is dependant on design and personal preference rather than weight. I am not overly keen on minature class D type amps, as I generally prefer the sound of my hybrid mosfet amps, but then again I prefer the sound of my own amps to an Ampeg SVT classic. Using the 'Bass Gear Weight Logic', then therefore should I declare that all mosfet amps are the best, or that simply that I really rate the EBS Fafner and Mesa Walkabout? Also is it really surprising that in a side by side comparison, a secondhand all valve Trace Elliot played through an Eden [u]4x10[/u] sounded 'bigger' than a brand new ultra-modern, compact and easily transportable [u]2x10[/u] Markbass combo? I have to go now and check to see if my five string bass has a bigger range than my four string Precision. :-)

I can't separate the top 4 I'm afraid! All of them are great but in different ways. Here is my list of ten, which actually includes everything I have owned/possessed. 1. Fender Precision 1978 1. Vigier Arpege V string (series 4) 1. Vigier Excess II 1. Sadowsky Metro MV4 5. My current double bass 6. Gibson EB3 1974 7. Westfield Precision bass 8. Squier Affinity Jazz 9. The double bass held together by a mixture of nails, superglue and formica. 10. The double bass that replaced number 9.

From what I have heard these are very nice basses but the fact that each bass has the same wear and tear kinda takes away from the uniqueness of each bass, so when you see more than one of the same model, it looks a bit strange. In principle I am not in favour of the relic effect, but after playing a reliced Sandberg I have to say that if it plays, feels and sounds like a great bass, then it is a great bass. As I tend to 'relic' instruments myself naturally over time, I'm not sure how a pre-worn bass would look after 8 years of gigging! I have no idea why Fender chose to stamp a massive 'Road Worn' stamp on the bodies though. Its probably just there to make sure that there is a demand for the 'Roadworn jazz without a scratchplate' that they have planned for NAMM 2014.

Must say that in the last few years of gigging I have not seen many Musicman's about, but I have seen a few Warwicks. In terms of amps I don't see much Trace Elliot about either, new or second hand stuff. Standard rigs I see are Fender jazz design being played through an Ashdown Mag or ABM head. If not that then its a P bass and a Hartke, or Laney RB stuff.

First gigging rig: Westfield Precision through the PA (1998) First 'proper' gigging rig, 1978 Fender Precision through Trace Elliot GP7 SM 300 1x15 combo (1999-2009) Current rig: Vigier Arpege five string, EBS Fafner through Trace Elliot 2x10 and 1x15/ Mesa Boogie Walkabout 1x15.

I agree on the Aguilar has a poor design in the sense that you can't really use angled jacks on the thing. Ideally you would have a blend as well as an EQ section. Mind you, the thing I like about it is that at low settings of grit it doen't really alter the tone too much, but adds just a bit of extra grit. Not a perfect pedal, but I still like it for gigging regularly due to the construction quality. Before I was using valve overdrives which were just too fragile for regular gigs.

Same here, only have the original Fafner, which does a very good clean to slightly overdriven sound. I would assume that the new one is the same preamp design with the addition of the overdrive. It looks a bit OTT for me personally, as I tend to just use an overdrive pedal if I need anything more, but that doesn't mean that I wouldn't buy it if I had the money!

[quote name='dave_bass5' post='1218803' date='May 3 2011, 04:40 PM'].....only to find the car wont start :-)[/quote] Hopefully I will never have a day like that though...

I usually bring an extra head with me just in case my main amp goes, or if another bassist doesn't bring any gear and I am feeling generous. Also I usually bring a Sansamp Bass Driver to a gig. I usually bring two speakers to a gig, so if one goes I can carry on with the other. In the event that both my amps die, both my speakers break and the Sansamp breaks down, I would probably just go through the PA, though given the previous events I am pretty sure that my bass would then break too. If my backup bass then broke, I think I would just probably call it a day and go home.

I think for me the choice of amps makes a bigger difference to the sound than the cabs. I have three heads and each has a pretty different sound when put through my two cabs. Usually soundguys/girls will just take a DI from the head anyway, so the cabs are just for monitoring/looks, so I feel I would always prefer a 'great amp/good cabinet' combination than a 'good amp/great cabiniet' one. Not something I really spent much time thinking about though to be honest. I bought my amps and cabinets about three years ago and will probably use them until they break down or I come into lots of money, which isn't likely to happen soon.