Starless

I always use the dot on the right. And it seems to be right. Right? edit: but of course if you're left-handed it will be the dot on the left - ehm... like what he said above - the one nearest the bridge. edit: or the one furthest from the headstock. It may be in the middle (I doubt it), but no way is it the other dot - that's just wrong and completely un-intonateable.

[quote name='Doddy' post='943714' date='Sep 2 2010, 05:59 PM']Starless-I don't know what you play like or anything...[/quote] I play like John Paul Jones, Jack Bruce and Andy Fraser. [quote name='Doddy' post='943714' date='Sep 2 2010, 05:59 PM']....the students I have are happy to put the work in and study.... ...I loved to study and practice.... ...requires just as much study.....[/quote] I don't think we will ever see bass playing or it's place in youth culture (or any age-group culture) from the same point of view. To me that word 'study' belongs in the vocabulary of the technically perfect classical cellist or horn player, or student preparing for exams. The bass guitar is a 'modern' instrument born out of Jazz and brought up by rock, pop, prog, punk etc. Technical perfection in these genres may be attainable, but I would suggest they are less than desirable. If your students are 'happy to put the work in' then by that I hope you mean they are keen to progress. It sure as hell has never been 'work' to me. This relatively recent formalisation of bass and (non-classical) guitar into grades through Exam Boards and the rest is heartbreaking to someone like me who grew up when these instruments were 'dangerous', un-appreciated (and positively discouraged) by parents and to master them meant going it alone and forging your own take on the groundwork laid down by those before you. I'm pretty sure Eric Clapton never sat any 'GCSE Delta Blues (Acoustic)' grading exams. If he had, he would have repeated parrot fashion what his syllabus taught and nothing would have progressed, because he would have been 'trained' to do it the right way. Nothing of any lasting value in rock has ever been done 'the right way'. Is it any wonder that the world is currently full of teen/twenties guitar bands doing absolutely nothing new? I'm 53, why am I not being outraged at what kids 30 years younger then me are producing, like my parents before me were (and their parents before them - my grandparents couldn't stand that new-fangled Jazz, my parents just didn't get anything from the 60's onwards). As long as bass teachers keep churning out Flea clones and guitar teachers keep churning out Slash clones and the rest, then I fear nothing will ever change again.

If I can slip into 'when I were a lad' mode for a moment or two, there was no such thing as a bass teacher when I was 13. There was no tab, just piano based sheet music for the day's popular music hits. Probably one of my first achievements at that age was memorising the chords to Ride A White Swan while flicking through the sheet music rack, dashing home and trying it out with the record playing in the back ground. I was a star! My 'teachers' came on platters of black vinyl and I could call on them any time I wanted, John Paul Jones, Andy Fraser, Jack Bruce - all at my beck and call whenever I needed to try figure something out. I wanted to emulate these people, and in the process of copying them picked up the greatest skill of them all which cannot be taught - how to LISTEN. The more bass lines you figure out by listening to them, the faster and easier it becomes to figure out the next one. Led Zep II was a struggle, but by Led Zep IV I was playing along very quickly. No one showed me how to play bass, they didn't need to because it really isn't rocket science. Here's a simple test. Go and find a song that you are not familiar with (nothing too taxing bass-wise) and listen to it. Give yourself a week (no cheating, no tab, no sheet music), and if you can't play the bass line (doesn't have to be at the correct tempo, just the correct notes) then no amount of 'teaching' is going to make a blind bit of difference in the long run. Consider percussion as a career path. Did JPJ place his thumb in the same place as Jack Bruce? or did Andy Fraser utilise one-finger-per-fret or....... who gives a hoot - certainly not me. If I picked up 'bad habits' then I continue to be blissfully un-aware that these are bad habits, and it bothers me not one jot as long as I can still play the damn music. I recently acquired a double bass and decided to check on t'interweb for the correct way to hold a French bow. Waste of time, there are 101 different experts out there who advise 101 different ways to hold it - so I'll do what comes naturally. What's the point of paying money to a teacher who, after trying various hand positions will declare, "Hmm.. just do it the way that feels most comfortable for you, that'll be £17.50 please" - Ker-chinng! The little runs and shapes that John, Jack and Andy taught me are not cast in concrete in the songs that I orginally learned, I can use them all over the place. They may be pentatonically ambioniphonicly Gregarian in their pentanamera Diolithian progression but that is information that I've managed to do without in a playing situation thus far and am happy to maintain this level of ignorance until the day I die (life really is too short). If someone is serious about taking up the bass, then my advice is to acquire THE most important piece of kit at least 6 months prior to purchasing their first bass. A six-stringed acoustic guitar. There, I've said it. This notion that bass is somehow on a different cerebral plain from six-stringers has the unfortunate side-effect of making people think that it is perfectly acceptable to learn bass - and nothing else. How many 'proper' bassists are there out there in the real world of showbiz who have no idea how to hold down a G7 or Am on a six-stringer? What kind of bassist takes part in a jam session and can't recognise the shapes that the guitarist is making with his hand on the fretboard? A less than desirable one, that's what. Apart from anything else, an acoustic guitar is very easy to pick up and noodle around on the bottom four strings (yes kids, they are tuned the same as a bass) without annoying the neighbours. You're not wanting to start churning out highly complex classical or finger-pickin' tunes, just master the basics of at least 1st position chord shapes, so if Bert Weedon's 'Play In A Day' is too complicated for someone to master on their own then again, they should start looking for a nice second-hand drum kit - not a teacher (who will just be following Bert's 'syllabus' anyway) If someone's attitude to bass (or guitar) is, 'I can't play because I need someone to teach me', then they can't play, and should just take up golf.

[quote name='Johnston' post='936041' date='Aug 25 2010, 02:57 PM']Maybe a daft question but when you order one can you specify the neck dimensions or is it just luck of the draw?[/quote] It is a daft question. Ric please themselves and don't tell anyone. There is no indication on the bass itself as to what you are getting. If you order new then you will get whatever rolled off the production line at that particular time. The recent neck shenanigans started when Ric made a cosmetic change to the fretboard inlays. Originally the 'shark fin' inlays stretched from one side of the fretboard to the other (full-width inlays), but in 1973 they stopped that and the inlays were narrower (non-full-width). This was an attempt to strengthen the neck by not chopping the fretboard into non-contiguous pieces (which is what a full-width inlay effectively does). The extra strength was needed to combat many cases of Ric necks bending all over the place when those new-fangled roundwound strings were used. This is how things were up until quite recently when for no apparent reason (other than to maybe coax a few more sales out of the more-money-than-sense brigade who wanted that 'vintage' vibe) they re-introduced full-width inlays again. This would have weakened the neck again so they just made it thicker to compensate (not telling anyone - least of all their potential customers). After a bit of an outcry at these thick necks, they kept the full-width inlays, but started making the necks multi-piece and thin again (rather then the single slab of wood that a Ric neck usually was). Maybe they've stopped piddling about and this is how Rics will be from now on, but don't bet on it. One thing is for sure, if they change things again, they won't let anyone know (until the sh*t hits the internet forums), by which time that brand new £1800 bass that you hate will be gathering dust in your bedroom cupboard. What has been churned out of the factory in recent years is a complete lottery and the only way to decide if a Ric neck is for you is to hold it and play it.

[quote name='ead' post='929711' date='Aug 19 2010, 01:00 PM']...they are fantastic basses with some [b]remarkable quirks [/b](e.g. the bridge).[/quote] That has got be the most euphemistic decription of that tangled heap of junk I have ever heard. Seriously, when budgeting for a Ric, add another £100 on top for a Hipshot replacement (cost from US plus shipping/VAT) and then another £20 or so for the Pickguardian PU surround (again from the US). I do like Rics, but their insistence on continuing to incorporate these 'remarkable quirks' on a £1500+ bass is beyond a joke now. But like I said, their order books are full so why change anything? They have made noises for years now about changing the tail-piece design, but Hipshot beat them to it and anything Ric come up with would have to be almost identical to the Hipshot design - which would be ironic as Hipshot would probably have a good case for hauling them through the courts (which is something Rickenbacker love to do to anyone who produces anything vaguely Rickenbackerish). 20 mins in a shop with a 4003 is not enough if you are not familiar with them. The entire 20 mins would be taken up with the 'wow' of holding it and marvelling at the body shape etc. When that novelty wears off, the annoying stuff starts to eat away at you... Find someone local and try/buy used. Guaranteed you will get the same price for it if you sell 6 months down the line. Buying new will inevitably mean you lose some dosh.

Having owned a 4001 back in the 70's I 'got used to it' early in life. I've owned a few 4003's more recently (pick of the bunch was actualy a Macca 4001 'sanded' re-issue) and it is still very much an odd-ball bass (IMHO) compared to more traditional designs. The Good? Mega sustain - needs to be tamed a lot of the time. Vast range of noises from gut-rumbling bottom to buzz-saw teeth-clenching top-end grind. Shorter scale is comfy, 'parallel' neck less so. Hangs nicely on a strap. Adjustable damper mechanism great for simulating an upright. Hold their value quite well. The Bad? (Here goes) The metalwork is terrible. The tailpiece/bridge assembly is a joke. I don't think they could have come up with a more awkward, limiting, un-adjustable contraption if they'd tried. The tail will lift after a while and reduce the break angle over the saddles. Palm muting is a nightmare because of aforementioned damping mechanism housing. Intonation adjustment is a constant loop of check, loosen strings, take out bridge part, tweak screw, replace bridge part, tune up, check, loosen strings, take out bridge part..... String height adjustment is one side or the other (not individual strings). The bridge pickup is housed in a gaping hole in the body, cover the hole by leaving the (plastic) pickup cover on (serves no useful purpose) but this restricts where you can pick/finger. Remove the useless plastic cover to reveal the gaping hole and the chrome pickup surround which is cunningly designed wth sharp protruding points which catch your plucking fingers right on the meat. The pickup selector toggle switch (on all 4 Rics I have owned) is sprung on a hair-trigger so the slightest inadvertent touch on it in the 'up' position will ping it back to the middle position mid-song. Solution? Replace stock tailpiece with a Hipshot drop-in Ric replacement. You lose the damping mechanism but gain total adjustability with no protruding edges and palm-muting now possible all the way back to the saddles (which adjust individually in every dimension - even side-to-side string spacing can be adjusted). Just don't mention the Hipshot on the RickResource forum - they will ban you (it happened to me). For the pickup surround, invest in a Pickguardian replacement pup surround (available in a variety of finishes) and avoid chopping your plucking fingers to bits. The company itself has something like a 2 year backlog so they don't really need to bother their arses as the order books are full for the forseeable. This attitude manifests itself in their amazing habit of messing around with the neck profile (one of a Ric's major selling points - a super slim neck) and not telling anyone. If you tried a mate's Ric in December then bought one manufactured in January you would wonder why it felt nothing like your mate's. The necks range from slim to chunky to not-so-chunky and back to slim depending on the year and month of manufacture. If you order a new one now (and wait two years for it to turn up) you haven't a clue what you will be getting. If you buy one off of eBay - you haven't a clue what you will be getting. Unless you can find one locally, in the colour you want then try before you buy. A grand and upwards is lot of money to be taking a wild stab with - and that's what you'll be doing when you a buy a new-ish Ric as far as the neck is concerned. In general, if I hadn't been introduced to Rics at an early age, I would not own one today. I discovered Fenders (and similar style basses) long after my Ric, and although it took me a while, I now 'get it' as far as Fenders are concerned. The Ric has tended to have a few 'celeb' owners (Squire, McCartney, Waters, Geddy Lee etc etc) but it always seems to be a temporary association as they all moved on to other things, and once the novelty of a Ric wears off, you are left wondering (at least I am) exactly why you paid an absolute fortune for such an oddball piece of kit. My latest Ric I got 2nd hand (very cheap) and I have been restoring it to more pristine condition. I would never buy a new one, that is just mental (IMO) (see neck profile changes above).

These company forums are a waste of space as inevitably ( and understandably) you can't freely express any less than favourable opinions. As previously mentioned, the RickResource forum is an amazing temple of worship for all things Ric-shaped. It is not company affiliated, but I would suggest that Ric's head honcho himself is not averse to tapping the admins on the shoulder every so often when something crops up that casts a less than favourable light on some aspect of Rics. An amazing thread some time back, where a newbie, keen-as-mustard Ric fan told the story of how he loved Rics but could never afford one. So he poured over photos of them and eventually made his own one. He was that keen, it was a remarkable thing to have done and he proudly showed pics of his handiwork. The poor guy was hung, drawn and quartered by the resident zealots. 'Trademark infringement', 'Sacrilidge!', 'Copies devalue the purity of US made Rics' etc etc. Poor guy must have wished he hadn't bothered. Being US moderated doesn't help in these places either. Irony, Sarc, tongue-in-cheek just don't seem to register on that side of the pond quite the same way it would on this side... as I found to my own amusement when I got banned for trying to be 'funny'. It hadn't helped that up to that point I had been extolling the virtues of an aftermarket replacement bridge for the 4003 (sacrilidge!). My card was marked and I had my plug pulled. Beware the brand-centric forum - therein lurks a competely irrational devotion to the logo and all common sense and any semblance of free-speech flies out of the window. (basically they're all run by loonies).

I've scanned through the whole thread and can't believe (unless I've missed it) that no-one has mentioned the most abominable mis-use of a bass guitar in its long, distinguished history. I speak of the ding-a-ding-a-chucka-chuka-meep-meep bollix that was the 80's and fecking Level 42 in particular. What the bejesus was that all about? Summed up that decade perfectly, all style and panache over any kind of musical relevance. Awful, just awful, and what is worse it gave birth to a whole generation of so-called 'bassists' who to this day go ding-a-ding-a-chucka-chuka-meep-meep in music shops up and down the country (the urge to strangle the spotty nerds trying out a bass who break into some ding-a-ding-a-chucka-chuka-meep-meep is overwhelming). If you want some wacky, off-the-wall noises then get a bloody synth player. Rant over.

[quote name='chris_b' post='867147' date='Jun 14 2010, 04:22 PM']Don't get hung up on the tools. Just concentrate on the job.[/quote] Snappy soundbite, but ultimately bo**ocks. Golfer fulfills his potential with wrong sized clubs? Runner does his best times wearing wrong size shoes? ....

In fact here's one: [url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/RICKENBACKER-4003-s-5-STRING-JETGLO-BASS-GUITAR-W-CASE-/370390933595?cmd=ViewItem&pt=UK_Musical_Instruments_Guitars_CV&hash=item563d05205b"]http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/RICKENBACKER-4003-s-...=item563d05205b[/url] Probably a bit pricey, but it is a 4003s model which is rare these days (not manufactured anymore). If a standard production model comes up as fiver it would be cheaper.

Rickenbacker's 'standard' scale length is 33.25" (4003 etc). I have Fenders and a Ric and the difference is very noticeable over long periods of '3-semitone' stretches. Although there are not a lot of fivers kicking around, a standard 4 string can be modded to 5 without any problems to the existing neck. Not sure if the string spacing would be to your liking though (pick or fingers?).

[quote name='silddx' post='867253' date='Jun 14 2010, 06:19 PM']Jeez. Mate, that is such sh*te. I'm assuming you're a young fella though so hopefully you'll learn. There's a lot of guitarist-bashing going on here that is simply untrue, unenlightened and unfair. It's not light-hearted rivalry here, it's just damn ignorant.[/quote] ...and a fairly light-hearted thread finally descends into condescending holier-than-thou finger wagging... Shame.

[quote name='lowdown' post='867200' date='Jun 14 2010, 05:12 PM']Good grief... So Nile Rodgers is just a dumbass rhythm player... Good rhythm gtr is a serious art.[/quote] But can he play bass?

[quote name='cheddatom' post='867121' date='Jun 14 2010, 03:48 PM']I my band(s) we know our roles and respect each other's. None of us put in more effort than the others. Maybe it [i]is[/i] really easy for the guitarist to play that fast and sing at the same time, but the rythm section don't give a f*ck because he's doing it well.[/quote] Sorry, I just edited in a little winking smilie to my post. Don't want to get too heavy....

I was thinking about this, and in a gig situation - who has the 'easier' life? If you assume two guitarists (one generally a chordsman, and the other a twiddler), just who is working harder throughout the evening? The bass player (and drummer) in the vast majority of cases have to maintain the beat, the tempo, in fact they are responsible for the entire evening's 'feel'. The bassist isn't simply thumping out 4 beats-in-the-bar root notes all night (surely). There is a lot of invention woven around the beats - I would venture as much invention as a lead guitarist. But the lead guitarist does not play lead throughtout the whole evening, every second of every song (just shoot the bugger if he does), whereas the bass player (to a lesser degree) is playing 'lead' notes most of the time (just not as obviously audible). The chordsman has an easy life. Make a shape with your fingers and then keep that shape for a few bars, and then make another shape.. repeat whilst strumming/chugging with the occasional arpeggio or hammer-on to wow the audience. Child's play. Any bass player worth his salt knows how to play (at least) 1st position chords on a geetar (if for no other reason than to be able to recognise what is being played by a guitarist when you have to 'wing' a song for the first time). I have packed up the gear after a good night's work and felt my arms/hands/fingers throbbing after the exertions of the evening (drummer flaked out behind his stool). It can be bloody hard work! The guitarists pull their jack-plugs, look at their fingertips and go 'Ooh, a bit raw luvvie, how's yours?'. In the old days of my first teen bedroom band (almost 40 years ago), I played guitar, was probably the best at it, but moved to bass because anyone else who played it just followed the root notes. They eventually ended up playing rhythm guitar - which surely is the lowest common denominator in a band. Although the concept of a purely rhythm guitarist is long gone, that is exactly what a 'lead' guitarist becomes in-between his twiddly bits - so for the vast majority of a gig all guitarists actually spend their time being the dumbass rhythm player - a job that requires the least talent of any of the band's functions. (IMHO of course )