Gust0o

Chaps, I'm sure this is all buried away in other topics, but I'm back on the question of rehearsal - particularly the rehearsal of original songs. I've been critical of my guitarist before on these forums. He has some reasonable skill, and he's a good contributor of riffs... but only riffs. Last night things almost came to a head, after a particularly awful rehearsal, where it was apparent that: [list] [*]Neither he nor the drummer are actively rehearsing individually, despite our recording every session as a "play along"; the resulting play was sloppy and the structure of some of the originals can shift depending on what the guitarist remembers. [*]Throwing out new riffs all the time is distracting - they take up too much attention and focus and don't leave the room as finished product; I don't mind the odd jam, but three hours of jam to get nothing is a f***ing wind up [/list] I'm worried I'm becoming the stereotypical bass player - the nit-picker, talking another technical language, and generally being un-rock-and-roll. I practice maybe 4hrs a week, or so, sitting down and listening to what we have and genuinely practicing the specifics. I will then noodle another few hours, since I always have a bass to hand, either coming up with new stuff or just mucking about. It pays dividends in rehearsal, as I'm not stood about trying to work out what I want to play - I know already. Am wondering what the balance is - how long people generally rehearse... and how people encourage their bandmates to practice also, so when we all come together we're just ironing out the creases of putting all the various bits back together. I'm just not sure I can be going on like this. I wanted to thump the guitarist last night after the second hour of f***-all and fannying about - especially when I had the wife at home, about to jet off, and it would have been nice to have had some time with her before she went! Thoughts, people?

Agree on Paul - I think a lot of people still labour under the misapprehension that he simply banged out open notes at lightspeed! I would also add: Rex Brown - Pantera... what a total monster! All those little runs, and a really good control of the ryhthmn.

[quote name='Lfalex v1.1' timestamp='1317216168' post='1388191'] Consensus on DD Verni, then!! They don't [u]have[/u] to be Metal/Rock, though... [/quote] Ah, I was mainly covering my iPod collection - a lot of the bassists we spend time talking about on here are the ones who have never made the iPod for regular listening

I'll just add four-or-so, off the top of my head - some we [i]do[/i] mention, but not on a par with some of the more regular names: Alex Webster - Cannibal Corpse... probably the type of music limits plaudits for Alex. DD Verni - Overkill... saw his BC Rich ST bass over on BCRichplayers.com, very nice... if a little road worn! Dave Ellefson - Megadeth... goes without saying Gordon Moakes - Bloc Party... some great little lines from Gordon, great rock/pop player

Wow, was it really 25 years? RIP Cliff.

I think you need to decide what is of the most value - either the sentimental or practical value of having the kit to hand; or having the cash in your hand. It's not the best time to sell, it would seem, which would pose a challenge - unless you need the cash now, there may be better times to go to market and maximise the money you can make from the sales. Of course, that then begs the question of what you will do with that cash, and whether you're really trying to ride out the global financial storm - people often have good intentions with saving, which the For Sale section does it's best to derail

For that price bracket you could also look at the Epiphone V, if you were adamant about the shape. I think it's a given that they'll both have some balance issues, but that's totally up to you as to whether it's a deal-breaker. I think it could be fun, but I would be banking on it being low/lower quality.

The 1976 Thunderbird looks cheap

I only ever hear great things about the G&Ls; to the point that it's only a matter of time before I start listening and do something about. Great bass, I can imagine you'll be very happy with that one

[quote name='Mornats' timestamp='1316959315' post='1384800'] I had a friend coming over so I went out to buy some bed linen. [/quote] Oh aye, you dark horse you! We need a :seedy: smiley! Mainly for me Lovely looking bass, though.

What compressor do you recommend, Tom? Are there any tips to blending the two? I'll admit, the compressor is the one thing I'm really missing - and a few people have mentioned it now, so could be time to learn from it.

[quote name='cheddatom' timestamp='1316773739' post='1382609'] I honestly am so arrogant that I think my bass tone is the best ever. Have a listen to this which is a recording of my old band re-recording our songs in April. There are mistakes etc but just listen to that tone!! [/quote] I like it Tom... It's almost as good as mine... I'll get my coat

I still like this - it's what I aim for everytime I set up: [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rU-1gFKPmo"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rU-1gFKPmo[/url]

Horses for courses, and they all have their moments. There are some which get less time than others, but there are some I would consider as quasi-investments.

I thought this was a Safety Dance reference

Scott Devine's a total dude. I can empathise with the OP. I just think you have to be honest with what you want out of your playing, and what it is in your playing that makes you happy - that will determine how much you might wish to advance, or simply relax back into your comfort zones and enjoy your playing. It's all subjective, so don't listen to any of us telling you there's a single route to "success". Maybe you'll want to learn alongside the band; maybe you'll want to pick up a teacher; maybe you'll just be happy where you are - just let us know what you pick and how you get on

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1316468655' post='1378577'] Lots of different versions of Thunderbirds even with "Gibson" on the headstock, 60s 70s, 90s, modern, reverse, non-reverse. Which one(s) are you interested in? [/quote] Spot on, I would say. There are some common features, such as the long, long neck - but the details change. Reverse has serious neck dive; the non-reverse is marginally more controlled; the electronics will change across some of the models, as will the weight and fittings. For me, they look great and sound great, on the whole. I wouldn't say no... until I had one in my hands, and then I'd find a reason to bitch about why Gibson still insist on that sh*t bridge and poor knob placement (ooh er missus)!

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1316434839' post='1377919'] +1 to all three points! When I first saw it I wondered if the Oak Leaves were a vague German WW2 reference, given Lemmy's intense fascination/expertise on the subject. The oak leaves being some kind of enhanced military award, similar to our "and bar" IIRC, when a second medal of the same type was awarded. Last time I saw the backup bass was in Glasgow a few years ago & he had a lot of trouble with it cutting out. You could see him giving the crew some serious abuse, as he played, to get the main bass fixed.[/quote] Good point, hadn't thought of that - you're right that's an additional merit to an award: e.g. Iron Cross with Oak Leaves.