Paolo85

Right, I had forgotten the pictures! Uploaded now

I have bought it a few months ago from here.

The R from the logo on the headstock has peeled off (was like that when I bought it), for the rest it is in great condition. 

I was a bit wary of the truss rod, I thought there was too much wiggle, but Jim at PlanetGuitar assured me it's all good (great guy btw, glad I have met a tech I feel I can trust). There is a minimal sign of fingerboard wear as I play with rounds, but you cannot even feel it with the finger and certainly does not affect playability.

It's a great bass, with the most comfortable neck, superlight and superversatile.

I am selling at a low price because I paid £375 for it and I just do not flip at a profit on BC. Have added £10 as I have given it fresh strings (D'Addario NYXL 50-105).

I bought this on a quest for a jazz sound. I can't play jazz really but I am slowly working on it.

But after buying a half good Stagg EUB this month and trying a Yamaha SLB, I have seen the light and realised I need to use an upright for my jazz itch.

So I sell this to help cover the cost of the Stagg and my nonsensical decision to spend more than I paid for it to give it a fingerboard shooting.

Pick up from Bromley or I can meet in central London though I am not there very often

Right, I have given it a first good listen. 

-Scott is a great player and absolutely not a show off. Obviously you don't just play roots and fifths in this genres but he plays for the band

-I think the album is great BUT...

-...I say it is great the way an album of a friend of a friend (or say a Basschatter sharing their music here) can be great. While there have been some extremely rare exceptions, I do not think this will become regular listening for me. The fact is, there isn't much recorded after 2000 that is regular listening for me

- I have one issue with this album. Often times it seems to come straight from the early 90s. That's mostly down to guitar and keys and how they go together. There is nothing wrong with making music heavily inspired by the past. Just I happen to find the typical early 90s fusion sound quite cheesy

- I agree with those saying this album keeps well within the boundaries of its genre so yes I'd say it won't make history

5 minutes ago, Rayman said:

 

I hear you.  Listen, I'm a jazz fan, along with metal, dub, funk, Britpop (😉) etc etc... a vast array of different genres.... I'm a music fan, like most of us are. I love fusion.... Mahavishnu Orchestra, Weather Report, Jamiroquai, (early) Level 42 etc... some amazing stuff there.

 

I also love art and poetry. However,  there are, for example some works of art and poetry that make me work too hard to understand.  I want to understand,  but no matter how hard I work, I don't get it. There's nothing for me, intellectually, to grab on to. It makes me feel like I'm too stupid to get it, and gets my back up.

 

That's how I feel about this music.

 

In my opinion, art should make you feel good and make you want to go back for more. For me, this art makes me feel like a Cy Twombly painting. Confused and irritated. 

Well, if you don't understand no matter how hard you work then it is safe to say you don't like them. Which is fair enough and no need to feel bad about it in my opinion. There is no way one can like everything and quite frankly mot everything is good.

But then there are some considerations that are interesting IMO in terms of what conclusions to draw.

So, I agree art should please us and make us want to go back for more. But it does not mean that you have to like it the first time around. I am sure that, like everybody, it happened to you that you did not like something, then years later something clicked and you started liking it. I figured out that maybe I like Jamiroquai less than a year ago. They used to irritate me.

Now, I am not meaning here that Scott's album is a masterpiece and one day you'll get it. I still have to listen to the album properly. They make me think of Gary Willis' Tribal Tech a bit. Which I don't get. But then I love Gary Willis solo (eg Bent). You replace the aggressive guitar with a fiery sax and suddenly it works for me.

There is music of the kind played by Scott that I can confidently say it's just good. Not everybody has to like it but that goes for everything.

As it happens, I do not get Twomby either. But I do seem to get stuff that at first sight is just as minimalistic and abstract such as Fontana, Kounellis and Klein. It pleases me and make me wsnt more. While I seem not to get stuff that on paper seem less abstract and complex such as Hirst.

So I think the fact that Twombly is not our cup of tea does not mean there's anything wrong with making stuff that's minimalistic and abstract. It's just a matter of whether it's good or not, and whether we click with it or not

Right, I thought I had heard the drummer's name before... Scott's drummer and keyboard player played together in this other fusion album with a more "relaxed" vibe which I find rather beautiful 

Apparently they also plaied with Gary Willis. Chances are that's the link between them. I think Scott studied with Willis although I am not 100% sure. Certainly Willis does a lot for SBL anyway

I have them in my P bass, I adore them. I must say though I think there is always a trade off. Brighter pickups that are wound a bit less can have a different charm and even a bit more clarity than the Tonerider IMO. Still, I am well set on my Tonerider

1 hour ago, Rayman said:

 

 

But so far the album sounds like the soundtrack to a 70s cop show….. you know…. when the police are chasing the bad guys down a back alley in San Francisco….. in a gold sedan with a magnetic red flashing light on the roof….. crashing through piles of empty cardboard boxes with a box of donuts on the dashboard.

Weren't they using funk for these movies?

Well, it's fusion. I have listened to two songs only, just coming back from seeing a band live, I really do not have an opinion on it yet. But I must say why I adore some fusion albums, it's not very many and rarely that's the case when the guitar player clearly likes their metal (nothing against "normal metal though").

That being said, in my opinion, any consideration on this album should be made in the context of its genre. If someone doesn't like fusion they won't like this full stop. Same way there's no chance I'd like a Britpop album.

There's part of BC that seem to find it hilarious that some musicians study music, build chops and god forbid try to push the boundaries of what can be done on the instrument - or at least move to the vicinity of those boundaries, as I think it's more the case here.

Not a comment on the OP, to be clear.

I had a GSR205b, not tje same but similar. Very good neck for the price point (including good fretwork). Sound I was not 100% in love - not that 9t was bad. My bet is that the split coil of the GSR200 would sound better

I was forced to stop at 18. Then tried again years later but it did not last long - wrong approach, wrong time in my life. Thinking back, what's interesting is that the periods that followed these two stops were quite amazing in terms of exploring new things and personal growth. I would not say that's because I was not playing. But maybe it helped in terms of freeing up mental space.

In fact, the first time around I believe it even made me a better at listening to music. As a musician, even hobbyst musician, one HAS to listen to music. Which does not mean that it's a chore, but part of the brain listens to music as something that maybe would be cool/useful to learn/play/take inspiration from. When that part of the brain was switched off, and I was open to the possibility of not actively listening to music at all for months (and it happened at times), it became "if I give this record my time and attention, what do I get back?". My tastes changed a lot and I am quite happy about it.

Obviously, this is not an argument against playing. I do play now. Every day for the past two years.

But for those of us that do not have to make a living with it, it is always fair to ask ourselves if it is really rewarding, or maybe at certain times in out lives it is just a slightly addictive habit. Or maybe just part of our self-image that we are afraid to let go because of how much we have invested in it, and we end up investing more (more gear, for example) in order to keep the flame alive when we could just explore something different.

I went a couple of times. Last time the staff seemed almost uninterested in concluding a sale ("...or you can buy online it may be easier", something like that). I suspect Yamaha sees that shop - which is quite magnificent compared to the Denmark street shops - more as a way to support the brand than a way of making money.

6 minutes ago, Yan_Huriey said:

UPDATE...put those Rotosound flats on my P bass, I've got to say, I'm liking them a lot.  Neck may or may not need shimming to counteract the tension, too early to tell, love the feel of them, loving the sound. Thank you everyone for the advice.  I might put flats on another bass now.

I may be totally wrong but I am not sure a shim would necessarily work out fine. Higher tension strings do not change the neck angle directly. They do so by adding relief/bow. If you have no room to counteract that with the truss rod, a shim may reduce the string height at say the 12th or 17th fret, but you'll still have a significantly higher relief than you were used to, which means the overall playability is not as it was. Consider string height is discussed in terms of 1.5, 2.5 or 3.5mm. Relief is discussed in terms of 0.1mm meing low, 0.5mm being high. Granted, you may be ok with a higher relief. But there may be an argument for lower tension flats there..

In my opinion,somewhere near the P position. Then you tame it with tapewounds, tone rolled off, a mute, and playing near the neck. I was very happy with the results on a P.

For DB you need punch and clarity.

I have limited experience of pickups closer to the neck bit yes, so far my impression is thet you lose something 

I have basses with both. You'd expect the latter to create less confusion when you switch from fretless to fretted and viceversa. Strangely, I find it's the opposite

12 minutes ago, Linus27 said:

What's the tension like on GHS Precision Flats? 

I would say perceived tension more than rounds of the same gauge but not a lot more. Less than LaBellas (excluding the LTFs)

Some notes I wrote somewhere else:

"Thomastick Infield –  Small gauge, extremely low tension. Very soft on the fretting hand but may require higher action depending on the quality of the fretwork as they are more prone to buzzing (in general that’s always the trade off wirh lower tension/gauge). They reportedly last forever (you hear of people that hsve them on for 10 years or so) and have very strong high mids for being flats. So unlike most flats they tend to stand up in the mix a bit more

Labella – I have tried the Jamerson, the 44-104 and the low tension flats. Low tension flats are my favourite, they are surprisingly thumpy compared to the gauge. The round core in my opinion makes them more “bouncy” and expressive. I am a for lowish gauge strings in general for similar reasons. Other Labellas are stiff relative to their gauge (as most flats are, not exceptionally stiff). LaBellas apparently are the go-to strings for a vintage thump. They have both the thump and to my ear also an element of pronounced top end. To my ears, they sound a bit unbalanced unless the gauge is high (the E is too thumpy and can at times disappear, the G has that top end and not enough thump so may sound tinny with the tone rolled up). But that’s me, they are the most popular flats and maybe my ear is funny

Dunlop flats – they have a thin core and are rather low tension, and a bit like the TIs have a somewhat roundwound zing. I prefer the TIs

-GHS precision flats – I have tried 55-105, 45-95 and 45-105. The 45-95 are my favourite flats alongside the TIs. Not properly low tension but more pliable than LaBellas. 45-95 and 55-105 have unbalanced tension, with e much sofer than the G (and the 55-105 are hard work for me) – but I like a beefier G so it’s worth it. A bit less thump and more clarity than LaBellas in my opinion. Still, we are talking proper vintage thump, nothing like Dunlop or TIs. They take a long time though (weeks and months) to get to their best sound. At first they have some zing but not necessarily in a great way

-D’Addario tapewounds. Not properly flats but, even more than flats, tapes reportedly last forever. They are strange in an interesting way. The tape wrap dampens the sound so they sound “weaker” than flats. Also, it gives them a double-bass like attack with string initial attack and fast decay. There is some thump to them but inside the nylon there are actually some quite zingy rounds. The result to me is similar to newish nickelwounds with the tone rolled of a fair bit (but with the different attack). The perceived “weakness” mostly matters in isolation, alongside other instruments they sound just fine. The G sounds a bit tinny to me though

– LaBella tapes 60-115 A bit like the d’addario tapes but less zing and way more thump"

Hi there, that's very kind many thanks! However, it turned out the truss rod is double action so I cannot get the nut off. Also, fortunately, it turned out thay my local tech says the nut is not rounded really, is fine, the allen key's wiggle is within acceptable and possibly it's the allen key I have at home that is a bit worn. False alarm!

I was very interested in plucking with three or four fingers right when I started. At the time plucking with more than two fingers, much like playing a six string bass, was seen as really cool among local metalheads. I quickly found that using three fingers was a very easy shortcut for galloping in Iron Maiden songs. Playing straight sixteenth notes with three fingers also seemed a reasonable option. The 1231231 you are describing. But then I found that for all things that involved more than one string, three fingers were creating new problems in terms of coordination. In the end, while I admired Billy Sheehan, I ended up thinking it was not worth the effort to develop the technique for my purposes. Over time, my index and middle got fast enough to play what I needed to play, and I abandoned plucking with three fingers completely. Most of the exercises then were aimed at bringing the left hand up to the speed of the right one - which I never managed, and got injured in the process.

17 hours ago, Paolo85 said:

Meet the UEB - upright electric bass.

 

Just to report that the UEB is working after all. I taped a small balloon ribbon roll (yes) to the back of the upper horn. It sticks out and rests exaclty on my sternum as I play, and that keeps it fairly stable. The stand now just keeps the bass up, and prevents it from twisting.

Agreed with @Burns-bass that that's not the real thing. Still, fun to use and keeps me away from the temptation of a short-scale EUB. After some playing, no sign of pain in my left hand, wrist or forearm, so I have good hopes that I have some aspects of the upright technique figured out. But the back of my shoulder is all stiff so maybe I am not doing it too well yet 

Meet the UEB - upright electric bass. Stuck on a tattoist arm rest, set up with unnecessarily high action to make the experience more vaguely realistic.

To be honest it is a failed experiment. The bass is very heavy (it's a cheap Fazley that competes with the heaviest Harley Bentons). I did nof feel like chopping the wings and having to redo the electronics.

The center of gravity would really be on the neck. Obviously I could not screw it to the neck.

Result? It wobbles a bit when I play.

To make it work, I should probably find a SERIOUSLY sturdy stand. However, I am tempted to just cut my losses. It was meant to be just a bit of fun. It's ok to play one note per bar, maybe try a slow two feel, see how far off my intonation is (a lot!), experimenting with using upper arm and shoulder muscles to play on the fingerboard, and see if it's painful or not. That should be all I need while I wait for the right time to buy an EUB to come 

EDIT: let me at least celebrate the acoustic sound of this, which with the superhigh action and plucked like an upright does sound more  "uprighty" than I expected!

29 minutes ago, Beedster said:

That’s how I see it, a few folks above appear to know what’s going on but are being a little opaque, could someone just explain in simple language what has happened? 
 

My spidey senses were pricked by the ‘sellers’ inability to take PayPal which of course would have facilitated an easy refund. But who knows…..

Right, I have been thinking this through and I thought it was worth writing a summary, with a question for the OP

-The seller gave their bank details to the @theplumber

-The wife of the OP typed the bank details for the payment

-Both the OP and his wife doublechecked the bank details

-The bank details typed were matching those provided by the seller, this was confirmed ex-post

-they made the payment

-the money went to to a different bank account. Now, the question for @theplumber. When you say that the money went to a different bank account, you mean different sort code and account number (as was my initial understanding), or just different name and address from that provided by the seller? If the former, that's not an APP, just because it does not match the definition, and it's hard to imagine how the seller has any responsability. If the latter that's definitely a scam, a pretty straightforward one, and it should be looked into it closely by the mods I believe

35 minutes ago, Beedster said:

 

'Problem' with PayPal account followed by a diversion of the bank transfer, the coincidences are mounting  

My thinking would be that if somebody was able to change the bank details manually typed and doublechecked by the OP and his wife in their heavily encrypted banking apps/websites, that would mean

-that they have the OP wife's phone or computer hacked, or the bank hacked

-that they are very skilled, so they would probably try to sell a Fodera, not something that has been reduced to £95

19 hours ago, JoeEvans said:

She's 16 and fairly tall so no need for short scale. Some good suggestions there, thanks! Interesting to see the universal love for Harley Benton.

Well, it is a miracle to make well built, good sounding basses for 100 pounds. But I am going to play my usual role of reminding that some have quirks (eg being stupidly heavy and/or bad balance). Over the past year I have read of plenty of people here that did buy one and then sold as they did not want to put up with it. For a beginner it could be a pity as it could discourage from playing altogether.

I'll join the chorus of those saying that a good setup is key. Maybe more important than the bass.

23 minutes ago, Rosie C said:

 

I could have written this post. I bought a "Gear 4 Music" branded EUB which looks much like a Stagg one. The only way to play it that I could find was squeezing with my LH thumb - something my teacher called "strangling the goose" or something, and said would cause tendon problems. I bought an NS stand from Thomann and fitted that - it was better, but still not the same as an acoustic upright. In the end I sold it and now have a cheap 3/4 acoustic which can be played in the recommended "pulling from the elbow" way.

 

I wish I could do that! The problem is that I mostly play late at night

Does anybody have good ideas on hi

ow to stick a heavy P bass onto this? https://www.gear4music.com/Drums-and-Percussion/Heavy-Duty-Cymbal-Stand-by-Gear4music/1J60

Or maybe @Paul S , @sandy_r would you be happy to show how yours attach to the stand?

Thanks!