DF Shortscale

Adam Neely just posted a brilliant video about this stuff today. https://youtu.be/U8dcFhF0Dlk

Yes, I agree and that is exactly why I'm saying it's a huge problem. The issue is not that people are not working hard enough now - if anything, people are working harder than ever before, for far less reward. But the AI / social media platforms you use to plough all that hard work into are the same platforms that are making their money from putting you out of work and making you broke. In 2026, everything you post on insta, TikTok, Facebook etc is being used to feed generative AI. When you use those platforms, your license agreement tells you that. The generative AI fed by those platforms floods the internet with worthless junk which is a facsimile of everyone's content, and that devalues your actual work to zero. It's a trap, and there is no getting away from it without moving away from the algorithm chase model and the platforms that provide it.

Yes, I remember that too, and it was part of the process for some people (including me - I was on housing benefit for just over a year after graduating). But I also remember that it was fairly common for people who were good at what they did to succeed enough to be able to afford a home and a decent quality of life directly from their creative output. The difference is that you worked part time or went on the dole BUT channelled your energy into focussing on your creative goals, and - if you were good at what you did - you could relatively quickly move on from that and make a living from your creative work. Which is what me and my 4 flatmates, and countless other gen x people did. It wasn't great by any means, but the opportunities were there if you were driven enough. I studied a creative subject and graduated in 97. There were 35 people in my year group. Out of those 35, 33 ended up working in the creative industry, and did well enough to be able to buy homes, have kids, eat, go on holidays etc. The remaining 2 were crap and not interested anyway. Compare that with current numbers - out of a group of 35 talented and driven graduates from a high profile university, maybe 3 will get properly paid work in their chosen field, another 12 will do it for pocket money while doing a 'real job', and the rest will go into minimum wage retail jobs and at best, treat the subject they studied as an expensive hobby. (Source: I work at a high profile creative university). And in the last couple of years, with AI creeping in, even those numbers are looking optimistic. Ultimately it comes down to money - if you can make money from creative work, you will invest in tools to help you do it. If you can't, then the people making those tools won't have a customer base any more. Not just NI, but also Adobe and all the other big creative software players.

Yeah, that’s pretty much the only currently viable business model. I see that particular path to fame as the opposite of creative integrity, but I get it’s the only option they have at the moment. I’m not sure if it’s a viable career route for most young creatives. The talent is definitely out there but their choices are very limited. Ultimately the financial success of the creatives of that generation will determine how much longer NI and similar software companies will be supported, and if those finances are dependent on the social media platforms that are actively using every upload on their platforms to train their AI - which is designed to devalue and obfuscate original, human made creative work - it’s basically a trap. It’s tough times for gen z, they’re going to have to make some pretty drastic moves collectively if they want to escape that trap, but I do see some signs that things are beginning to shift at least.

Ok, show me some examples of current young practitioners whose business model is to post on online platforms either within music or art, who are genuinely innovating and pushing boundaries (not just pandering to algorithms), and are generating enough of an income from that to buy homes and feed families. Not people with side jobs, not people who are surviving off pre-social media fame and success - genuine newcomers who are making work with creative integrity. Reaching an audience is not the same as getting paid. If you're on TikTok, you can have an audience of 400K if you fart into a phone. Engagement and success are not the same thing, and engagement without the support that comes with it is just attention without value. I don't know of many young people in the Gen Z range genuinely innovating and making art making an actual living purely from posting stuff online right now, and that's when we're still in the early days of AI. The current functional model is either to post clickbait, or to have a day job and do creative work on the side for pocket money. But feel free to show examples of current creative young innovators who are really pushing boundaries and paying off mortgages and feeding families from the online distribution model of their own creative output. To me it seems like wishful thinking, and it's only going to get worse as AI content grows, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong. I see lots of talent and artistic vision out there, but I don't see any of those people surviving without jumping through hoops right now, let alone when AI content corrupts things even further. And those are the people who would need to be investing in products by NI to keep the company going. Ageing boomers nearing the end of their creative careers - and even Gen X artists - are not going to sustain these software companies for much longer.

I don’t disagree with any of that, I just think that the innovation now needs to happen outside of the internet or any digital domain. With things as they currently are, no matter how amazing the art, if your end result is a jpeg or an mp4 (or whatever digital format), it falls in the same toilet as all the AI stuff.

Kraftwerk are an interesting example to bring into this, they were innovating and creating original works *despite* the fact that what they were doing was technically (and financially) very difficult, and out of most people's reach. Rarity, innovation and skill and craft are all fundamental to works of art we perceive to be special and meaningful. As a couple of more contemporary examples, Aphex Twin was (is?) an innovator, and his process and tools were shrouded in mystery. Similarly, Photek pushed samplers beyond what people thought they were capable of, and his tools and techniques were also mysterious at the time, and on top of that, his records were not easy to get hold of, especially in the early days. In all 3 cases, innovation, craft and skill and rarity played a huge role in what made people value those artists and their works. Meanwhile, if my fat uncle Dave can ask chat gpt to crap out an acid techno banger or a Kraftwerk-style song in under 12 seconds, all of that craft, skill and rarity goes down the toilet. If you played an Aphex Twin tune and an AI generated ambient acid techno track to a 15 year old, they would probably assume both were AI generated and move on. The lines between 'digital' and AI are becoming very blurry. In the art/graphics world, people can often no longer tell the difference between 3D modelled / Blender-made artworks and AI generated images. And people attach zero value to anything AI generated, which in turn means they are increasingly attaching zero value to anything digital at all. Digital tools might be convenient and clever, but if the output of those tools has no perceived value, then people will stop paying to use those tools. (Which is partly why AI companies are starting to be in such deep financial trouble right now).

My comment was less about the musicians who use the stuff and more about the perceived value of the outcome. The software is great, of course. The fact that it’s either freely available or it provides you with a level of convenience that even my mum could knock out a 175bpm d&b roller (or whatever), and the fact that AI can essentially just do it all for you - that pretty much means that nobody listening values the music any more.

Yeah, it’s been kind of happening very slowly ever since DAW’s replaced samplers and outboard gear, those amazing 90’s genres started to sound a little contrived when everyone dumped their Akai’s and Emu’s and got on Reason / FL / Ableton etc. But what’s happening now is way beyond that. Splice, Izotope and all the other new ‘essential’ tools have taken anything that was special and unique about electronic music and they’ve commodified it all. But even that is nothing compared to prompt driven AI creating tracks for you - that to me is the final nail in the coffin. The interesting thing about AI being used for creative output is that the internet , as we know it today, is going to end up just eating itself. AI produced anything has zero value, it’s derivative garbage in a pretty dress. If people can no longer tell the difference between real and AI, they will quickly stop trusting anything they see / hear online, and all digital / online creative work will be treated as worthless garbage, regardless of where it comes from. And the only solution is to move away from online / digital and back to physical spaces and physical objects. As soon as you’re away from the internet, AI stops mattering. People won’t stop wanting to enjoy art and music, they will just stop engaging with it online. Which I actually see as a very good thing - perhaps the beginning of the end of the social media / smartphone era.

This would be a big loss, Reaktor and Kontakt are both great, Reaktor in particular is pretty unique and the user library is full of amazing stuff going back decades. I have a feeling that this will keep happening to similar companies and we are seeing the early stages of the death of electronic music, or at least software based electronic music. As AI eats everything digital, people are slowly losing interest in this stuff and values are beginning to shift. If AI can crap out a generic house tune which is indistinguishable from a human-made one, it’s game over. When people can’t tell the difference between digital and AI, they will just lose faith in the whole thing and move on. Same thing is beginning to happen to digital art too. Interesting times.

If you are tempted by that, you might like the new Fodera / Trickfish pre. Same price, and with endless eq options. Both are beyond what I’d pay for a pedal (but I do own a Motown DI which is also not cheap, with zero eq options and it has been in daily use here for around maybe 10 years or so).

Could always order one from ebay, or maybe give Danny at Japan Bass Direct a shout. It will mean shipping and taxes but it’s a relatively cheap bass. Fender USA seems to be funny about cross-breeds of iconic basses (based on the hoops we have to jump through to have a US built J neck or J pickups on a P body..), perhaps a Mustang / Jazz combo doesn’t align with their marketing strategy. Or maybe they think it will just sound bad in a live situation, which it easily might. Short scale jazzes definitely do sound different to Mustangs. Who knows.

Has this been mentioned here yet? Seems like it will hit the spot for a lot of people in this thread, Fender Japan Chilli Beans / Maika Mustang (although it's made in Indonesia I think). Almost exactly what I was after a couple of years ago, if I was still searching for a short scale I would 100% grab one of these.

Not sure, I know he has a website as well as the Reverb shop, I guess it might be better to contact him directly through his site if you’re after a trade-in, but I don’t know.

Maybe it’s because I was trading in a bass, and he wanted to see it in person. In all fairness his place is more like a small workshop than an actual store, it’s probably not ideal for drop-in visits. Ultimately he gave me a decent deal, and his stuff is legit and priced realistically, so I my experience was definitely positive.

I bought a bass from him recently, no issues at all, I found his prices totally reasonable and it was an easy transaction. I went over to his shop, tiny place full of cool / odd / rare Fenders, lots of MIJ stuff that you don’t see often in the UK.

This used to be my bass, I can happily vouch for it, it’s a light weight, beautifully built and super easy to play instrument. I got in new from Japan a few years ago. The action can go crazy low on these, definitely lower than I needed and I like low action a lot. The tone is bright and snappy, but you can get a really nice jazz front pickup tone from it, especially with the preamp engaged. It’s basically a modern J style short scale. The body shape is a downsized P, this was the shape before they came out with the Baby Z series. If anyone decides to buy it, I strongly recommend the Atelier Z short scale rounds, I tried a bunch of different strings on this bass and I liked their own strings so much that I ordered loads of them, I still have a few spare unopened packs so message me if you’d like them. Also feel free to ask if you have any questions about it. (No affiliation to Fender Fever, I had a good experience dealing with him, but I just want to see it go to a good home!)

That’s literally down the road from me, I’m gonna go have a look at the weekend. Quite surprised to see a bass of that calibre in that shop, it does seem like a bit of a novelty market shop but I suppose with Trinity, Greenwich uni and Ravensbourne in the local area there are a lot musicians and music / art students hanging out around there. Not that any of them will be able to afford that bass. (Although you never know, there are still lots of international billionaire trust fund kids coming to London to study).

This album has some beautiful bass playing on it, pretty much all the way through. One of my all time favourites.

Good to know, thanks. It's odd that the individual saddles cost more than some entire bridges, I've seen a Wilkinson one for about the same price as the one above, although a legit Fender one with slotted screw heads (instead of hex screws) is closer to £60..

If I want to replace the saddles on a P bass with threaded ones, is it just a case of buying the threaded saddles and putting them on my existing bridge, or is it better to replace the whole bridge with a bridge that comes with threaded saddles pre-installed? The current bridge is just a standard USA Fender, but I know screw shapes / sizes can vary, some threaded saddles don't come with screws etc, and I'd like to make sure it all fits as it should.

I feel like genres like ska and even jazz are much less problematic. (I personally find reggae a little more tricky but it depends on context).

I don't know if age has that much to do with it. Younger millennials and gen z don't tend to use forums at all, outside of maybe Reddit (which doesn't really qualify as much of a forum any more), but from what I know about under 40's (I spend most of my working life amongst them), their opinions would probably be surprisingly similar to the variety of opinions expressed here. Some would say it's not ok, some would say it's ok if it's handled carefully, others wouldn't care. The only real difference would be that not many under 40s musicians would be outraged that they were being asked a question like this, and pretty much none of them use Facebook / tabloid terms like 'virtue signalling' or 'woke'. But their opinions would be equally varied.

I can confirm I am not a Russian bot, but I do find it interesting that there is still no clear consensus this many pages in. It shows that the answer is clearly not as straightforward as you might hope. It’s good to discuss these things.