Gear vs Playing

[xgsjx]

[quote name='Spike Vincent' post='1371256' date='Sep 12 2011, 11:27 PM']I'd rather talk about gear than talk about scales.[/quote]




Back on topic, I think it depends on the kind of music you're playing (I haven't read all the pages so sorry if I repeat something).
If you play bass in the traditional sense, then gear won't make a bad player good (but I agree that better quality gear being easier to play should help).
If you play bass that relies on effects for the sound, then a budget bass plugged straight in isn't gonna make very good dubstep (or whatever style you choose there).

I've used the same bass for 20+ years & wouldn't change it (although I do want a fretless 5/6). I have however, changed my gear that I put it through considerably.
Some songs I play require my playing ability, some rely on me controlling my effects & playing a very simple bassline with my fingers. Like I say, it depends on the music.

[tinyd]

[quote name='chardbass' post='1371291' date='Sep 13 2011, 12:25 AM']What was it Marcus Miller said...?.. pauses to Google... oh well, something about people getting "too hung up on gear. Just find something that works and concentrate on your playing" (then he works on a signature bass!!!)[/quote]
That Marcus Miller quote is pretty good IMO - I think the initial "just find something that works" bit can take a few years for a new player, but I've had the same bass for 20 years and try as I might, I can't justify getting another bass guitar ( I bought a double bass a couple of years ago but that's a whole other thing ). I'd rather worry about the things I can't do as a player than worry about the things that my bass can't do. Not sure if that last sentence makes sense but hopefully you know what I mean...

[Guest bassman7755]

[quote name='dc2009' post='1370645' date='Sep 12 2011, 04:14 PM']I think audio quality is what helps a crap band like Coldplay sell millions of records and an awesome band like _______ who sell none because their CD sounds like crap, even though the songs are amazing.[/quote]


But thats the point isnt it, I'd rather listen to a decent player with a great sound than a virtuoso with a poor one. Example: eddie jackson (queensrhyche) vs john mayung (dream theatre). Now were talking about two of my favourite bands here and much as I love DF I find the bass to be merely functional, despite the complexity of the songs and the playing because the sound is non descript and you can barely here it in most of the tracks. The bass on QR on the other hand is a grinding thunderous sound and a simple root-b7 line has me nodding my head and pouting my lips in that "yeah that really rocks" style.

When I go out and play myself I want to be eddie jackson and not john mayung.

[uncle psychosis]

[quote name='dc2009' post='1371131' date='Sep 12 2011, 09:37 PM']I dare say I could pick out a Gaga song in the first few bars, and [b]wouldn't be able to tell Dusty Springfield or Aretha Franklin apart [/b]if I heard the two alongside each other.[/quote]

I refuse to believe that anyone with ears (nevermind anyone who plays an instrument) couldn't tell the difference. Don't even get me started on your Motown comments either!!

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='dc2009' post='1371131' date='Sep 12 2011, 09:37 PM']I dare say I could pick out a Gaga song in the first few bars, and wouldn't be able to tell Dusty Springfield or Aretha Franklin apart if I heard the two alongside each other.[/quote]
Have a feel around in your ears... I think you'll find there's some cloth in there.

[Marvin]

[quote name='dc2009' post='1371131' date='Sep 12 2011, 09:37 PM']I dare say I could pick out a Gaga song in the first few bars, and wouldn't be able to tell Dusty Springfield or Aretha Franklin apart if I heard the two alongside each other.[/quote]

Really?! I heard her new one on the radio the other day and thought it was Shania Twain.

Gaga is a gimmick, a marketing vehicle, a 'produced sound', here today gone tomorrow. I find it astonishing you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between Springfield and Franklin, their voices are their trademarks and what made them the respected artists they are.

[chris_b]

[quote name='uncle psychosis' post='1371511' date='Sep 13 2011, 10:11 AM']....I refuse to believe that anyone with ears (nevermind anyone who plays an instrument) couldn't tell the difference. Don't even get me started on your Motown comments either!!....[/quote]
At last... someone's challenging this bollocks!

[ped]

I own my gear, it doesn't own me.

Or so I thought.

Bass wise, I'm fine. I used to have loads, sell and trade them all the time, but one stuck with me for a long time and now it's all I have. It feels like home. Weather it's expensive or not doesn't matter - it sounds great and feels great and I can treat it normally without having to be prescious.

Camera wise, though, things happened differently. Starting with a small but nice compact I went for a DSLR, then my grandfather gave me a pretty little 50s rangefinder film camera. I used all three and really enjoyed myself, especially with the little 50s gem, film was just lots of fun and very satisfying. Naturally, swayed by the hype and the crowd, I went for a Leica, a very expensive version of this cheap old 50s camera. I got sucked in; bought expensive lenses, developing kit, lens hoods costing more than a normal camera, etc. Then I realised that the gear was starting to become what I liked about photography, and my little 50s camera was looking at me all sad. I took it out for a spin and upon my return sold my Leica and all the gear. Just because it was expensive and had the 'hype' I lost sight of what I enjoyed about the whole practice.

Now I have three cameras that I don't plan on selling or moving on any time soon, because I am back to enjoying taking pictures again. And one of those cameras is from the 50s.

I get why people want to buy the next fancy bass, amplifier or speaker. It's natural. But I'm increasingly of the opinion that I am lucky to have what I have now, and that I should put my money towards looking after it and making it work.

Also buying a Basschat Polo Shirt is a good use of money in general *cough*

Cheers
ped

[Dave Vader]

[quote name='Marvin' post='1371544' date='Sep 13 2011, 10:33 AM']Really?! I heard her new one on the radio the other day and thought it was Shania Twain.

Gaga is a gimmick, a marketing vehicle, a 'produced sound', here today gone tomorrow. I find it astonishing you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between Springfield and Franklin, their voices are their trademarks and what made them the respected artists they are.[/quote]

I thought it was Madonna, but then I always think it's Madonna c.1986 whenever Gaga comes on.
She was very adept at producing horribly catchy hooks (even I quite liked her when she first came out) but now it seems to be even more turgid crap than before, shame.

[Dave Vader]

Oh. and I personally love the sound that came out of Sam Phillips Sun studios back in 56, more than the polished cack you get now. Much nicer, shame I still can't get it myself, depite being more technologically advanced in my studio, hey ho...

[dc2009]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='1371521' date='Sep 13 2011, 10:17 AM']Have a feel around in your ears... I think you'll find there's some cloth in there.[/quote]

You guys have entirely missed the point.

Of course I can tell them apart if I heard them side by side with a big effing title at the top saying which one was which. I was just saying I honestly don't listen to enough of either to hear a song by one of them (without knowing who was singing in advance) and be able to identify it as one of them rather than the other.

[dc2009]

[quote name='chris_b' post='1371565' date='Sep 13 2011, 10:52 AM']At last... someone's challenging this bollocks![/quote]

I'd appreciate it if you didn't call my opinion bollocks, as I don't do that to yours. I'll gladly report your post if you contravene forum etiquette again.

[wateroftyne]

Fairy nuff.... I have no idea what Lady Ga Ga sounds like, or most of the new divas, for that matter. Apart from Rumer, who IMO is marvellous.

[originalfunkbrother]

[quote name='dc2009' post='1370908' date='Sep 12 2011, 07:04 PM']As for standing the test of time, I can honestly say you're the first person I've encountered under 30 years of age who is a Motown fan, the lions share of Motown listeners are people who grew up with it. I'd argue it really hasn't stood the test of time, because so few young people these days choose to listen to it.[/quote]


I am another U30 who swears by Motown. I dont listen to Lady Gaga, not because I find her musically unappealing but I just prefer not to. Having said that, she has a super band with Lanar Kern Brantley on bass and I have been a fan of his for a long while now...

[SteveK]

Blimey, there's a lot of nonsense in this thread - James Jamerson; tin cans; crap hi-fi and [quote]I do get the sense that there is an undercurrent here of "I'm good enough a player to have nice gear, but I've noticed there are players who are not quite as good who also have nice gear, and somehow that's not fair"[/quote]I mean, wass that all about???

There's only been one bass that I[b] needed[/b] to buy - my first, a Fender P (in 1972), which I'm seriously thinking of getting resprayed and bringing out of retirement. The rest were the result of a whim, or gifts.

There's nought wrong with buying new gear, we live in shallow times, it makes us feel good, but don't hoodwink yourself into thinking that it's essential. Once you've spent several hundred or more on one instrument, providing you've done a modicum of research, you should be sorted.

[JTUK]

I would have thought that anyone with an ear for music who has to play a lot could pick out Aretha and Springfield, for sure...and Gaga as well.

I think Gaga is a huge step on from say, Madonna but she is now beginning to go round in circles. Still, she has her fan-base and they'll buy anything from here until they get bored.

I think both Gaga and Madonna were marketing marvels but musically ..er.. well, Madonna was sh*te and couldn't even sing. At least Gaga can hold a tune with a catchy riff.

Aretha and Springfield were amongst the best of their era and still hold up today.

I don't see how you can not be aware of their work....and it isn't so much a generational thing..it is a music thing.
Some things you just have to be aware of, IMO..!!

[xilddx]

We all joined a bass forum, to buy, sell and talk BASS. Most bassists I meet in the field have never heard of Basschat, and they seem to have fewer basses and change equipment less often than many of the BCers I meet.

The fact is, it's easy to TALK about gear, it's quantifiable, it has measurable value. We are a fairly materialistic bunch on here.

Most people find it much harder to meaningfully express their feelings about their music, their musical philosophy, their approach to music and bass. It is much harder to TALK about. Given the sh*t that passes for inteviews with musicians, I think this is well borne out.

To answer the OP, I think your surmise is heavily skewed by the demographic and the criteria, and the lack of ability to express themselves with the written and spoken word.

Edited September 13, 2011 by silddx

[BigRedX]

Music is totally subjective so arguing about it is fairly pointless, as you're not going to change anyone's opinion unless they are particularly weak-willed and in that case their views are without much worth.

I can't say I have any strong feelings either way for either Motown or Lady GaGa, but "classic" Motown has an advantage simply because it's been around longer and has more time to seep into people's consciousness. I think also that there is a tendency to look at older music with a bit of a rose-tint. Not every Motown single was a hit or even a decent piece of song-writing, but it is easy to overlook these in favour of the ones that were well-known and successful.

[martthebass]

[quote name='silddx' post='1371659' date='Sep 13 2011, 12:29 PM']To answer the OP, I think your surmise is heavily skewed by the demographic and the criteria, and the lack of ability to express themselves with the written and spoken word.[/quote]

To coin a phrase, I think the OP 'lit the blue touch paper and retired' on this.....

[dc2009]

[quote name='JTUK' post='1371658' date='Sep 13 2011, 12:28 PM']I don't see how you can not be aware of their work....and it isn't so much a generational thing..it is a music thing.
Some things you just have to be aware of, IMO..!![/quote]

Thing is it's a kind of music that my parents used to turn off on the radio because they weren't fans either, and I've never had the desire to listen to that sort of music myself, and as a result I've never heard much of it.

I think we can all think of a list of bands and bass players that other people should be aware of, but I bet you it's different for everyone. I don't feel I'm missing out not being aware of much of what these two did, just as plenty of people don't feel they're missing out by not being aware of what At The Gates did.


I would say that I know I am fairly bad at listening to music outside my comfort zone, and would never really sit through something because it would make me 'musically more rounded,' I'd just sit there thinking how much it sucked all the while.

[dc2009]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='1371666' date='Sep 13 2011, 12:35 PM']Music is totally subjective so arguing about it is fairly pointless, as you're not going to change anyone's opinion unless they are particularly weak-willed and in that case their views are without much worth.

I can't say I have any strong feelings either way for either Motown or Lady GaGa, but "classic" Motown has an advantage simply because it's been around longer and has more time to seep into people's consciousness. I think also that there is a tendency to look at older music with a bit of a rose-tint. Not every Motown single was a hit or even a decent piece of song-writing, but it is easy to overlook these in favour of the ones that were well-known and successful.[/quote]

A big plus one from a man who has been arguing for an artist he's not particularly a fan of for three pages

I definitely agree with the rose-tinted thing, and did try to allude to it in an earlier post. Not just about motown, but with Elvis or anything like that. I swear a death does oodles for how people remember music in later years, Elvis, The Beatles etc.

[xilddx]

[quote name='martthebass' post='1371672' date='Sep 13 2011, 12:39 PM']To coin a phrase, I think the OP 'lit the blue touch paper and retired' on this.....[/quote]
I think he retired because there's so little of interest that can be said about the matter.

People appear to talk about shoes a LOT more than they do about walking. So what?

[JTUK]

[quote name='dc2009' post='1371673' date='Sep 13 2011, 12:39 PM']Thing is it's a kind of music that my parents used to turn off on the radio because they weren't fans either, and I've never had the desire to listen to that sort of music myself, and as a result I've never heard much of it.

I think we can all think of a list of bands and bass players that other people should be aware of, but I bet you it's different for everyone. I don't feel I'm missing out not being aware of much of what these two did, just as plenty of people don't feel they're missing out by not being aware of what At The Gates did.


I would say that I know I am fairly bad at listening to music outside my comfort zone, and would never really sit through something because it would make me 'musically more rounded,' I'd just sit there thinking how much it sucked all the while.[/quote]


ok.... but on a session or something..someone says this needs a stax/motown type feel...?

There is a host of work within genres and styles that transends time... it is all building blocks, IMV.

[4000]

I often wonder about what the internal selection process is for the music you relate to. I grew up in the 60s/70s. In my childhood the only music we had in the house was jazz (I remember winning an Elton John single at school and my dad wouldn't let me play it when I got it home). So, anything that wasn't jazz I was only exposed to on the radio (infrequently). The only things that really stuck with me - we're talking late 60s here - were essentially harmony-vocal artists; Simon & Garfunkel, Mammas & the Pappas, the Beatles (obviously) etc, with a little bit of the Doors thrown in, although I doubt I knew who they were at the time. That continued on through ABBA and still informs much of what I like and write. Despite this being a popular time for Motown, I just don't remember being exposed to it, or when I was in didn't stick with me at all. I feel the same about it now. I recognise its impact and influence, but I must admit it still doesn't really touch me in any way; neither does much of the music derived from it.

EDIT: With the exception of Reach Out I'll Be There.....

Edited September 13, 2011 by 4000

[BigRedX]

[quote name='silddx' post='1371681' date='Sep 13 2011, 12:47 PM']People appear to talk about shoes a LOT more than they do about walking. So what?[/quote]
I'll recommend you this then: