The heretic thread approved by Roger Sadowsky or For those who pretend tone doesn't come from wood...

[Ricky 4000]

4 hours ago, Rich said:

Is your dad Roger Whittaker? No, because you would have mentioned it if he was.

 

I'm having this tattooed on my arm.

[Bassfinger]

On 01/10/2021 at 21:59, Hellzero said:

Why ? Are you hearing with your eyes ?

While the question was doubtless meant to be flippant, it backfires somewhat as the answer is very serious - with an oscilloscope or signal analyser, yes, in essence you can hear with your eyes and incredibly accurately, consistently and effectively at that. Indeed, you can see things you would have no chance of detecting with your ears.

 

As for the validity of the experiment itself:

 

What were the torque settings on the truss rods of these supposedly otherwise identical instruments?

 

What weight of glue was used to secure the fretboards of each?

 

How old was each instrument, as ageing and drying of woods and finishing materials can make a big difference?

 

Where was each instrument stored prior to the test, at what temperature and humidity and for how long?

 

And 101 other questions about technical and construction consistency and repeatable results with a statistically significant number of difference samples

 

And independent is the experimenter?⅕⅕1

 

Answers on a postcard to...

 

We don't know house,

Too many variables street,

No scientific consistencyville,

Waste of timeshire.

 

The entire comparison is massively flawed, and if people think that represents evidence of the tonewood effect they're very mistaken.  Tonewood may or may not make a difference (I have my own views on that) but the demonstration is completely useless as a valid comparison, and no meanful conclusion can this be drawn from it.

 

The instruments may appear superficially identical in all but material,  but I guatantee you there will be measurable differences in construction and set up that will have profound effects on the tone.  This is why we go to music shops and try 3 or 4 "identical" basses, all made from the same wood, and hear a different tone from each.

Edited November 19, 2021 by Bassfinger
I saw Lord Lucan

[EBS_freak]

1 hour ago, Ricky 4000 said:

 

I'm having this tattooed on my arm.

Please don't. There's nothing worse than somebody copying your tattoo. I'd be straight in for a cover up.

[Dan Dare]

3 hours ago, 4000 said:

I’m not quite sure how suggesting I’m a bit up myself as a response to my saying that an audience shouldn’t dictate your artistic decisions is “responding in a similar tone”, but whatever. 😂😂😂

 

The tone of your posts was somewhat dismissive. That's what I was responding to. We're talking about pop music, after all. It's a fashion product, whether we care to admit it or not.

[Dan Dare]

7 hours ago, ped said:

It would be a shame if everyone only produced things that suited a given audience. I've always loved companies that design and make things for a super niche audience, or without one in mind at all, because they love it. That's where the cool stuff lies.

 

But that's my point. Everyone hopes/believes that what they make or produce will appeal to an audience of some sort. Failing to pay attention to whether something will be likely to recoup the time and money spent on producing it can be a shortcut to bankruptcy (as many find out, sadly). It may be nice, romantic even, to imagine that companies "design and make things for a super niche audience, or without one in mind at all, because they love it", but it is rarely the case, unless they are sufficiently well off to be able to not care (a point I made earlier).

 

The notion of "cool", which flatters us by inviting us to believe that something is made specially for us and a few other like-minded souls, is just another marketing tool.

[4000]

1 hour ago, Dan Dare said:

 

The tone of your posts was somewhat dismissive. That's what I was responding to. We're talking about pop music, after all. It's a fashion product, whether we care to admit it or not.

I don’t agree that it was dismissive. Why is stating that I don’t believe an artist should make artistic decisions based on an audiences preferences dismissive? Would you choose a partner based on your own opinion or the opinions of a bunch of people who don’t even know you? Same principle applies. How could you possibly create something that is satisfactory to you based on a bunch of contrasting opinions anyway? 
 

If you think that that is somehow disrespectful to an audience - which you seem to - please explain why. I’m sure if you asked Kate Bush, Joni Mitchell, Roger Waters, Neil Young - whoever - whether an audience should dictate what they create or how they create it they would say absolutely not. That doesn’t mean they don’t respect or appreciate their audience. Why would it? 

Edited November 19, 2021 by 4000

[Stub Mandrel]

4 minutes ago, 4000 said:

Neil Young - whoever - whether an audience should dictate what they create or how they create it they would say absolutely not. That doesn’t mean they don’t respect or appreciate their audience. Why would it?

 

An excellent and challenging example. Someone who has changed direction more times than a terrier man avoiding the LACS... Arc Weld and LeNoise are pretty good examples of self-indulgence/artistic purity.

 

But that said, every album he's produced (except perhaps those two) has been pretty much had a solid recognisable genre behind it, and therefore was very much addressing a particular audience in some way. Even the controversial Trans was explicitly an attempt to communicate something of his relationship with his son, and communication assumes an audience.

 

 

[4000]

1 hour ago, Stub Mandrel said:

 

An excellent and challenging example. Someone who has changed direction more times than a terrier man avoiding the LACS... Arc Weld and LeNoise are pretty good examples of self-indulgence/artistic purity.

 

But that said, every album he's produced (except perhaps those two) has been pretty much had a solid recognisable genre behind it, and therefore was very much addressing a particular audience in some way. Even the controversial Trans was explicitly an attempt to communicate something of his relationship with his son, and communication assumes an audience.

 

 

Having an audience and allowing them to dictate your creative decisions are two completely different things, and all my comments have revolved around the latter, which you sadly appear to be struggling to grasp - unless of course you’re being deliberately obtuse. Either way Stub, I’m disappointed. ☹️

Edited November 19, 2021 by 4000

[SumOne]

I expect that even the most avant-garde and experimental artists consider how their art will be consumed and appreciated by an audience.

 

...at least the ones that have been heard by an audience. I suppose the ones that really don't care at all about an audience would never record or perform their art for an audience to ever know about it. 

 

 

[4000]

5 minutes ago, SumOne said:

I expect that even the most avant-garde and experimental artists consider how their art will be consumed and appreciated by an audience.

 

...at least the ones that have been heard by an audience. I suppose the ones that really don't care at all about an audience would never record or perform their art for an audience to ever know about it. 

 

 

They probably would, but considering how their art will be consumed and appreciated by an audience doesn’t necessarily mean they would make artistic decisions according to their audience’s preferences. 

 
Why on Earth would someone who really didn’t care about an audience not record their music? Would a painter who doesn’t care about an audience not bother actually putting paint to canvas, or a writer who doesn’t care about an audience not bother writing anything down? It’s quite possible to do something simply for your own enjoyment, although based this thread that seems to be anathema to some. 🙄

[SumOne]

Just now, 4000 said:

They probably would, but considering how their art will be consumed and appreciated by an audience doesn’t necessarily mean they would make artistic decisions according to their audience’s preferences. 

 
Why on Earth would someone who really didn’t care about an audience not record their music? Would a painter who doesn’t care about an audience not bother actually putting paint to canvas, or a writer who doesn’t care about an audience not bother writing anything down? It’s quite possible to do something simply for your own enjoyment, although based this thread that seems to be anathema to some. 🙄

I get the impression you are considering every comment to directly relate to you, I was just commenting generally on the discussion points. 

 

If someone really didn't care about having any audience to their art then I don't expect they would record and release music or perform it to an audience (perhaps they'd record it so they alone could listen to it). My point is that just about everyone that creates art does care a bit about what the audience thinks of it and it must inform their art to a certain extent. 

[4000]

15 minutes ago, SumOne said:

I get the impression you are considering every comment to directly relate to you, I was just commenting generally on the discussion points. 

 

If someone really didn't care about having any audience to their art then I don't expect they would record and release music or perform it to an audience (perhaps they'd record it so they alone could listen to it). My point is that just about everyone that creates art does care a bit about what the audience thinks of it and it must inform their art to a certain extent. 

No, but your points were relating to points that I’ve been involved in discussing, hence why I’m continuing to comment. Although I am beginning to wonder why. 🙄
 

I don’t agree with your second point. Most of the painters and sculptors I’ve known - and I’ve known a lot - really aren’t concerned with what an audience thinks and most don’t even show their work. That doesn’t mean they don’t create the work though. 😉 Speaking personally, it’s one of the reasons I abandoned illustration, because having to fit a brief ruined my enjoyment of it. 
 

Now, can we go back to Roger Whittaker please? That was a lot more fun. 

Edited November 19, 2021 by 4000

[Stub Mandrel]

1 hour ago, 4000 said:

Having an audience and allowing them to dictate your creative decisions are two completely different things, and all my comments have revolved around the latter, which you sadly appear to be struggling to grasp - unless of course you’re being deliberately obtuse. Either way Stub, I’m disappointed. ☹️

 

 

I think I've been defending considering your audience as part of the creative process rather than "allowing them to dictate your creative decisions".

 

I've interpreted your position as being agnostic to any consideration of how your music may be received; you appear to think mine has been that the artists should bow to any whim of the listener.

 

That's not mine and may not be yours.

 

But I think my attempt to further explore the subtleties of the artist-audience relationship (something I have mused on for 40 years or so) are just flogging a dead horse.

[Stub Mandrel]

7 minutes ago, 4000 said:

😉 Speaking personally, it’s one of the reasons I abandoned illustration, because having to fit a brief ruined my enjoyment of it. 

 

I don't know if it's relevant, but my brother is of an artistic bent. He largely gave up on commissions because of this. He still paints subjects that he hopes will appeal to people, and also paints things just for himself.

[RhysP]

24 minutes ago, SumOne said:

If someone really didn't care about having any audience to their art then I don't expect they would record and release music or perform it to an audience (perhaps they'd record it so they alone could listen to it). My point is that just about everyone that creates art does care a bit about what the audience thinks of it and it must inform their art to a certain extent. 

I have many hours of recorded music that nobody will ever hear. 

It wasn't created with the intention of anyone ever hearing it.

The process of creating & recording my own music gives me great pleasure, something I never got from gigging or working with other musicians.

[4000]

6 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

 

 

I think I've been defending considering your audience as part of the creative process rather than "allowing them to dictate your creative decisions".

 

I've interpreted your position as being agnostic to any consideration of how your music may be received; you appear to think mine has been that the artists should bow to any whim of the listener.

 

That's not mine and may not be yours.

 

But I think my attempt to further explore the subtleties of the artist-audience relationship (something I have mused on for 40 years or so) are just flogging a dead horse.

Thank you for the clarification, it’s much appreciated. As you’re no doubt now aware, even if you weren’t before, my point all along was that artists shouldn’t “bow to the whim of the listener”. Of course an artist may consider how their music will be received, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they should alter their music to accommodate it IMO, especially given different individuals may receive it differently and have different opinions about it. They’re two completely separate - although arguably overlapping - issues IMO. 
 

One of my favourite pieces of music is Shine On You Crazy Diamond, which to me is near - but not quite - perfect. Personally, I think Nick nods off on his stool half way through and I’m not overly keen on Roger’s bass sound, even in context. Now I’m sure the boys were well aware there would be an audience for Wish You Were Here. 😉 However I’m sure if I’d contacted Roger and pointed out the issues I’ve mentioned I would be told to go forth and multiply, and I would expect nothing less.😂 What’s more, someone else may love Nick’s sagging feel or Roger’s bass sound. So who is right? I’d say Pink Floyd are. 😉 

[4000]

20 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

 

I don't know if it's relevant, but my brother is of an artistic bent. He largely gave up on commissions because of this. He still paints subjects that he hopes will appeal to people, and also paints things just for himself.

I get that. Personally I don’t think I’ve ever painted anything in the hope someone else would like it, unless it’s been a commission. I also gave up on painting commissions for similar reasons. They’re absolutely no fun whatsoever  and most of the time pay abysmally compared to the amount of work that is put in. 

[Hellzero]

I'm also an artist, I'm getting tone out of woods that aren't tonewoods, but woods producing tone when you'd expect they won't as they are tonewoods known for not producing tone, but sine waves you could see on an oscilloscope meaning that it's tone.

 

I love being an artist.

[4000]

Just now, Hellzero said:

I'm also an artist, I'm getting tone out of woods that aren't tonewoods, but woods producing tone when you'd expect they won't as they are tonewoods known for not producing tone, but sine waves you could see on an oscilloscope meaning that it's tone.

 

I love being an artist.

I do apologise profusely for the massive thread derailment Hellzero. 😂

[Hellzero]

You don't need to, BassChat wouldn't be BassChat if there were no derailment. 😉

[Stub Mandrel]

Back to tonewood eh?

 

I'm working on a carefully selected guitar body, mahogany  with a maple top. Carefully chosen because it looks nice and no regard for its tonal properties 🤪

[Stub Mandrel]

Randomly found this...

 

 

[Rich]

2 hours ago, 4000 said:

Now, can we go back to Roger Whittaker please? That was a lot more fun. 

Fun? FUN? I'll have you know whistling is a serious business. Deadly serious. Tell him, Frank.

[Downunderwonder]

9 hours ago, 4000 said:

I don’t agree that it was dismissive. Why is stating that I don’t believe an artist should make artistic decisions based on an audiences preferences dismissive?

It's proforma dismissive of an enormous musical industry dedicated to entertainment being priority numero uno.

[Doctor J]

There is music and there is the music business. They are not the same thing.