Bass Guitar Magazine

[bythesea]

[quote name='OldGit' post='530242' date='Jul 2 2009, 09:06 AM']Also the weekend warriors who do fine on a Squier and old Peavey TNT but who may just want to upgrade to something just a bit better.
That's the readership who are not being served (by the reviews anyway).[/quote]
Although the last Weekend Warrior I saw had two Alembics and a Warwick fretless 5...

but I do know what you mean

[Pete Academy]

I think the latest issue of BGM is brilliant, especially the feature on session bass players, which is worth the cover price alone. I'm really glad it's a monthly now. I have to agree about the amount of expensive basses on review (Guitarist mag seems to be doing this lately), but this might have something to do with keeping the advertisers happy, possibly.

[JimBobTTD]

[quote name='OldGit' post='530242' date='Jul 2 2009, 10:06 AM']@Janek

You are talking as if everyone reading BGM is, or should be, an aspiring pro musician. If they were the only readers of BGM it would have gone bust years ago.

Beginners and intermediates buy the magazine, loads of beginners.

Also the weekend warriors who do fine on a Squier and old Peavey TNT but who may just want to upgrade to something just a bit better.
That's the readership who are not being served (by the reviews anyway).[/quote]

If that group is the majority, the next largest group probably consists of people who frequent gear forums (judging by how much of a response this thread has on this forum). Reviewing basses w-a-y out of our reach will anger us, whereas basses within or just outside our reach will make us subscribe.

The problem of getting companies to send basses for review may be severe, but it is not the readers' problem. As a reader, I don't care how much of a hard time the magazine is having getting basses in for review; I only care that the magazine has what I want to read in it. Things like typos, poor grammar and punctuation are also big things which need to be fixed. I see a lot of things which a simple spell check would correct, and there are times when I have read something a few times to understand it. If BGM doesn't care enough to check what it is publishing for the whole world to see, then I am not sure I can trust the reviews inside it (the quality of which has been brought up in this thread).

In short, when BGM can say the following, I shall renew my subscription:

1. We review all types of gear in all price ranges in all issues (unless it is a special edition).
2. Our reviews are impartial and informative because, as reviewers, we are judged on the quality of our reviews.
3. We check the spelling, grammar and punctuation of everything we write because, as writers, we are judged on the quality of our written word.

[BigBeefChief]

[quote name='gwizmon' post='530190' date='Jul 2 2009, 07:21 AM']So the question(s)... why does it matter what the price of the bass is? are people really trying to purchase a new bass every time they read a review?[/quote]


So how would you feel if the reviews didn't include the price then?

As to your second point, I'd suggest the majority of bass players who buy a bass magazine buy a new bass more frequently than every 5 years. Also factor in the number of pedals/effects/amps/cabs people buy.

Reviews of sensibly priced gear ARE welcome. They DO influence people.

A lot of people have used the Top Gear analogy. They very rarely review "normal" cars and the show is probably better for it. The difference between Top Gear and BGM is that they make their reviews of Super Cars interesting and humourous, whereas BGM reviews make me want to go on a killing spree in a shopping mall.

[BottomEndian]

[quote name='Rich' post='528059' date='Jun 29 2009, 08:05 PM']And thankfully, none of the reviews contained the phrase "dialling in"..! [/quote]
I'm pretty sure the Marleaux review talked about the ability to "dial in an articulate and precise tone". Still, one instance per issue isn't bad.

[quote name='BigBeefChief' post='529666' date='Jul 1 2009, 03:35 PM']How many people work on/for BGM?[/quote]
I counted through the credits in the front this morning on the pooper, and I reached 21, including Accounts, Subs and Advertising. I may have counted someone twice, although I tried to avoid it. Interesting? Relevant?

[Clarky]

I think BGM should consider adding a What Car type section on gear (maybe not every issue, for the sake of repetition). That would also force them to take more controversial stances in their reviewing - I have never seen a really bad review for a bass or amp, everything ranges from 3-5 star with little grounds for choosing between them

[BigBeefChief]

[quote name='BottomEndian' post='530310' date='Jul 2 2009, 10:03 AM']I counted through the credits in the front this morning on the pooper, and I reached 21, including Accounts, Subs and Advertising. I may have counted someone twice, although I tried to avoid it. Interesting? Relevant? [/quote]



I ask because its always seemed massively light on content. Given that it used to come out once every 2 months, 1 person working alone could write a better mag in that time - maybe not produce it, but certainly write it.

Its always felt "thrown-together" to me. Some articles are clearly cut'n'paste jobs that any of us could do given 1 hour and an internet connection.

So I ask how many people work on the mag. If they have 5 writers who each spend 1 day a week working on the mag, someone needs to crack the whip a bit harder.

I'm hoping that the epidemic of laziness and drug abuse in the media does not extend to Bass Guitar Magazines!

The BBC (sub-human scum who should be firebombed daily) took about 150 people to Glastonbury. That's our money they're using to spend on coke. What do we get out of it? That good-for-nothing-prostitute Jo Wiley telling me how good some god-awful haircut band are. How about 1 lucky licence-payer gets to saw her head off live on stage? [i]That [/i]I'd watch.


Stop the world. I want to get off.

Edited July 2, 2009 by BigBeefChief

[alexclaber]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Star rating or scores out of ten are useless if you're beholden to the manufacturers for advertising revenue. Let the words do the talking and if the gear truly is crap then at least you can write it so that the manufacturer shouldn't take offence but a reader with half a brain can read between the lines and know that it's blah.

As it stands I don't see much point sending in any of my cabs for review because the reviewers aren't tough enough. Are the problems getting in gear for review because I'm not the only manufacturer thinking like that? The last thing I want is for my cabs to receive a similarly scored and worded review to cabs that I know are clearly inferior!

Alex

[alexclaber]

And regarding the spellings, I pick up stuff like that on the first flick through. I know it's much harder to spot spelling and grammar mistakes on screen but it is SO important. The writer has to sound like they know more than the reader - once the reader reaches the point that they feel more knowledgeable than the writer then the reader stops buying the magazine.

Alex

[BigRedX]

I haven't seen the most recent copy of BGM. I think my subscription must have run out, although I thought the same last month and on returning from town with my newly purchased copy found another one waiting in the post for me!

If what is being said in these posts is being taken seriously at BGM, then let me add my weight for more reviews of high end gear. I have no problem with a magazine full of £2k+ instruments provided at least one of them wasn't made by Warwick or is essentially a posh version of one of Leo Fender's designs. I also have no problem with reviews of cheaper gear provided that it isn't the kind of instrument that can be found hanging on the wall of pretty much every musical instrument retailer in the UK. The Hagstrom 8-string review would be an excellent example (under £1000 but not at all mainstream) if it wasn't for the fact that the article failed to address a crucial design feature of the bridge and how it would affect the intonation - pretty much the first thing that I would be checking out if I ever manage to get my hands on one.

I don't need the look of instruments described in the review, that's what the pictures are for. I want to know practical stuff. Do the machine heads feel smooth, do the strings stick at the nut or elsewhere when tuning? How easy is it to adjust the action/intonation (do you need to slacken off the strings to do this?) How easy is it the change the strings? Do you have to remove any hardware to do this? Will the bridge fall apart once the strings have been removed? Easy of battery access in basses with active electronics. All this practical stuff makes a difference especially at the lower end of the market a well designed bridge may be the only realistic difference between two basses.

By all means describe how the bass sounds but don't spend too many words on it. Put in a link to your web site where the sound clips are. These will tell you more than any number of words when it comes to what tones you can get out of a bass.

I not entirely convinced of the worth of reviewing very inexpensive/beginners instruments. When I bought my first bass, my decision was limited to what was in stock at the local music shops that I could afford. Reviews would have been pointless because the final decision came down to a cheap P-bass copy, a cheap J-bass copy or something old and weird second hand (can you guess what I ended up with?). However it might be worth doing a run down of the common cheap brands that only ever appear on eBay and which to avoid and which could be worth a punt, because for most of us there is no way to try without buying.

Personally I still haven't seen better reviews that those by Stephen Delft that appeared in International Musician in the 70s. The man had no worries about criticising instruments that deserved it where they cost £100 or over £1000.

[alexclaber]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='530345' date='Jul 2 2009, 10:32 AM']Personally I still haven't seen better reviews that those by Stephen Delft that appeared in International Musician in the 70s. The man had no worries about criticising instruments that deserved it where they cost £100 or over £1000.[/quote]

Whilst conversely some of the worst I've ever read were by Roger Newell in Bassist in the '90s. Everything was 'efficient' and could get that 'hollow' tone.

I totally agree about not wanting to read about how it looks - a picture says a thousand words!

And once you get into the sub £200 bass bracket for any review to be worthwhile you need to review about five examples, and not those carefully selected by the distributor - at the cheapest end the quality control is so random that one example could be fantastic and one could be utterly toneless. Wood is not a consistent material and tone is very much dependant on it.

Alex

[Hamster]

[quote name='alexclaber' post='530357' date='Jul 2 2009, 10:38 AM']And once you get into the sub £200 bass bracket for any review to be worthwhile you need to review about five examples, and not those carefully selected by the distributor - at the cheapest end the quality control is so random that one example could be fantastic and one could be utterly toneless. Wood is not a consistent material and tone is very much dependant on it.

Alex[/quote]

As you've said, getting a very carefully prepared and selected 'demo' model for a shoot-out from a distributor does no one any favours except the distributor. I suppose it might show the potential of the bass [u]if[/u] you get a good one and have it set up properly.

I don't know what budget BGM work on, but if they spent £1k on 5 budget basses from various retail outlets, did a shoot-out with them, then did a prize draw for the winner and knock out the 4 'loosers' on fleabay for £125 each, then they're only £500 down on the exercise (unless they make this up on the prize draw entries?)

[BigBeefChief]

There's loads of stuff guitar mags do that are great for beginners that BGM can rip off.

How about best Bass and amp for under £500 for various styles of music? What about proper reviews of basses under the £150 mark? A guide to making your own (basic) pedal(s)? Drop some cheap combos down the stairs and see how they hold up?

For the more experienced and knowledgable, nick Dave Pomeroy's series on vintage/obscure instruments? An article on the basics of luthery? More long term reviews - perhaps where readers can submit? Get someone who really knows what they're talking about to review amps?

[Tait]

[quote name='gwizmon' post='530190' date='Jul 2 2009, 07:21 AM']I don't see why people get that bent out of shape about the cost of instruments that are being reviewed. are you really trying to rush out after every issue is published and buy the latest thing that was just reviewed at under £500? of course not. You're going to play pretty much the same bass you always have and possibly buy one once every 5-10 years if something comes along that really jumps out at you. This is of course quite a generalization, but I'm guessing it's true for a large percentage of the readership of BGM, or any other magazine for that matter.[/quote]

no, we don't read about something that looks good and think "i must buy it". but whenever i'm looking at buying a new bass, i will look through the reviews for things in my price range, see if anything jumps out at me, see what BGM think. ok, they might not be overly reliable, but they will give an idea on what i might like and might not. or if theres a bass i'm GASing for, i'll have a look through to see if BGM have reviewed it at all, see what they think. or even if i'm just reading reviews, i see a bass thats sub £500 and its got excellent reviews, then i can bear that bass in mind in the future when i will be looking to buy a bass. but if they're only reviewing £3000 instruments, this doesn't apply.

[cheddatom]

[quote name='gwizmon' post='530190' date='Jul 2 2009, 07:21 AM']...defence of expensive bass reviews...[/quote]

I don't buy the mag, and i've never read it, but I find this hilarious. Your readership are reading your post as a representation of BGM, and you're trying to pursuade them that they're wrong! The customer is ALWAYS right, even when they're wrong.

[Waldo]

Oh god..he's back

[bumnote]

I have had subscriptions to various mags over the years, beat instrumental, pissed of and out of work musician, guitarist, bassist, and I used to subscribe to BGM and just got bored with the whole thing.

In fairness the mag does have a quite difficult task, and needs to identify who its target audience is. There are the young beginners through to the old cynical bastards like me, all with different interests.

Over the years I have lost count how many reviews I have read of Precisions,Strats Jazz basses etc, and I would probably skip any review of these. According to one review of a mex precision I read it now has new features such as a tinted neck and a parchment pick guard. How exciting. However a newcomer might not understand all the differences between a jazz and a precision, and he or she needs to be catered for.

Similarly, if the reviews are not accurate, they devalue the whole review process. I think in many of the old reviews in bassist it was almost like having a template, with insert name of bass this month. Having said that, it cant be easy to write an objective view every time.

Ive had 2 G&Ls, great basses, but I didnt really get on with them, why, dunno. Why do i like precisions, why do some of my precisions just feel that much better than others. Dunno.

How should an amp or cab be reviewed? Just on how it sounds, what about the design, quality. Should an amp review be done by a technician or a musician?

If you are going to buy a car, you dont really look at top gear, you buy what car or similar.

Personally, i think they should take some pointers from top gear.

Sting, Phill Colins and Lemmy in the holiday inn, how quick can you trash your hotel room with photos.

Can Paul Mcartney still carry his bass rig up 5 flight of stairs.

Can Chris Squire play roundabout after 10 pints of lager and a curry

Bass player or Guitarist, who can service the most groupes in an hour.

Ring and task master TBBC

Much more fun

[Waldo]

[quote]Personally, i think they should take some pointers from top gear.

Sting, Phill Colins and Lemmy in the holiday inn, how quick can you trash your hotel room with photos.

Can Paul Mcartney still carry his bass rig up 5 flight of stairs.

Can Chris Squire play roundabout after 10 pints of lager and a curry

Bass player or Guitarist, who can service the most groupes in an hour.

Ring and task master TBBC[/quote]

Good work

[EBS_freak]

[quote name='Tait' post='529958' date='Jul 1 2009, 08:56 PM']i can't see how a bass can be so good its worth much over a grand anyway, but like you said, its all subjective. but really, pay £1,500 for a shuker, or £3,500 for a fodera, does the fodera really sound that much better than a shuker? i think not.[/quote]

That's the key thing. Have you actually played a Fodera in anger? Do the people on the forum who are so informed on boutique basses really know their stuff? How much stuff have they actually used and qualified to have an informed opinion on? The tale is usually the same. For example, somebody has gone from a £150 jazz bass to a £1500 jazz bass by a certain luthier and then proclaim there is no better. Really? Based on what? It's hardly an informed decision. I would rather hear what somebody like Birdy has to say who has had the whole realm of J bass copies - Celinders, Alleva Coppolo, Fender, Sadowsky, Lakland to name just a few.

It always amuses me how people bash Fodera or suddenly jump on the Fodera bandwagon and lust over them whenever they are for sale. They are not the be all and end all. There is a certain mystique about them granted... and everybody wants to be in the club... but it's more about exclusivity. Exactly the same with Dumble amps. A Fodera buys you a certain amount of kudos. You are expected to be able to play if you have one. Why? It's just a bass at the end of the day... a good one granted.

If you look at my signature, you can see what my chosen brand is. As people know, the cost of some of those individual instruments could have bought a Fodera. Why didn't I? Well, they simply don't do it for me. I can't make a Fodera sing like I can my basses. I make no secret of the fact that the reason I love my GBs is because they feel spot on, I can get the action exactly how I like and I believe that there is not another preamp on the planet which does what the GB currently does. I do realise though, that other people may hate the feel, love high actions and just want nothing but a passive thud. Hey. You know what? That's fine.

I don't believe Fodera do sing like my basses... but maybe that's because my ideal sound is more like the one that comes out of my basses when I play, than the sound that comes out when I play a Fodera. Does that make a Fodera better or worse? Well, neither. It just depends what floats your boat.

If you look at the craftsmanship behind basses, you can see the differences. Compare Shuker, Smith, Sei, Celinder, GB... in fact, any luthier. They are all different and all cater for different markets. For me, the top two luthiers in the country are Sei and GB. Their work (again, my opinion) is visually better than the competition and the feel of instruments is spot on. With that however comes a pricetag. Fine - you either pay it or you don't. Jon Shukers basses - nice... and from a business point of view, he has a larger target audience because he is placing less people out of the market. Fine. Janek comments on Fodera being the best luthier - fine. I would argue that, but he has obviously found the instrument that sings for him. I was actually a little dissapointed to see sanding marks in the finish of a particular Fodera I saw... but hey. People like what they like but before people shout off and proclaim this is best, that is best, at least a little justification would be useful.

Oh... and Jeff Berlin seems to do just fine on his bass.

[EBS_freak]

[quote name='Doddy' post='530673' date='Jul 2 2009, 02:30 PM']I've got to agree with the comment about one instrument "outperforming" another-a good player will sound good
on whatever instrument they are using,be it a Squier,a Sadowsky or a Fodera. It's not about the instrument you use,
but how and what you play on it. I play some expensive instruments-Roscoe LG3500,Pre Gibson Tobias 6-but can still play the
same things on a Fender Jazz or Precision if necessary.
However, if having a fancy name on the headstock makes you feel better and more confident,go for it.
I'm not going to argue with Janek's opinion on Instruments. After hearing him play his Fodera through my little
Roland combo,I can honestly say that his sound comes from the way he plays the bass and not purely the bass itself.[/quote]

Indeed a player should be able to play well on any instrument. Some instruments just make it easy, whether that be through it's action and general feel or it's sound. We've probably all played gigs where we haven't been able to play to our maximum due to what we are hearing out of our amps. Anything to minimise that is a bonus. If we get that through a "boutique" instruments/amps, then that's cool. I don't think BGM should be criticised for it's reviewing of such basses but as pointed out, a few mainstream models probably wouldn't go amiss.

As for these top end basses, some people just like to have that extra peformance... I think Phil summed it up pretty well with his Audi TDI/Audi RS4 argument in the boutique bass thread.

Not too long ago I think somebody posted a YouTube link of Marcus and friends playing cheapo toy instruments - and they still made them sound pretty good.

In short, buy what makes you happy, buy what gives you the confidence to play well... but just play and don't get too bogged down in gear.

And yeah, I am guessing Janek playing anything through anything is going to sound good regardless!

[Tait]

[quote name='EBS_freak' post='530611' date='Jul 2 2009, 01:45 PM']That's the key thing...

[i]sorry, that was a really long post so i figured i'd save space by just quoting the first sentence, so you know which post i'm replying to[/i][/quote]

i agree with everything you said there. my post didn't really say what i meant, i should've clarified. what i meant was that you could get a £1500 shuker and make it sound fantastic, and yeah, the £3000 fodera may sound "better", but who will notice the difference, really? either bass you play, people will think "what a great tone!", but to most listeners theres no difference, and that includes bass players, not just the general public. if you're playing a £1500 bass, and you know what you're doing with it, chances are, no ones going to think that you don't quite sound right, and you should really be playing a £3000 bass, because that would work better for what you're playing, especially since when you get your custom shuker built, you'll have the sort of music youll be playing in mind. the more likely situation would be that with either a £1500 bass or a £3000 bass, nearly every listener would think what a great tone you've got out of the bass. therefore there isn't really a difference, or at least not one worth the extra money.

but anyway, its an old debate, no ones right, and this is a completely different topic to what the thread is about. so if you want to reply to me, theres another thread on boutique basses [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=53399"]here[/url], i'll be checking in there, reply there. or PM me, but the boutique basses thread seems more logical, cos other people can join the discussion.

Edited July 2, 2009 by Tait

[Stingray5]

[quote name='Rich' post='531040' date='Jul 2 2009, 08:30 PM']I love the Tune 6-string in your sig. It's one of the most boutique-looking production basses I've ever seen. Gorgeous instruments. One day, I [i]will[/i] have a Tune WoodBass. [/quote]
Thanks, Rich. Yeh, it's a nice player for sure; very comfortable neck and action for a 6'er. Not bad for 250,000 (Yen, that is )
I also would love their Wood Bass - very nice too!

Cheers,
Steve

[xilddx]

Reading the latest issue, I appear to have come to the conclusion that Mike Flynn is the writer to aspire to.

[yorks5stringer]

Call me picky, but if I'd reviewed the Marleaux Mbass on page 40 & 50 of the July edition I'd have a comment under the "Minus" column.
Yes, I know no-one sees it when the Bass is being played, but I'd cut the rear control cavity cover so it matches the rest of the guitar, otherwise what's the point?
It's a bit like only painting the front of your house.....

[Guest JanekGwizdala]

[quote name='Waldo' post='530620' date='Jul 2 2009, 08:50 AM']But they're the greastest ever basses made by the greatest ever luthier, Janek said so. Can't you read?[/quote]

very mature, well done.

what I said was that Vinnie is the Stradivarius of his time. Just because I'm a Fodera user posting in this thread doesn't mean I'm the only player that feels this way. There's a reason why there's a three year waiting list for the instrument, that speaks for itself. No one else makes an instrument like it, or puts that much attention to detail into the construction of a bass.

You don't have to believe a word I have to say, or take my opinion as anything. But there's a great book coming out next year written by Jason Desalvo who interviewed about 20 fodera users (including me, but you can of course take those pages out and burn them) which I think will be a really interesting read. Victor Wooten, Anthony Jackson, James Genus, Tom Kennedy, Lincoln Goines, Marcus Miller, Matthew Garrison are all interviewed as far as I remember, and after my interview I chatted to Jason about the kinds of responses he was getting from the fodera users and I think it's going to make for a really great book.

I am by no means a spokesperson for Fodera. No one is sponsored by the company, and tour or clinic support is not handed out by fodera to any of the artists playing their instruments.

It really doesn't matter anyway. talking about gear just detracts from the music which I think is a far more fruitful point of discussion. I like Fodera basses because they give me a clean, fresh and flat pallet to start from scratch with, rather than the sound being highly coloured in the construction and pre amp instillation. Why Waldo has to make pithy stabs at quotes I've made is beyond me. It's only an opinion after all. you can take it or leave it. It would seem a healthier approach just to leave it, rather than act like you're in high school (which maybe you still are, who knows when you sit anonymously behind an internet screen name).

How about a thread which discusses melodic development in modern music, and what possibilities lie ahead for our industry and for us as players? or would that actually be too realistic of a topic? and would there not be enough opportunity to bitch about the cost of instruments or pieces of gear for page after page......?


Easy,

Janek

Edited July 4, 2009 by JanekGwizdala