mcnach

[quote name='LukeFRC' timestamp='1343730772' post='1754201'] you know for years I wondered what was above that Scotmid [/quote] Now you know! But the sign is fake, however the gym is real. We got the keys to it and had an absolute blast there

[quote name='Evil Undead' timestamp='1343718061' post='1753961'] Thanks to Mr Lozz, I now have a set of Chromes on my Precision They feel very strange, and I've had to lower my action as the tension was much higher than the elixirs. They sound great so far. I'll have to play along with some metal tracks to see how they fit. One thing that concerned me is I had to tighten the truss rod by 1/8 turn - would have turned it more but I can get it to move any more... uh oh [/quote] If you decide you like the sound of the Chromes but not the tension, have a look at the Fender flats. I switched to them for that reason and I really like them.

I think I'm going to have a T-shirt printed

[quote name='jackers' timestamp='1343687169' post='1753835'] I've been looking at a G30, and I was just wondering how many people actually use the cable tone switch. Does it make a difference? [/quote] It makes a difference. I have it at the 15' setting, I think. With the switch in the off position it's clearly brighter than using a cable. I use 3m or 6m cables usually, but I chose the 15' (nearer to 3m) setting and it sounds pretty much the same with cable or wireless now,

Here's a video for our track "In the city"... featuring a Sue Ryder P-bass! OK, I admit that the recording was done with my Stingray... but hey. It's really confusing... there was a story that made a lot of sense, but a 5-part screen and a 3 minute song does not help. I hear there will be a much longer version where the story will be clearer. Here's the "trailer" first. [url="http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=2451262435055"]http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=2451262435055[/url] It was fun And here the video itself: [youtube]http://youtu.be/jeaWrBImVUk[\youtube] that's one of our earlier tracks, and not very representative of what we sound like now... I'm not sure why we chose that song, actually It was filmed last September, when our trumpet player had just joined us. The "script" was devised by our singer's brother, who did not know we now had a sixth member... so he does not feature heavily in the video... but he is there, in the background, everytime we get mugged. There may be a simpler version out soon.

[quote name='noelk27' timestamp='1343559253' post='1752001'] Well, I'd be careful about mixing in early originals that weren't already in your setlist - there's probably a good reason why early material was left on the shelf. But it's certainly worth taking a second look at early material to see how it can be improved, and brought up to standard. Extending some of the stronger songs currently in your setlist is a good idea - but not every song in your setlist! Look at arranging the songs with an extended break section and a few chorus repeats. Similarly, look at the song in your set where you can do an "introducing the band" section - where you can all take a turn in the limelight. I'd certainly avoid the more freeform, improvisation/jam approach. Finding the right cover versions is also a good idea - if you're particularly fortunate you'll identify some obscure songs that you can look at taking and reworking to give these a new identity in line with your bands, and play these alongside the instantly familiar covers. But, as an originals band, looks like you need to find the time to write some new material. Not your style, perhaps, but take a look at Crowded House. Those guys know how to involve an audience in a gig - extending songs, audience participation, story telling, and covers. Was at a CH gig where the guys played for over two-and-a-half hours before doing half an hour worth of encore. [/quote] Good suggestions, thanks. The old material that was left behind was not necessarily "worse", but you know how it is: the new songs always seem more exciting than the ones you've played for years. In our case that was coupled with having been recording a 10 track CD... we had a couple of demos with 4-5 tracks each, and we did not want to re-record them all, so only a couple of the old ones made it into the new recording. When the new drummer joined, we asked him to learn the new CD... and it sort of stayed there. In addition, we got a sixth member now, after being a 5-piece forever: a trumpet player. So, again, the newer tracks were adapted for trumpet... and as a result, our whole style has evolved a bit, so the older things are different. But trumpet player is happy to get a break every now and then, he says We're revamping "the rest of the best" so that we can play them with trumpet. It makes a big difference to our sound. I think that's why they put us with ska bands so often.

[quote name='Beer of the Bass' timestamp='1343559499' post='1752005'] We had this problem last night at a pub gig. The singer booked the gig, then we found out last week that they wanted 3x 45minute sets. We have just enough material for maybe 2 sets. Fortunately, as it was a pub rather than a ticketed gig, there was enough turnover of punters that by the third set, the barman was the only person in the room who'd heard the first set. The landlord seemed happy enough and actually paid us slightly more that we'd agreed (always welcome!). We had a big group of Norwegian army lads (in town for the Tattoo) dancing to the second set, so he was probably pleased with the takings. We might start doing a select few covers to bulk out our pub gig set in future though. [/quote] and that pub's name starts with a W?

[quote name='Musicman20' timestamp='1343669348' post='1753449'] For anyone worried about the neck profile, IF its anything like the Musicman Sterling (USA) neck that is on the Sterling 4 and Big Al 4, it is a brilliant profile. Fender Jazz necks make my hands cramp a little, but I can deal with it. The neck on the Sterling (USA) is like a step between a Stingray and a Jazz...not TOO thin...and extremely fast. IMO, anyway. [/quote] tch tch, you're not helping!

[quote name='brensabre79' timestamp='1343650657' post='1753051'] Except I think its the other way around... maybe you could put some collars in them? [/quote] if this is teh case, this can be sorted more easily...

[quote name='Delberthot' timestamp='1343632525' post='1752778'] Thought I'd bump this rather than begin a new thread since most of the people who have commented have the Line6. I stuck between the G30 and G50. I've read a lot of reviews where the battery door on the G30 is really fiddly, in some cases broken off, and other stories where its opened during a gig sending the batteries flying. I know the different features and plastic v. metal housing but its the battery door thing that would make me go for the G50. Obviously I'd like to save myself £100 if possible. Has anyone here had any issues with the battery door or solutions to avoid anything happening mid set? [/quote] The door on the G30 is just a bit hard to open... and close. The slidey thing works well. I don't have problems to open it, two years on, and if you close it properly (i.e.: look at the slidey latchy thing -and yes, that's the technical term- and make sure it's pushed towards the closed position) it will not open by itself. Like I said, two years of usage, not a single problem with it. The belt clip, however, doesn't inspire me confidence... so I use a Levys strap thingy for it.

I have to say that what puts me off slightly is the slim neck. I love Jazz basses *despite* the thin neck, not because of it. I wish they came with the regular Stingray neck dimensions... Not that I need another Stingray style bass...

[quote name='Fat Rich' timestamp='1343558426' post='1751991'] As long as you don't mind explaining that to every bass player you meet [/quote] I'll make a T-shirt and a sticker for the bass.

[quote name='Fat Rich' timestamp='1343557995' post='1751978'] It's your thread, you can do what you like! [/quote] I don't own it, I only started it.

[quote name='Fat Rich' timestamp='1343557995' post='1751978'] I suspect when the Fender bass was conceived, no one expected bass players to change their strings often for fresh ones or want super low action. Upright bass player leave the same strings on for years and have to have the instrument properly set up usually by professional, Leo was probably trying for a fairly dead thumpy sound from flatwound strings (this was before roundwounds were popular) and foam mutes. So, like Jamerson you kept the same set of strings for the whole of your career. Which meant you didn't need to remove the ashtray covers, take the old strings off, put the new ones on, take them off and remove the neck, adjust the truss rod, put the neck and the strings back on, then off and adjust, back on, set the action (nice and high), the intonation and finally put the ashtray covers back on. There's a guy here on Basschat with a very nice 70s Mocha Fender who hasn't changed the strings yet, and probably hasn't needed to adjust anything either. It was when people like John Entwhistle made the zingier roundwound sound popular, and Anthony Jackson put fresh strings on not just for every session but for every take, that you needed to get to the gubbins regularly to make the adjustments. It's your thread, you can do what you like! [/quote] Yes, that makes sense, historically. But when Fender says "let's bring out a new series, based on classic periods, but without having to adhere strictly to the peculiarities of the period, bringing up a modernised version of the classic period... and we can call it Modern Player series!", and they replace the 6-screw vibrato system on the strat for a simpler and more stable 2-point one... but they leave the body-end access truss rod neck... THAT is madness.

[quote name='Conan' timestamp='1343556815' post='1751958'] Cheers for that! I had already found it on an old thread - very useful! You learn something new every day! [/quote] Adjusting the neck angle can make the difference between "meh" and "playing like butter". It's often overlooked. Some people think of a shim as something you do to repair a defective instrument. IN a way... they are right, because if the instrument were made carefully making sure neck and body fits perfectly etc, the neck angle would be spot on. But with a bolt on neck, a tiny shim can make a huge difference (illustrating just how accurate the manufacturers would need to be), and it's a painless and simple operation. The micro-tilt makes it even simpler. Take advantage of it! (if you need to)

[quote name='Thurbs' timestamp='1343545771' post='1751823'] Well done on the longer gigs... sounds like you have some fans! I wouldn't worry about playing songs for longer than the usual 3-4 minutes to tend to find most bands stick to. As long as you have musicians that can improvise well (and I don't just mean a guitarist going up and down pentatonics) then there is no reason why one song couldn't be a whole set, or more realistically 6+ minutes as you say. I don't know if you play much Jazz? You could look at how some Jazz songs are structured... play the song through, take it in turns to improvise (sometimes the whole song, sometimes just a section) have a go around again improvising if you want to and then when everyone is done, play the song again and end. You can easily turn a 3 minute song in to 10 minutes... [/quote] Not playing jazz at all, no. But we sometimes do that "go in turns" thing, and we may use it to introduce the members of the band sometimes. Not talking about solos, but more who is going to lead the improvisations, who is going to lead the changes and the rest follow. For some reason, I am normally the leader in these things, 'though, so it's easy for me... although I have to make sure the changes make sense and that I come up with interesting variations. I played with the same drummer in another band for a couple of years, and that helps a lot as we have a "shared vocabulary", and I find that if bass and drums go well together, then the rest seems to fall in place easily. The only problem is that the sound onstage is not always good enough, so we often need to keep it simple live, as some band members may not be able to hear well what's going on. Hopefully one day we will have our own sound screw and we will be able to hear eachother well.

[quote name='RichF' timestamp='1343555595' post='1751940'] interesting. I discussed this with Chris McIntyre (ex Sei and now McIntyre Guitars) and he encouraged me to disengage the microtilt and revert to a shim with an explanation that in part involved the issue of contact (the difference between a pin and a traditional shim) and reference to what BigRedX is talking about. What I would agree with is doing whatever's necessary to understand this dimension of your bass(es) so that adjustment is as easy and effective as possible. If that makes 3 bolt and a micro-tilt your thing then go for it. I am rarely in a set up crisis so I quite "enjoy" taking my time over an afternoon, adjusting and fiddling to get it right. If I needed stuff on the fly then I would see the benefits of a micro tilt as long as it worked. [/quote] Your point about "speed" is a good one. It's true, I enjoyed that it was simpler and faster to use the microtilt compared to using a shim... but it's hardly the end of the world if I need to remove neck, put shim, do neck again etc. I have done that many times before, and once it's done right, it stays and does not require further modification. But I am of an impatient nature, and I want things done yesterday. I don't particularly enjoy the process of setting up my guitars. I like the final result, and I love playing with them. But setting them up? Nah. Once I fugure out what it is they need, I lose interest. I'd leave the manual work to somebody else if I could afford to pay a luthier a retainer to be available anytime I call

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1343555559' post='1751939'] The 3-bolt neck joint with the micro-tilt is a good idea that Fender in the 70s simply couldn't implement in a consistent and reliable fashion. It relied on the two metal plates fitted to the neck and and body in the neck pocket to be completely flat with the surface of the joint. Unfortunately this seemed to be a fairly hit or miss operation. If one of the plates wasn't sufficiently flat, then adjusting the micro-tilt screw would tend to push sideways as well as up. On it's own that wouldn't have been a problem but when combined with sloppy over-sized neck pockets, the neck had room to move sideways which resulted in the typical 70s mis-aligned Fender neck. Every new Fender with the micro-tilt mechanism that came into the music shop where I was helping out in 1979 suffered from mis-aligned necks to the extent that none of them were suitable to be put on display until the shop guitar tech had taken the necks off and sorted out the problem with the plates. [/quote] thank you for a great explanation!

[quote name='Conan' timestamp='1343555041' post='1751928'] I have no idea what this is about.... and I have a three-bold Jazz! Please enlighten this thicko about the "micro-tilt" system to which you refer?? Thanks. [/quote] no problem, check this out, bottom of the page. The picture is actually of a 4-bolt, but the microtilt system is the same, through a tiny hole at the bottom of the neck plate: [url="http://www.fretnotguitarrepair.com/repair/electric-guitar/neck-angle.php"]http://www.fretnotguitarrepair.com/repair/electric-guitar/neck-angle.php[/url]

[quote name='Fat Rich' timestamp='1343552379' post='1751887'] I've got 3 bolts on my 74 and 78, the micro tilt seems to be seized solid on both although I'm sure they could be freed up with some WD40. The neck is rock solid on the 74 because it has good neck joint routing, the 78 isn't so stable because the neck joint is a joke, the routing is not even neck shaped. The screws into the neck have been over tightened in the past to compensate and feel like they'll strip any minute, although it can probably be fixed with some plugging and re-drilling. I prefer the 4 bolt system, but only where there is access to the truss rod without removing the neck. Older instruments without truss rod access need to be treated with care or the threads in neck get sloppy if the neck bolts are over tightened. [/quote] That's another thing: truss rod access at the body end. Madness!!! I have one of those Modern PLayer series Fender Stratocaster, based on the 60s models. Lovely guitar. Based on the 60s models, but not adhering strictly to the 60s... for instance it has a two-point vibrato system, which is a modern addition and a better execution of the original idea than using 6 small screws partially unscrewed. Nice. However... they kept the truss rod access at the body end. Why oh why oh why oh why don't you "modernplayerise" it and use an easy access truss rod system, since you are not exactly going for 100% genuine characteristics anyway? Grr. It was explained to me that a truss rod inserted from the body end is a better mechanical solution. Then do like MusicMan do and their "wheel of fortune". Sorry for the offtopic rant... I hate having to undo the neck to mess with the truss rod, especially when the screws are simple wood screws, not exactly designed for repeated screwing/unscrewing.

[quote name='The Bass Doc' timestamp='1343545827' post='1751825'] Don't think there's anything wrong with the 3-bolt system in principle. Leo Fender persisted with it through his Musicman period and on to G&L. It's mainly that it's introduction coincided with a time when jigs were wearing out so neck joints were gappy, pickup routs got sloppy, contours got slabby etc... [/quote] and this makes a lot of sense. 70s CBS Fender is accepted as a general low point in the company's production. Although some great instruments still managed to come out of their factory.

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1343545268' post='1751815'] The 6 bolt is as solid as a rock! Never had to shim one though...... [/quote] That has nothing to do with the number of bolts, and the 5 basses I have owned (now 3) with 6 bolt necks have not required a shim either. But I think that is a reflection on factory tolerances than anything else. And if I had to put a shim on a 6-bolt neck... I'd be looking at the 3-bolt with microtilt with envy It seems reasonable to think that a shim makes better contact therefore it is better than a screw making a small contact point. However, is the resulting difference noticeable? Is a micro-tilt neck instrument less resonant than a shimmed one, and this one less than one without a shim? I am not convinced that works as a general rule. People argued that about bolt-on vs. glued... and that doesn't hold water for me either.

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1343545111' post='1751814'] Most three bolt neck basses I have seen you can move the neck left and right fairly easily with a good tug. Now a 4 bolt with a micro tilt that's a different matter. In truth though a good shim is always going to give a good solid joint compared to having a little pin trying to do the job, using it as a way to gauge the shim you need would make sense. [/quote] Yes, I understand that, and that's why whenever I heard bad comments about 3-bolt I just gave it a half a microsecond thought, nodded and moved on. But now I am questioning it. I really can't see any "movement" issues with the Jazz I just got, and neither has my brother with his strat (about 10 years or more with that guitar). Once it's "solidly attached", you cannot make it any more solid by adding 300 extra bolts, if you see what I mean. And I play my bass, I don't use it to club baby seals or anything... Just getting the feeling that "3-bolt necks are unstable and bad" is an exaggeration. Much like "Stingray's G string is weak"

[quote name='Delberthot' timestamp='1343533216' post='1751788'] So its like shimming a neck but you don't have to take the neck off? [/quote] 'xactly.