fretmeister

It is a great video. Unless it's for something specific like Steve Harris or Billy Sheehan tones I'm also of the view that a P bass with the tone up full is a bit crap. When I play mine (with ti flats) I take the Duck Dunn approach and have the tone at about 50%-60% so I've got a bit of movement both ways to adjust for the room on the fly. I'd love to get a 4 string Stingray (I had a 5 string) but the specials have wider nuts than the previous version and they are too wide for me, and the chances of finding one with an SLO neck that is under 7.5lb appear to be non-existent. So I will just have to put up with that.

I had a baritone bitsa for a while. It was great fun but at the same time I found myself not really knowing what to do with it. I just seemed to play guitar stuff a lot lower!

This post has been sponsored by EBMM!

I'm aware that Wamoth and others make guitar scale conversion necks, but does anyone make bass ones? Just curious really as I have a P bass that I was thinking about doing a neck swap on, to put a jazz neck on it, and then it just occurred to me that a shorter scale might be nice too. Any ideas?

I was thinking the good old Halford's spray can approach to seal it and then cover it in stickers.

Tried them. Liked them. Then got annoyed that they didn't sound like something else. And then I got annoyed that the next set didn't sound like... etc etc etc

Strings are my weakness. Always swapping them. I bet I've spent more on strings than on pedals. Probably one of the reasons I really hate bridges where the string has to be threaded though it rather than a top loader!

Ye gods. And I thought buying a Bongo 6 string was ridiculous!

And the other plug too. It changes the “flat” EQ curve on the preamp to slightly reduce the mids and increase top end presence.

I’ve been watching demos of that since you posted the pic. Now I want one of them too! 😂

I sent him a message. He’s got Ti flats on it. My preferred strings for a P. I am definitely in trouble!

yup. I have to have one. That sounds amazing. I’ll get my Fender listed so I can raise the money.

Much more recently. IIRC it was when Grayling was Minister for Justice. or thereabouts. There are slightly more methods of getting money than I said but we’d be here all day. But the govt overall position is that there must be proof of another’s guilt rather than your own conviction “just” not being safe.

I’m not an ES fan either, but he has inspired a new generation to pick up a guitar, and that’s always a good thing.

I bought Hooky’s Jim Deacon short scale P and I’m loving it. He does seem to like a really high action so I’ve sorted that for my tastes. It’s my first 30 inch scale and now I’m wondering about a Lionel as well!

he does quote other people testing theirs.

Because it’s not really about music. Its about the alleged theft of intellectual property. The type of property isn’t really important.

Again that’s not a problem. Admitting a killing is not the same as admitting murder or manslaughter. Could be self defence, pre-emptive strike, diminished responsibility, lots of things. Can even be an accident with no criminal liability. And even when a client admits a murder to his lawyer (not the court or police) he is allowed to refuse to enter a plea and make the prosecution prove their case. The lawyer is allowed to test the prosecutors evidence but not offer any evidence on behalf of his own client. In reality this hardly ever happens. But why can it be done? Be cause Innocent until proven guilty. It is the state’s job to prove to the jury that it happened. This assumption of innocence until proven otherwise is a vital part of a fair system. The state isn’t limited to the crap legal aid rates that the defendant has. The state can spend millions on a prosecution if they want. It’s such an uneven playing field that innocence must be the starting point. Again this is basic jurisprudence that should be learned at school. But even in the event of an actual murder guilty plea that person requires representation to ensure that the minimum imprisonment tariff is set correctly in line with the sentencing guidelines set by parliament. Theres an old saying that guilty people actually need lawyers more than the innocent ones because of the imbalance. If you want something to be angry about with good reason then try these 2. 1: If you are not eligible for legal aid so you have to pay your own lawyer and you are found Not Guilty then the state does not have to reimburse your costs even if clearing your name made you bankrupt and homeless. 2: If you are wrongfully convicted and later an appeal finds you not guilty then unless another person is found guilty of that offence the government position is that the question of guilt is not yet resolved so you get zero compensation for being locked up for 20 years. Then, if another person is convicted so you can get compensation (you’ll love this) your room and board expenses from being in prison are deducted from the compensation amount, because you would have needed to pay for them outside anyway. Be angry about stuff like that.

I agree completely. Any judgment without the ability to enforce it is useless. The best way to start to restore confidence is civics and basic law at school. Have an electorate that is genuinely educated about how the system should work so they know when certain groups of people are taking the fosters. Calls for civics and law at school have been made for years. Makes you wonder why those in the highest positions of power don’t want an educated voter. I did actually start the application process to retrain as a teacher with a view to teaching humanities / A-level law, but the training period with zero or extremely low income was impossible to work round. My wife is unable to work full time so we couldn’t afford to live if I stopped working to study. I was most upset. I feel very strongly about it, but I can’t make us homeless.

Equal between strings I think. I don’t measure, I do it visually. I set the outside strings first then the inner ones.

I do equal distance.

I’m sorry but that’s nonsense. ”follow the law blindly” - as opposed to what? Ignore the law? That would be unlawful! And it’s the clients that bring the cases, not the lawyers. The lawyers do as they are instructed. In the UK a lawyers first duty is to the court, not their client. Other jurisdictions are different. Lawyers are not allowed to lie for their client. That’s why a criminal lawyer will never ask their client if they did it. They will ask how they want to plead. If the client says they did it and then says they want to still plead not guilty then The lawyer has to withdraw or not offer any evidence. Cannot lie for their client. And you are missing the subtleties too. Often lawyers represent people who know they are wrong. It’s those people who need representation the most! The lawyers job then isn’t to “get them off” it’s to make sure the punishment or penalty is correct and proportionate and within the law. It is not a binary job in the slightest. If a claimant lawyer goes to trial and relies on a precedent judgment that for whatever the dispute is awarded 50,000 then the defendant is entitled to show a precedent that only awarded 20,000 on similar facts. Cases are not just about winning or losing. Sometimes it’s about controlling the extent of the win / loss. Every one of these sorts of threads shows that misinformation and misunderstanding is rife and confirms the need for civics and basic law to be in the national curriculum. The old “ignorance of the law is no defence” has to apply for obvious reasons, but the state should also have to make an effort to educate too.

Anyone assembled one of them? I’m tempted to do one for a bit of fun. How much woodworking is needed to make it a half decent job?

Not in music cases. There just aren’t enough music cases for that to make a difference. And if they do swap experts and decide not to rely on a report then they can’t recover the fees from the other side. Do that a couple of times and all of a sudden you are in a loss unless the claim is for a massive amount of money. Medicine is very difficult though. Ask 100 consultants and you’ll get 100 different expert opinions. But there are thousands of those cases so it is easy for a party to have a look at court reports and see which experts tend to lean one way or the other. The availability of those reports is good though. It’s easy enough to object to experts who don’t have a roughly equal split of claimant and defendant instructions. And the experts sign a declaration that they recognise their duty is to the court and not the person instructing them. They can get in serious trouble if they breach that.