Roland Rock

[quote name='mcnach' timestamp='1381854438' post='2244591'] I was leaning towards making one myself and buying a laptop bag for it. There are laptop bags that look pretty decent for about £15, and you get a few extra pockets and things which is always useful. But right now I'm liking the pedal train nano a lot. It is the right size and I can keep the power supply out of the way underneath... [/quote] Yeah, that Nano looks great. I think my problem is that the Moog EP2 is too long to fit on that board, and too tall to fit in a laptop bag!

On a Zion Train tip at the moment - superb stuff. This one sounds fantastic - what a bassline: http://youtu.be/6pW0QRwF6tg

I'm looking for exactly something like this. It will need to accommodate two small pedals and a Moog expression pedal (and a one spot psu when not plugged in) I reckon I'll make the board itself from ply, and then keep it in this: http://www.thomann.de/gb/rockbag_rb_23415_mixer_bag.htm

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1381847786' post='2244496'] [URL=http://s17.photobucket.com/user/Incarante/media/DSCF1699_zps6f3e37c2.jpg.html][IMG]http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b69/Incarante/DSCF1699_zps6f3e37c2.jpg[/IMG][/URL] [/quote] Are you legally required to put up a warning sign every time you set up that rig?

[quote name='waynepunkdude' timestamp='1381827655' post='2244137'] Have sent Orange a strongly worded email after have a nice chat with my legal adviser. [/quote] Is this on the strength that the design of the old ones make them 'not fit for purpose' under the Sale of Goods Act?

[quote name='Woodinblack' timestamp='1381785653' post='2243869'] I really don't understand why they are called prog rock - I guess it is in the 'it has guitars and it isn't 4/4' meaning of the word. [/quote] Focus II includes "Eruption", a 23-minute adaptation of Jacopo Peri's opera Euridice which tells the story of Orpheus and Euridice. surely that's as prog as it gets? :-D

Yeah, clear with low mid emphasis is how I'd describe them. Good strings

[quote name='Beer of the Bass' timestamp='1381619308' post='2241590'] i'm not quite getting your point here. Picture a square section of timber, say 2x2" with the grain parallel with one of the planes. It would effectively be quarter sawn if you looked at it one way round and flatsawn if you rotated it by 90 degrees. How would that change its density? [/quote] You put it this way, and now I'm questioning my logic ....... Edit: yes, thinking about it, I was focusing on the larger number of layers of dense wood in quarter sawn boards, but not the length of the layers! Apologies to all for the misinformation [embarassed smilie that I don't know how to insert on my phone]

[quote name='lurksalot' timestamp='1381621129' post='2241613'] Ok , the late wood / early wood issue is largely irrelavent in this context as the difference in the wood is in essence the definition of the grain . this happens every year in the cycle of the tree and you can tell the good growing years by the width of the ring of growth , the ' late and early' purely define the parts of the year that the growth occured . most trees of the same age in the same climate will show similar patterns in the grain to each other . yes the late wood is denser , but by definition you cant cut a stable quarter sawn board to incorperate more latewood , a quarter sawn board will radially cut a tree and the growing cycle of the tree will determine how much early and latewood is in the board . If a board is quarter sawn, it will shrink along the lines of the grain, effectively compressing the grain but staying flat . this is the quality that is sought after , and because of the way you have to cut it, it is is more wasteful and time consuming than just slicing a tree along its length. as soon as you cut up up sliced tree and start glueing it together again, opposing the grain each time, you will get some very strong and stable constructions without worrying tooooo much about which way the wood was cut. [/quote] Again, I agree with all of that, but to clarify on this point: [quote name='lurksalot' timestamp='1381621129' post='2241613'] by definition you cant cut a stable quarter sawn board to incorperate more latewood...... [/quote] But by definition, a quarter sawn board has more late wood than any other type of cut. It is probably largely irrelevant though, ie one tiny factor among a hundred others, as I intimated in my first post

[quote name='lurksalot' timestamp='1381602577' post='2241320'] The denser wood can be cut from the centre of a tree at any angle , the trick with quarter sawn is that it is cut radially through the centre , the main idea behind this is consistency of grain direction so that when it dries, the direction and shape of the timber is predictable . When making anything that needs excellent stability most woods are engineered into laminates and that gives a much greater degree of stability . [/quote] Yes, I'd agree with all of that. I understand that wood can be denser towards the centre (and bottom) of the tree, but I'm talking about something different. I'm talking about latewood and earlywood. A quarter sawn board has a higher concentration of dense latewood compared to a tangentially sawn board, regardless of where on the tree it was cut.

[quote name='jonsmith' timestamp='1381598337' post='2241269'] Perhaps I'm being a bit dense (haha) and missing something, but isn't the wood is the same density regardless of how it's cut? [/quote] Wood has alternating layers of dark, thin wood (latewood), and paler, wide wood (earlywood). The latewood is much more dense than the earlywood. Quartersawn timber, being cut radially, has lots of straight layers packed pretty close together. A similar width of tangentally sawn timber will pass through far fewer layers, and they appear to be much wavier and more spaced apart. So it's simply the fact that quarter sawn has a higher concentration of the dense stuff in it. TBH, I don't know how significant it would be in terms of tone.

[quote name='gstirrat' timestamp='1381593307' post='2241173'] Does anybody know what the make ..... is? [/quote] I'm going to go out on a limb and say Dean! I'm sure more knowledgable types will elaborate soon Edit: Dean Edge? http://www.jbmusic.com.ph/product/details/dean-edge-4-string-electric-bass-guitar It's worth 13,750

I almost stopped a short way in, as the slapping was awful (however skillful). However, I actually enjoyed a lot of the fingerstyle stuff. It was very very busy, but in some ways that suited the machine gun velocity of the vocals. Then he slapped, tapped and did chords which seemed to be more if a 'look what I can do' exercise, rather than playing what was best for the song.

A bit of all three. I believe that the density of a neck plays a part, among a hundred others, in the overall tone of the instrument. Regarding flat sawn v quarter sawn, this will have a bearing on density, and therefore tone (see above) Other than that, flat sawn v quarter sawn is more significant in terms of neck stability than tone.

In terms of price point, I think a fairer comparison would be the '69er and the Berg NV610. I know the Berg is discontinued, but it was retailing at £1140 posted, then the '69er went on sale initially at around £920 posted. In terms of finishes, rat fur is my least favourite, I had an SWR Combo with this and really dislike the look and feel. The BF panted finish is rough (in terms of texture, not the skill with which it applied), but I still don't mind the look and feel. My favourite was my old EA combo, and extension cab. Slightly textured but very tough and professional.

I'm thinking that 'bassiest' means naturally closest to the fundamental, with fewer harmonics and overtones. I hear that the Steinberger is excellent for this. A favoured tool by deep reggae players.

Both of my amps (Streamliner and all valve 100w) have valve-based EQ. No problems there, as they both sound great. I don't normally fiddle with EQ much, but recently started playing around to get the best tone for various songs when recording. I was surprised at how much twiddling one eq knob could have an effect on the others. For example, totally cutting the treble seems to have a diminishing effect on the bass eq. I could get a suitable tone easily enough, but it's more by trial and error, rather than a logical method. So, is there a science behind what happens with valve EQ? Which one affects the other and how? If I knew this, I'd be able to know what I was doing, rather than twiddling and hoping for the best.

I must admit, although I don't get modern gospel, despite the fantastic musicianship. I love a bit of old school gospel, whether it's Aretha, or a modern artist using Gospel influences like Matthew E White. Someone ask for funky bass with gospel? Voices of East Harlem http://youtu.be/JpY53QpakhI And this fantastic, dynamic film scene: http://youtu.be/EeQyoTSgllc

Green Festival, Nottingham 01/09/13

Nottingham-based reggae band. Jam Cafe, Nottingham 22/12/12:

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1381479145' post='2239558'] Those amp settings are mental. What's the reason for them? [/quote] I know! The high master vol and low gain is the old 'clean as poss' setting. The eq settings really mess with one another. For example, if I turn the treble right down, the bass eq seems to have no effect! Lots of things like that, so it takes lots of fiddling to see what works. In this case, I was after a deep, full reggae tone on low volume for recording, and this just felt right. I've never done this setting at band volumes, might give it a go! For one dubby song, they used solely the miked track (ie excluding the direct to desk signal) because it was so perfect for that track. If you're interested, I can let you hear it when it's finished FYI, I recorded one track with the Precision, and that was everything at 12 o'clock. Go figure.

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1381440203' post='2239292'] Are they out of fashion? [/quote] I think that there is a perception among some that they had their heyday in the 90s/00s. The used prices are very low, suggesting that the demand is not there. I've never played one, so can only comment on the aesthetics. I'd love a Fortress Flashback, but wouldn't have the nerve to play it live - too flashy. Other than that, I find the Vampyre hideous, the Corvette, Infinity, Dolphin, normal Fortress and Thumb less than pretty, and The Star the nicest Warwick of them all. The Streamer is nice enough, in a Spector kind of way.

[quote name='intime-nick' timestamp='1381450063' post='2239439'] Tried my new Eden Navigator with a Crown XLS 1500 for the first time [/quote] Very nice. [quote name='intime-nick' timestamp='1381450063' post='2239439'] I thought I'd better play some Eden gear given my job.... [/quote] Do you work at the Eden Project?

[quote name='Billy Apple' timestamp='1381462882' post='2239475'] Total style stylee. What's the head? [/quote] Same old head in a new suit :-) http://basschat.co.uk/topic/216904-new-casing-for-valve-amp/page__pid__2237799#entry2237799